monitor question

S

sorex

Expert
Licensed User
Longtime User
A question for the tech nerds... :)

I was playing around with Premiere but on my laptop with only 1600x900 you constantly need to switch panels.
Photoshop is ok altho I sometimes need to hide things aswell to reach certain settings panels.
For B4X it's still perfect tho.

So I was looking at a monitor to replace my 19" LCD screen that's attached to my desktop on the attic.

My eye fell on these 34" devices but these come in 2560x1080 or 3440x1440.

The difference is only 80 euros between the LG LG 34WL500 and LG 34WN700.

What do you guys prefer? I guess more visible source in height is optimal and it gives also more room to place docking all around the screen since it's higher and wider in general.

You only know this from working a while on it that's why I'm asking here.
 
sorex said:
was looking at a monitor to replace
Click to expand...
My guess would be that its about what you can afford. Beyond that is going to just getting used to the extra real estate and whether you have the peripheral vision to cope (you will experience more head and eye movement).

A question might be have you enough memory on the PC to cope with a greater number of open "windows" / program instances - running concurrently.

Other than that if it looks good - eat it.
 
rabbitBUSH said:
My guess would be that its about what you can afford
Click to expand...

Thanks for your input both of you.

I don't really need anything too fancy as I'm not a gamer. I don't need built-in speaker or anything like that (I'll wear just some headset if needed).
The 2 I listed are 240 ($285) & 320 ($381) euros if I recall right.

the desktop has 12Gb of RAM but might need an additional gfx card to work with that massive resolution tho.
I don't know if it has a seperate one right now or just being on board.


Sandman:

42" seems like overkill as I don't use the machine daily and sometimes I just take it over with VNC to check mails etc so a bit pricy for that.
Altho I might use it more soon but only time will tell.

the 34" is almost the double in width (resolution and real width) of what I currently have and even 7" bigger than what I use at work and that's already very comfy at 1920x1080.
 
For me, it's the highest resolution that my eyes can handle. Currently, QHD ( 2560x1440 ) on a 27" monitor seems to hit the sweet spot. 4K at that size is already starting to strain my eyes. When it comes to laptops, I used to love toting around 11" versions, then 14" and 15". The 15" was 4K, but, over time, my eyes could not handle that. Now I'm 17" at 2560x1600. With the two monitors offered above, I would go with the 3440x1440.
 
I thought 3440x1440 was 'only' 2K?

But indeed those monster resolutions above 1920x1080 HD aren't intended to be used on laptop screens imho even on 17".
I think you'll waste your eyes and it compensates a little because you're sitting closer to your screen but even then a single pixel is so small that you barely see it I guess?
 
sorex said:
But indeed those monster resolutions above 1920x1080 HD aren't intended to be used on laptop screens imho even on 17".
Click to expand...
The higher resolutions help with split screening (even on a 17"). I do a lot of split screening (Win 10 makes it easy), so I look for the highest resolution at a particular size that I can use. And yes, for laptops I can go a little denser due to the fact that I sit a lot closer to the screen (as compared to a desktop).
 
do you mean like in B4X where you can draw the edit window into 2 halves?
 
2 ide's open (once side client, other side server), ide + browser (research), browser + spreadsheet (financial stuff), notepad + browser (research), ide + simulator, etc.
 
Few years ago I was looking to upgrade from my old LCD monitor, came down to 2 monitors 27" HD and 32" 2K. The 32" was beautiful monitor, looked like Apple would build it all aluminum. Ability to have 2 apps or document on 1 monitor side by side was great. However Icons and text was tiny. I could resize the resolution but it didn't look as good as at native resolution. Went with 27" HD. Just my experience.
 
jerry07 said:
However Icons and text was tiny.
Click to expand...
Windows 10's scaling has gotten a lot better and today this would/should not be an issue anymore.
Work: Center 27" QHD, left and right 27" 1080p. The scaling on the QHD is 125%. Now I'm spoiled.
At 4K, I need 150% scaling in order for me not to have issues with text/icons.
 
OliverA said:
Windows 10's scaling has gotten a lot better and today this would/should not be an issue anymore.
Work: Center 27" QHD, left and right 27" 1080p. The scaling on the QHD is 125%. Now I'm spoiled.
At 4K, I need 150% scaling in order for me not to have issues with text/icons.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that is good to know as will be looking to upgrade again.
 
I ordered this one


a bit more in price (20 euros, so 345 in total) but it has height adjustable stand and speakers unlike it's cheaper brother with the same res.
it would be stupid to lose space to put it on a pack of paper because it would be too low otherwise.

I guess the second hmi port allows me to swith between pc and something else (rasPi or another desktop/laptop) or even see them simultanious via split screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top