Do any 4k monitors actually scale 1080p perfectly? In theory it should be easy, but the upscaling on the few that I've seen actually looked quite poor.
That image looks wrong.
from my only experience with a 4k tv, 1080p looked like shit on it for vidya.
>do any 4k monitors actually scale 1080p perfectly?
what does this mean? 4k is 3840x2160, which is double of 1920x1080.
If you're asking about scaling for desktop use, you're taking up beef with the operating system and blaming it on the monitor. I have a pair of UP2414Qs at home right here, and a P2415Q in my lab, and they all look like regular 24" 1080p monitors that have magically sharper text and other assets. They're basically "retina" displays, because OS X has been pushing scaled assets since 2012 when the rMBP came out.
Jagged edges now with more jags.
>4k = 2(1080p)
>2k != 1080p
explain this shit
>>52043360
"4k" is a name.
"retina display" doesn't mean it's made out of human retinas.
what other things do autistic people need explained to them? i'm free for a few minutes.
>>52043307
meh
I'm assuming most people have a 1080p monitor here, to give you a proper analogy imagine you scale up a 960x540 resolution to 1080p
its the same 4:1 conversation as 1080p to 4K is
Your eyes get used to seeing all the fine details/ not being able to distinguish pixels to suddenly having pixels that are 4x larger that is noticable
Weirdly this only from my experience seems to affect games the most, movies look fine, maybe its just the lack of finer details to begin with in films..
>4K monitor here
this is bait, op has to be a massive retard to not do any research.
>>52043360
4k just sounds impressive for marketing. Not a single thing about it actually has anything to do with 4000.
>>52043437
meh its just a name, just like Full High Definition is just a name
True 4K the DCI standard is really only used in professional settings, so I can't see how there will be a lot of confusion for consumers between 4K and DCI 4K, when one market is magnitudes bigger than the other.
>>52043417
it doesn't make a lot of sense, i know.
i bought the cheap 4k tv that anon listed here for black friday, the sceptre 4k from walmart. RGBW panel but it wasn't even awful for the price. took it back though.
anyway i compared skyrim on my current hdtv to skyrim on that 4k tv at 1080p and it simply wasn't as sharp on the 4k model.
now in 4k it was fine but the input lag was shit. granted i was over 4k30hz on hdmi 1 and not hdmi2.
after seeing games in that resolution with AA i'm fucking sold on 4k resolution. gpu's just need to get faster and we need better 4k monitors of substantial size before i go full retard. the wasabi mango 4k 42 inch is what i plan to get in the meantime but i hate the idea of importing a 800 dollar korean monitor to the usa.
>>52043480
Is your 4k TV bigger? Because of course it's going to look worse then.
>>52043480
>now in 4k it was fine but the input lag was shit. granted i was over 4k30hz on hdmi 1 and not hdmi2.
I feel like input lag is another meme.
4K for monitors is good, for TVs its a waste of money, there is like a drop of content in 4K out there.
only recently did the bluray consortium finalize the new 4K spec (which you will need to buy a new player to work btw)
>800 dollar korean monitor to the usa.
Why not look at Dell's P2715Q monitor ?
routinely goes on sale,
IPS panel
"only" 60hz not sure about input lag
Don't skimp on on your monitor, its gonna be the longest lasting part of your PC that you literally got to look at every day.
>>52043480
a lot of them simply don't scale 1:4 correctly.
>>52043562
it was pretty close in size, 37 inch vs 40 iirc.
>>52043577
27 inches isn't big enough, sorry.
input lag is a gray area in memeland. under 50ms is good enough for plebs. under 30ms is good enough for most people. i prefer size to refresh rate so i can live with the compromise.
>wasabi mango
>LG IPS panel
>42 inches 4k resolution
>4:4:4
>60hz
i don't consider that skimping out at all.
>>52043624
that's the operating system or something. there's no reason that 1 pixel shouldn't scale to a 2x2 array taking up the same space.
>>52043627
whats the point of having such a large display ?
It either feels uncomfortable to sit very close to it, or if you're sitting far away then its just a waste of a high PPI display.
>>52043775
his monitor isn't high PPI. It's roughly the same density as a 24" 1080p monitor.
Not saying that his decision is intelligent; just clarifying that a properly high ppi display would be ~24" and 4k. make everything scaled at 2x and you get a conventional amount of "real estate" but substantially sharper text and whatnot.
in before someone somehow doesn't understand this.
>>52043480
My roommate got that mobitor on sale about 4ish months ago for 425$. That thin metal bezel is ultra sexy my friend.
>>52043775
i suppose it's a personal thing. 37 inch 1080p sitting about 2 feet away has been great for me for the last three years. text looks nice and sharp. if i go to the planned 42 inch 4k monitor i'll sit it about the same 2-2.5 foot distance away.
don't knock it until you've tried it. for gaming with a 90 degree FOV it's excellent.
i've always been in search of bigger monitors since having a 15 inch CRT. in a few years i expect to have something like an 80 inch 8k monitor in 4:4:4 at 60hz minimum.
>>52043825
my opinion of acceptable PPI is probably less than your typical /g/ user. i'm right at about 60 ppi/3600 pixels per square inch.
as long as you can't see the pixels themselves you're at adequate distance.
>>52043852
i know, i know!
>>52043633
No, it's an issue with some monitors. Swap them out on the same system and it becomes apparent.
>>52043889
what would you recommend for a 4K 60hz monitor? I like to stay exactly in the middle of the monitor so I hate dual monitor setups.
>>52044020
the philips if you want the VA panel
http://www.amazon.com/Philips-Computer-Monitor-3840x2160-Truevision/dp/B00UBCVY02
or the wasabi mango
http://www.amazon.com/WASABI-MANGO-UHD420-Real-HDMI/dp/B00YA5IZS0/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1451026155&sr=1-1&keywords=wasabi+mango+uhd420
