Question Help chossing between 21:9 1440p vs 4k; real estate vs 1080p and 1440p

[tony carvalho]

Hi all

Quick Back ground:
A year ago I bought my first external monitor ever, I was realy back and forth between a 4k, a 21:9 1440p a 21:9 1080p and a 16:9 1440p. Ended up buying a 2560*1440 32" ISP 75mhz (AOC Q3279VWFD8). All the other option at the time were too expensive or TN.
I've been using this monitor at around 85~95cm, I realy feel like less than that and it would be too big for my work flow. I do mostly work, explorer, chrome, MS office, autocad, paint and gimp.
I still use my 14" 1080p laptop, but both at 100% in scale and layout, only increased my mouse size in 1440p.
The diference:

I've looked all over youtube and google and couldn't find what i'm looking for, a lot of youtuber and the like talk about expended field of view on games, how consuming media is a hit or miss in 21:9 and the like, but not one talk about the multitasking experience of a 4k or Ultrawide.
I screenshoted a couple of use case scenario and was realy looking for help to get a good feeling of what it's realy like.

First, desktop (all images croped)

Windows desktop, 25 icon horizontaly vs 28 and 10 vs 14 verticaly

2. Explorer

At 1080p I can fit 2 windws explorer at ease, not 3, the midle 1 is barely unusuable, the sides ones are bare minimum in term of usability. At 1440p, I can 3 "full" content sized windows explorer. I could also get 4 smaller, or 6 if the top tray was recoiled.

3. MS office

At 1080, I can view Word at 100% and have an ok windows explorer, at 1440p word is still fine and the 2 wondws are ok too, but manly beacause it's a 32" display.


Again better explorer, better word more excel at 1440p vs 1080p
To get a sense of how much a diference it make, look at the menus. At 1440p I have almost an normal tray at top, at 1080p everything is hidden in sub-menus.

Continue in next post

 

[tony carvalho]

4. chrome and outlook

Chrome look fine in both but outlook get realy skinny at 1080p.

5.Autocad


Not the same work, but it's easy to see how much space the 1080p have "left" to work after all the sides panels are open.

I have a Gimp comparation but it's more of the same.
all full res pic:

resolution compar.rar

drive.google.com

 

[tony carvalho]

Now, about a 32" 1440p monitor, the fact that i'm 90cm away make it aceptable in term of field of view. I can read all information in every portion of the panel with ease, but to be honest, the top part is easy, but not natural. I have the eplorer top tray open so no importante information get in that portion of the screen. It's not inconfortable or stressful, but it's realy at the border for confort, so 32" at closer range would be a big nope for me.
Another factor is, I don't do work in wich color acuracy is critical, it's more about being used to nice display than a requiermente.

Also, I'm Not gaming on this display, Ever. Does Windows use a Variable Refresh Rate tecnoilogy (AMD freesync or G-sync) outside of games?

Buying possibility:
I'm eyeing at 27/28" 4k or 34" 3440x1440, both have about the same vertical height, the ultrawide have 18cm more horizontal width.

4k analisis
Pros:
-cheaper for same level of feature
-way easier to find/buy
-every tier of feature and price available
-easy to find exctly the feature set your looking for

maybe pros:
-can fill more info/element than UW
-can stack 6 explorer's windows (?)
-More pixel Real Estate
-more eyes demanding
-actual second hand market

Cons:
-will need to upscale to 125 or 150%
-more GPU intense

UltraWide analisis
Pros:
-less GPU demanding
-Can stack 4+ APP/windows at full contente side by side
-Easier on te eyes

maybe pros:
-Novelty efect
-Less eyes strain
-More Screen Real Estate

Cons:
-way more expensive
-dificult to find the right combination of size, HDMI port, eight and tilt adjust, USB HUB, Variable refresh rate, color acuracy, brightness and cost

Other consideration:
In terme of panel techology, TN is not considered, both VA and ISP seem valid option for 4K, but i'm kinda hesitante of VA in UW, I've seen a lot of coment about edge bleeding and color diference in UW's VA.

Here a list of my wish/priority list

	4K	UW
Size	27/28	34/35"
Ports	DP+HDMI	DP+HDMI
eight and tilt adjustment	eight not necessary	eight not necessary
colo racuracy	NTSC >71%	NTSC >71%
USB HUB	preferable	Maybe
Var Refr Rate	yes 75 up	60 is fine
brightness	>250cd/m2	>250cd/m2
cost	<280€	<330€
panel tech	ISP or VA	ISP

The HUB diference is about the place most UW have their HUB, realy outr of the way, better to not have it.
Brightness, both my laptop and 1440p monitor are 250cd and I realy don't need more for the place the monitor is going.
I was breifly considering a 32:9, but those are >1000€
How much is an height adjustment valuable? I nevewr used one so I have no idea.

Curved vs Not Curved
Curved monitor create a curved straight line acording to alot of report, i'm not going to try this out as having straight line in autocad is realy a basis for working.

If you guys could show me some screenshot of the uses case shown above it would be really helpfull.
I intende in update this thread with my onw experience when I'll decide and actualy buy 1.

 

[tony carvalho]

just in case

 

[tony carvalho]

1+

 

[biostud]

The problem with 4k 27" is that text is really small if not upscaled. I have a 27" 1440p monitor at home and a 34" 1440p uw at work. My next monitor at home is going to be a 1440p 34" uw. It is very versatile for work.

 

[tony carvalho]

The problem with 4k 27" is that text is really small if not upscaled. I have a 27" 1440p monitor at home and a 34" 1440p uw at work. My next monitor at home is going to be a 1440p 34" uw. It is very versatile for work.

The small text of 4K is realy what holding me back. I realy wanted to try first hand but no resseler around my town have windows pluged monitor for display.

 

[postmortemIA]

The UW is only thing that can replace two monitors for work and be pretty good at it, so looks like that's the furture for gaming and work. IMO 32" 1440P is slighlty too big for that resolution, that's why many prefer 27" variant, you can use whole screen with less eye movement.

 

[aigomorla]

4k 27" IMO is small.... unless you got eagle eyes or your right up on the monitor.
If your going 4k, you really should again IMO go 32 inch, as i feel that is the perfect size for a 4k.

 

[Ricky T]

4k 27" IMO is small.... unless you got eagle eyes or your right up on the monitor.
If your going 4k, you really should again IMO go 32 inch, as i feel that is the perfect size for a 4k.

Yeah I think most people find 27 inches for 4k is too small. That size is almost perfectly suited to 1440p for most people. 32 inches is the smallest I would go for 4k.