There is no logical reason to go above this resolution.

Movie theaters perhaps

what if you don't want to see jagged pixels on your 32" screen?

>>105774746
Movie theatres should be using real film.

>>105774747
stare at it until you get blurred vision

>>105774752
no thanks. 4k monitor is like $200, price of five mcdonalds meals

>>105774737 (OP)
I'm happy with less.

>>105774760
Way to miss the point. retard

>>105774750
they shouldn't and don't.

money

>>105774737 (OP)
I work at medical imaging and there are a lot of reasons to go above 1080p in medicine and research.

>>105774760
>no thanks. 4k monitor is like $200, price of five McDonald meals

In what fucking country is a McDonald mean $40?? I can eat a fucking good Argentinian steak with red wine for that price.

>>105774737 (OP)
>I need glasses but dont realise it yet

my stinkpad has a 4k display and i wouldnt want anything worse.

>>105774737 (OP)
I just bought 2 4K monitors hahahahahahaha not sorry

>>105774932
That's a fairly small amount of McDonalds for an average-sized person, I'd say?

>>105775003
That's one meal? For one person?

>>105775003
I can eat 3 times in Europe, just with the fees alone

>>105774737 (OP)
True

>>105775003
lol fat cunt

>>105774737 (OP)
I got a 1440p laptop and the fonts look much nicer. No I don't gayme if you're wondering.

>>105774737 (OP)
1080p looks blown the fuck out on 27" or 30" monitors. Sounds like you're just being stubborn and wrong.

1080p is the new 1366x768

>>105775162
Europe is a poor country, makes sense.

>>105775619
>I can eat 3 times with the same amount of money
>country is poor

>4chan_logic.rm

>>105774737 (OP)
Video games with DLSS are justified in going above because pic related doesn't happen, you consume resources at 1080p level but get real pixels for 1440p+

>>105775619
He didn't mean that he can because the price is cheaper. He meant that he can because he doesnt eat like a pig, u fat cunt.

>>105775231
because your pixel density is ridiculously big due to both the resolution and a tiny monitor, you can achieve the same pixel density on 1080p with a smaller screen, functionally you get the same look

>>105775162
but European portions are much smaller, you probably pay more per the same weight due to taxes

>>105775733
>European portions are much smaller

And yet, we do not need to eat more than 1 portion per meal.

Take a look in the mirror, and you might understand.

>>105775739
I'm European, schizo.
Your education sucks.

>>105774737 (OP)
for me its 1440p

>>105775003
fat ass nigger

>>105774932
$10 McFatass burger, $5 XXL french fries, $2 extra dipping sauce, $3 jumbo coke, $5 McFlurry, $5 tip, $5 delivery fee, $5 delivery tip.

>>105775003
>$40 extra fees and tips
do burgers really?

>>105775745
I guess we also have whales in Europe

>>105775841
thus why I only call in takeout orders and go pick them up myself, and I don't tip on takeout.

>>105775719
>you can achieve the same pixel density on 1080p with a smaller screen
Yes, on a phone. On a desktop you need at least 4k.

>>105774737 (OP)
1080p feels small after trying 1440p, less real state. 4K is a meme though.

>>105777027
Not really, 1080p 15.6 inch is around 145 something ppi.
THAT'S BEYOND ENOUGH.
Matter of fact this is both my finding and something Linus tech tips has tested, if anti aliasing is used anything above 105 regardless of its size is more than serviceable, takes a giga autist to just tell the resolution is bigger not the quality of the image.

I say use w/e resolution you want my point is that this is mostly about ppi when people talk about how crisp the image is, anti aliasing looks like shit on 96 and under.

And again I also made this point about gaming: >>105775694 which makes running w/e resolution you want find.

>>105777250
I went from 1080p 15.6 inch to 1440p 14 inch, the fonts are MUCH better.

>>105777292
placebo or different scaling settings

>>105774737 (OP)
https://www.rgb.com/display-size-resolution-and-ideal-viewing-distance

>>105774737 (OP)
> logical
Perception goes beyond logic.

>>105777664
Of course there's different scaling, 200%. Had 100% on 1080p because 150% is an abomination and 200% was too big.

>>105774737 (OP)
More likely than not your phone already has.

Hot day today isn't it?

more ppi


1600p/1440p for monitors, 4K for tvs

>>105774760
>five mcdonalds meals
thats like 20 meals for me .. anon what do you eat there. are you this obese?

>>105774737 (OP)
Ultrawide monitors.
And before you call me stupid, Full HD is a specific resolution of 1920x1080, so while you can have an ultrawide with 1080 vertical resolution, Full HD is specified here.