Hacker News Reader

Comment by nepeckman | Hacker News Reader

Question for anyone who has coded on a 4k display: is it worth it? Is the scaled image that much sharper, and is that sharpness worth having? I feel like I still see so many scaling problems, and I'm curious if people feel like the better display quality is worth it.

View on HN

> Is the scaled image that much sharper

Sharpness is a property of the pixel density, which is separate to the number of pixels (the 4K part), so it's not really a question which makes sense.

For example I have a 4K screen for coding but it isn't particularly high DPI because it's physically large at 68 cm so nothing on it is 'scaled' beyond normal.

Most people buy monitors from a fixed set of sizes (say 23-27 inches) so within that range 4K means pixel density with not much variation.

And of course, for the same monitor size, compared to 1080p, it would be ~2x the density, so that's a valid fixed comparison to make too.

In other words, read the parent's question as: "if it worth it to go 4K over 1080p/2K for the same monitor size? Is it noticeably sharper?".

You won't be blown away when you start using a 4k monitor, but you will hate every monitor that is smaller after you start using a 4k

It's not the sharpness but the incredible amount of real estate you have. I can have documentation, a preview window and the code open at the same time in what would be their full screen resolution.

To anyone considering one, make sure it supports 60hz at full resolution, otherwise the choppyness makes it unusable.

I have an ultrawide, so about 60% of the pixels of a 4k. Best feature IMO is being able to have 2 windows open side by side without feeling squished. I assume it is even better with a full 4k.

(imho) difference is as night and day - once you start with 4k there is no turning back...

+1. After getting a 4k display at work, I decided I need to get one home as well. It's so much nicer.

I've had two 4K displays.

One was a 15" laptop screen. It gave me no end of trouble. Anything that didn't scale properly would be unusably small due to the downright excessive pixel density, and a distressing number of apps didn't scale properly. Most everything else about that computer was great, but I ended up replacing it within a few months, mostly due to dissatisfaction with the display.

The other is a large external monitor. I can't remember how big - maybe 27"? I like it quite a bit. Combined with a tiling window manager, it's a bit like having a multi-monitor setup, only with even more flexibility in how to arrange your workspace.

So, I guess, my advice would be to ignore the marketing terminology and just make sure that your monitor has an appropriate pixel density - not too little, not too much.

Yes it's worth it. I'm usually on Windows, and can say that 95%+ of the programs I use work flawlessly on a 24" 4K monitor with 175% scaling. The crispness of a text editor on a 4K screen is worth every bit of the 5% of programs that have scaling issues. And these days, remaining scaling issues involve some parts of the app scaling correctly, and other parts (usually menus) not scaling correctly. I never encounter "blurry" programs with bilinear scaling anymore.

I'm not really using scaling... at home, I'm using a single 40" 4k display... absolutely love it. It's like 4x 20" 1080p displays, without lines in the middle... on OSX with moom, it's been pretty awesome (I pin my launcher on the left so when I run a windows vm, the taskbar is at the bottom).

It's definitely been worth it for me... I wish my work would let me bring my own... I'd rather the one 40" than the two 22" (1080p) that I have now.

Thanks for https://manytricks.com/moom/

I wish I had it in Windows/Linux ... probably my #1 productivity app.

I find it a lot easier to read, personally. Less eye strain. Most of the windows apps I use, at this point, finally support it (a few stragglers). The only downside I've found is that cabling can be complicated (not every HDMI cable is 4k enabled), and if you're a gamer, it's a lot easier to get a 144hz refresh rate on an older 1080p screen. (Which is also one of those things you probably don't realize is really nice until you actually use it)

If you're on macOS, absolutely. Linux, maybe not. It's really hard for me to go back to a non-retina screen. I'm using a 2018 15" MBP which ships with a default scaled resolution of 1680x1050 which upscales the screen and in my opinion isn't as clear as the 1:1 pixels of 1440x900 (the native screen resolution being 2x that at 2880x1800). The crispness is worth the lack of real estate. Sharpness is definitely worth having.

Definitely works fine on Linux too

From my experience, scaling problems are usually related with the app itself rather than the screen or the OS but;

After getting used to the retina display of macs, you realise how bad, how pixelated 1080p looks on texts. Especially the workplace monitors since they are usually the cheapest ones. Upgrading 4K gives you joy after being exposed to those cheap screens. :)

I got a 4K 15.6" laptop last year and it is totally worth it. I can't go back to 1080 now, text is very noticeably blurry and jagged. Text and UI lines on 4K with properly implemented scaling are so clean. I'm using KDE Plasma on X11 with 1.8x scaling and it is perfect.

Yes.

I use a LG 27UD69P-W 27" 4K at home and 27"@4K is the sweetspot for me.

The dpi is high enough that fonts are crystal sharp without any noticeable hinting artifacts as I've gotten older poorer screens give me a literal headache.

Recently bought 32" Samsung 4K display ($360). At first, I thought it a waste of $$$. But as soon as I fired-up Visual Studio, I realized how wrong I was. I'm planning to get a second one very soon.

I'm using 13" 3200x1800 display with KDE Plasma, won't ever go back.

Absolutely.

I don't have any scaling issues, the added screen real estate is a life saver.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com