The Kuycon P20 – 28" 4500x3000px 3:2 monitor
taoofmac.com
taoofmac.com
Yeah, instant non starter for a $1k display. And the HDR section makes it sound like HDR support is purely there to tick a checkbox and not actually usable on the device. Not even counting the fact that the author had to swap the display as soon as they received it to get a non-defective one.
There’s a reason Apple displays are still the gold standard. Everyone else just skips the quality control part. If you trawl the high DPI display subreddits, you’ll find plenty of stories of people exchanging displays many times (3, 4, 5 or more) until they get a unit with an “acceptable” amount of dead pixels/color shift.
For tech that’s in the $1k-$2k range (or above), it’s just unacceptable.
Apple is not the gold standard, Eizo's ColorEdge monitors are. Built-in hardware calibration is non-negotiable for color critical work. Monitors drift over time.
No it is mostly a convenience gimmick. Support for external hardware calibration is important though. But far more important feature, implemented properly only by Eizo and no one else I am aware of - is uniformity compensation. Benq has it, so does Dell, but they all come with sever limitations compared to Eizo.
Until you decide to use Linux and all the distros you're interested in force you to use Wayland (which is a color management trainwreck).
Also, I find that for actual work the calibration actually gets done if the display does it by itself during night at set intervals. Perhaps I'm just lazy.
Why 2400p? Because it is the LCM of 400, 480 and 600, so it would allow perfect integer rescaling of my favourite MS-DOS and early Windows games.
But even if I had the budget to afford it most probably I'd pass - having to handle settings with a remote control instead of with the OS via a ddc interface or something seems quite odd, or maybe it's just me that grew so used to this "old" Apple Thunderbold Display.
Also that it doesn't have internal speakers, mic or webcam - I really like the thunderbolt display "peripherals" and make my desktop way less cluttered that it should be with just any other monitor, so the hypothetical case of having to get also speakers, mic and a webcam sounds like a serious downgrade. Can't care less about the 120Hz thing but maybe it's because I've never used a high-rate display.
I wish they do a "P20 Pro" of sorts that adds this things.
I do applaud the company for bringing a new interesting option to the market, though. Integer scaling HiDPI is rare enough (though thankfully is finally becoming more common), but integer scaling HiDPI with a ratio that's not 16:9 is practically a unicorn. If they can get QC under control I wouldn't mind buying from them in the future.
Coding is so much nicer on those. I have a Huawei Matebook 14 from a few years ago, and at my previous work I had a Framework, this ratio is just night and day it's so much better
To me, 28" 4K is near the sweet spot: it's exactly 4 14" screens of my ThinkPad. I wish the screens had higher resolution and smaller size though.
You said you wished the screens had a smaller size? You'd want a smaller than 28in screen? Wouldn't that get pretty uncomfortably close to view, even with scaling?
[1] https://i.dllu.net/2026-09-09-20-40-23_b59cb931ec7bd913.png
However, as another commenter mentioned in the thread it seems like nearly every non-Apple monitor has some sort of negative compromise outside of port selection.
That being said $700 is a steal for that monitor easily and the price overcomes a lot of possible downsides (at least for me it would).
For graphics work, of course the answer might be different and I'm no expert. Personally I think screen size does matter, and I've noticed a fair improvment going from 28 to 32.
With 4K it feels like I have to do a lot of tabbing between apps on a single monitor.
But I get people’s experiences obviously vary since display preferences are extremely subjective and overall it seems like the 27” 5K and 32” 6K fans are in the minority.
I have 20/20 vision and a pretty normal desk setup. I run my 32 4K at 100% scaling in Windows, and while I could maybe push it down a little smaller, some of the least PPI-aware interfaces and text would start to be too small.
If you're running 6K scaled to 150%, you basically just have a slightly sharper 4K monitor - effectively 0 extra space. If you're not running it scaled, I'm betting you're sitting closer to the monitor than is recommended for long term use (or have like 20/10 vision).
It's too bad there isn't a 3:2 OLED (and if there is let me know). I shelled out for a AW3225QF OLED 4k at 240hz and it is beautiful... I would love to get a proper OLED side monitor for the blacks and contrast but instead stick with my Dell U24 as replacing it seems silly.