[citation][nom]downhill911[/nom]You just got me unsure - really interesting question.If you mean PC displays than2560x1600 with OLED @ 27''= very likable4K 3820x2160 @ 30-32''- not sure about using it as monitor cuz I feel like my current 1440p 27'' is just the right and reasonable size without having to turn head from side to side.But if we talk about TVs, I think I would prefer 50'' 4K instead of 50'' 1080p Oled.[/citation]
I was going for displays in general, so both TVs and monitors count
Yeah, that answer is pretty much what I expected. It seems that among people who have an understanding of large displays and/or very high resolutions, stuff like what you said here is a general consensus.
I'd answer the question like this:
for computer monitors, I prefer 16x10 resolutions over 16x9. It's the other way around for TVs for good reason IMO, but it always seems to short for a computer monitor.
Monitors equal to either 24" or 27" or somewhere between the two would be ideal with 2560x1600.
Monitors equal to either 15.6" and 21.5" or somewhere between the two would be ideal with 1920x1200.
Monitors between either range or outside of them are often somewhat uncomfortable for me regardless of resolution and such.
I haven't had a TV under 50" in a long time and I don't see the point in it for my uses (if I wanted something smaller, then I'd just get a good computer monitor because I'll probably be sitting close enough to be annoyed by the big TV pixels anyway). Around 50" or greater for TVs would make some sense with 4K. Granted, I'll be sitting much farther away from the TV than from a computer monitor, so around 2560x1440 will probably still be fine, it would not be a resolution that works well with 1080p programming.
Oh, and I made a mistake earlier. It's 3840x2160, not 3820x2160. My bad
🙁
3840x2160 is a very nice resolution because it can accurately play 720p ( 3x3 720p) and 1080p (2x2 1080p) and that is very nice, although you probably already knew that
