Kaby Lake, 4K Touchscreen Come To 14-Inch Razer Blade Gaming Laptop

Status
Not open for further replies.

CaptCalamity

Commendable
Jun 10, 2016
9
0
1,510
0
Can someone please explain to what use a 4k screen is on a gaming laptop? You are insane if you think any laptop video card can drive that many pixels at an acceptable frame rate.

Wastes power and offers zero benefit. Kinda makes me think Razer lost its way.
 

kinggremlin

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
574
40
19,010
0
Who thought this was a good idea? A 14" 4k screen on a gaming laptop? The gpu is way too weak to game at that resolution, and no one is buying a razer for productivity. Even if they were, the 315 dpi is about double what a normal person can comfortably use for a windows display.
 

therealduckofdeath

Honorable
May 10, 2012
783
0
11,160
70
Why? Because, even though it's a gaming laptop people should be allowed to use their own device for other things when they're not gaming? Why do people on the internet always get so offended when they see a device built to be used in a way they themselves don't use a PC? I mean, the point with PC's is that you get to buy one that fits you, not one model force fitted to all. 300 DPI is a normal density for printing. Getting a display on your laptop able to present text and image as clearly as printed material is definitely not a bad thing.
[edited for wording, grammar, thangs]
 

hannibal

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
2,259
25
19,840
14
You game on 1080p resolution, but run 4K when doing work related stuff, or even when reading webpages. I definitely changed my opinion about reading dokuments from tablets, when I get a pad with retina Display. So much sharper text!
 

dstarr3

Honorable
Mar 18, 2014
1,527
0
11,960
52


Well, one advantage to a 4K 14" screen is that pixel density is so high, you really don't need anti-aliasing anymore. You can free up a lot of horsepower by turning that off.
 

MrKB

Reputable
Jun 25, 2015
7
0
4,510
0
1080p or 1440p (depending on game) for gaming and 4k for Video playback and reading.

Not everything needs to revolve around gaming, even on a "Gaming PC" It's a computer not a console, it's a multi-purpose tool.
 
basically as said...
1) 4K (with DPI Scaling to about 150%) produces sharper text.
and
2) Games can be set to whatever resolution you want. 1920x1080, 2560x1440, or 3840x2160 and upscaled to fit the screen. Which resolution is best depends on the game.

*However, I think 2560x1440 would be a better choice. 4K does add scaling issues, and while it can produce sharper text it causes more problems than it solves. For example, some older Adobe programs look very fuzzy when scaling up and it gets worse at higher resolutions.
 


Running a game at 4k requires far more horsepower than using an optimized anti-aliasing routine at a lower resolution. On such a tiny screen, I doubt you would even notice much visual difference between a 1080p display with antialiasing, and a 4k display, aside from only getting around 30% of the framerates at 4k. I suppose some older, less demanding games might be playable, but just about any big game from the last several years would require you to turn down graphics settings to be playable at 4k on a 1060, which would make the visuals noticeably worse overall. For a high-end gaming laptop, I can't help but think that giving it a higher refresh-rate screen would have been better than an apparently 60Hz 4k panel.



Yep, any software that doesn't support display scaling can appear blurrier with scaling enabled than it would have without it at a lower resolution. Even some of the settings menus and utilities built into Windows 10 haven't been updated to natively support display scaling. However, one advantage I could see at 4k is that you could use an even 200% scaling on the desktop, which will likely scale a little cleaner, and still provide the same usable area as a 1080p display. 150% scaling would almost certainly not be enough to comfortably use a 14 inch 4k display anyway.
 

kinggremlin

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
574
40
19,010
0


No one is "offended" by how someone uses a laptop. Stop being stupid. The point we are making is that a 14" 4k screen is not usable for anything. So why waste the money developing such a product? Spend the R&D on features that actually benefit the intended target. There is no one who could use a 315 dpi screen unscaled for any text based application. Someone suggested a 150% scale. That would be the equivalent of a 21" 4k monitor. If you're a fighter pilot or Major League Baseball batting champ, that may be usable for you, still completely useless for anyone with average or slightly better eyesight. There's a reason no one sells a 4k monitor smaller than 23.6". To be made usable, you'd have to scale the text about 200% which puts you at 1080p. So, you've lost any benefit of increased screen real estate at that point. And anyone who has used windows scaling knows, it often has issues and ironically, will usually end up looking worse than if you had just being running the lower equivalent resolution to begin with.

There is not a profitable market for a combination gaming/photo editing ultrabook. Anyone serious about content creation is not going to be shopping for a Razer. Realistically, they won't even be looking for a windows based laptop, it will be an Apple.

Your printer comparison is useless. You can't compare the dpi of different mediums.
 

hitman400

Honorable
Jul 24, 2012
90
0
10,630
0
I agree with KingGremlin, 4k is pointless even for regular tasks other than gaming. 4k in a 14" screen is pointless because a screen that small isn't that much sharper than a 1080p and a waste of system resources. Why not just go for 2k like the Macbook Pros and get the benefit of a slightly sharper display but doesn't bind your laptop down. I wouldn't even touch a Razer Blade 14" regardless because the display itself sucks (horrible viewing angles being for an IPS display). They might have improved the quality of the display, but I doubt it if an IPS display like the one on the 2016 units got through quality control.
 

knowom

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2006
777
0
18,990
1
4K good even outside gaming, but not on a 14" screen that's absolutely retarded. I have a 43" 4K display and run my DPI at 300% from about 3 feet away. I hope they at least included a free telescope with it.
 

hannibal

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
2,259
25
19,840
14
So you think that 360 pixels is enough in phone?
The more you put resolution to computer monitor, the better. I watch my 27" qhd from distance of 2 feets aka 50 cm and it would be much nicer if it would be 4K or 8K. My iPad is much more better reading the text than my 1440p monitor, because the text is much sharper!

If windows is bad at scaling, does not make sharp monitors bad. There is a big difference. 1080p vd 4K is easy for scaling up or down if needed. 1440p much less...
 

Atul Kumar Pandey

Reputable
Feb 26, 2015
2
0
4,510
0
The new i7 Processors are I amazing. I checked the Intel's for the specs and amazed to see it (Ref. https://ark.intel.com/products/97128/Intel-Core-i7-7700-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz) They are now much powerful for laptops even.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS