What is the minimum size 4K monitor you would use for productivity without dpi scaling?

[cbn]

For comparison sake a 27" 1440p monitor works out to be 109 pixels per inch according to this calculator.

A 21.5" 1080p works out to be 102 pixels per inch.

28" 3840 x 2160 works out be 157 pixels per inch.

32" 3840 x 2160 works out to be 138 pixels per inch.

 

[alcoholbob]

I find 32" too small without having to sit too close and squint. I think 40" is pretty much the minimum for UHD productivity.

 

[mnewsham]

40" 4k is the minimum for me as well, that's 110PPI which is identical to a 1920x1080p @ 20".

It essentially gives you a 40" screen with 4x20" 1920x1080p quadrants.

I'm currently using dual 2560x1440p @ 25" for 117PPI, any denser however and I would need to start looking at GUI scaling, I think anything over ~125-130PPI would basically require some scaling, at least for my viewing distance.

 

[Piroko]

I have a 27" 1440p monitor, which is fine without dpi scaling. But even then it took my eyes several weeks to adjust to the higher dpi (came from a 90 dpi screen). I'd say I wouldn't want to go above 120 dpi, so 37" to 40" would be my choice.

 

[cbn]

This Curved 37" 3840 x 1600 monitor (in today's Anandtech news post) has 111 pixles per inch:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10644...h-curved-219-display-with-38401600-resolution

 

[Newbian]

Low 30's at least and it depends where it's sitting compared to where you are.

 

[Thinker_145]

Windows 10 scaling is honestly not that bad. If I weren't a PC gamer I'll buy a 24-27" 4k screen for sheer pixel perfection that we get in smartphones. My father has a 15" 4K laptop and my God the desktop clarity and sharpness is so enviable.

Sent from my HTC One M9