Question 1440p with 125% scaling VS 4K with 200% scaling

[ohm-ish]

My brain thinks 27" 4K with 200% scaling will give less realestate (bigger text etc.) than 27" 1440p with 125% scaling
True?
Or will both give 1080p result, just different pixeldensity, sharpness etc.?

 

[SkyNetRising]

Get 32" or 34" 1440p screen with 100% scaling instead.
Use scaling in apps, that support it internally (like web browsers).

A lot of apps do not handle 125% or 200% scaling properly. You may get wacky alignment of UI elements.

 

[ohm-ish]

Get 32" or 34" 1440p screen with 100% scaling instead.

This is not relevant for me, but thanks
It's not about choosing monitor size, but understanding the scaling better
27" is what I will be having, but the model comes in 4K and 1440p versions

 

[SkyNetRising]

It's not about choosing monitor, but understanding the scaling better
27" is what I will be having, but the model comes in 4K and 1440p versions

If those are your only options, then 27" 1440p with 100% scaling.

 

[ohm-ish]

If those are your only options, then 27" 1440p with 100% scaling.

I'm on 1440p with 125% scaling on windows now
And maybe going to mac and have 4K set as hidpi (200% scaling) instead
Just trying to compare the scalings/results so I can know the difference

 

[Glenwing]

1440p with 133% scaling would be equivalent to 4K 200% (i.e. 1080p). 1440p 125% will give very slightly more real estate.

 

[ohm-ish]

1440p with 133% scaling would be equivalent to 4K 200% (i.e. 1080p). 1440p 125% will give very slightly more real estate.

Ok thank you
Do you think that say 225% would leave lower quality than 200% on a 4K monitor?

 

[hotaru.hino]

Ok thank you
Do you think that say 225% would leave lower quality than 200% on a 4K monitor?

It depends on if the GUI element being scaled is a vector or raster based element. But disregarding that, increasing scaling will decrease the "usable space" you have on the desktop.