New monitor - Ultrawide QHD or 4k?

[JohnJay]

I need a new monitor and am considering the above sizes (34 and 32 inch respectively).

Ideally I'd get a 4k monitor as when everything works right it looks so clean and crisp (I have a Dell XPS 15 inch laptop with 4k screen and text and lines are great).

Most software though hasn't caught up yet and I'm thinking that for a Windows workstation, 4k will cause more problems than it solves.

I read some earlier threads on here saying there were issues with AC and 4k (tiny cursors, some blurry elements etc).

How is 4k currently working on Windows with scaling enabled (I'm assuming I will need around 125% or 150%)?

I'm also assuming native 4k resolution on a 32 inch screen makes everything too small to see?

[runxel]

4k is great! I use it with 150% scaling and the newer versions of Archicad work just fine.
I wouldn't recommend to go with native resolution (= 100% scaling), that makes everything indeed reeeeally small.

Ultrawide seems nice, since Archicad has no multiscreen support on Windows.

[JohnJay]

Good to know 4k works well with AC.

It's a bit of a dilemma because the apps that aren't HDPI ready look terrible in Windows. MODO is one of those which isn't ready and is an important part of my workflow right now.

I'm slowly transitioning to Blender (which has excellent 4k support) but it will take some time to be as fluent as I am in MODO.

I feel like Ultrawide QHD is old tech and I'd be buying obsolete hardware just so I can keep using softwares that have been too slow to make the much needed changes...

I may try the 4k monitor first and begrudgingly return it and swap for the QHD if needed.

[Lingwisyer]

I much prefer my UWQHD at home over my 4K at work. I find the workspace more balanced since there is more space for relevant palettes on the sides. This is more noticeable in AutoCAD, Photoshop and Lightroom for me though as my ArchiCAD workspace has a few too many toolbars at the top... The UWQHD also allows me to have documents open side by side or to the side of the production software without squishing anything to ineligibility, though a secondary monitor solves this.



Ling.

ps. I wonder how the 32:9 aspect ratio looks when you use it as a single workspace...?

[Anonymous]

I use a 32Inch 4k Samsung U32H85x scaled to 125% as my office monitor connected to my HP zBook studio which is also 4k and 125% scaling and have no issues and am generally happy with interface /scaling etc

[Rex Maximilian]

I have a 5K 27" iMac with ArchiCAD. Default emulation is a 2560 pixel wide monitor (using the full 5K across) for extra sharp resolution. But the cool thing is you can also set the pixel display going more toward the 5K end for more screen real estate; especially for palette heavy programs like Archicad. There is a happy medium that only your eyes can judge.

In a nutshell, get the 4K!

[Laszlo Nagy]

I have 28" 4K monitors, and at 4K resolution, I also found that text is too small for me. So the 2 choices were: either use them at 4K with scaling or use them at a smaller resolution with no scaling. Since scaling may cause issues (although probably with fewer and fewer apps), I decided to use the 4K monitors are 2560x1440 resolution at 100% scaling.
I am happy with the result.

[JohnJay]

Lingwisyer wrote:
I much prefer my UWQHD at home over my 4K at work.

interesting that as a user of both you prefer the UWQHD. Do you not miss the extra clarity offered by the 4k monitor?

My current 24" monitor is 94ppi, a 34 inch UWQHD is approx 110ppi, and a 4k 32" screen is just under 140ppi - that's quite a bit more than the other options?

Rex wrote:
In a nutshell, get the 4K!

It would be a no brainer if my other apps played well with 4K but unfortunately some of them don't.

LaszloNagy wrote:
I decided to use the 4K monitors are 2560x1440 resolution at 100% scaling.
I am happy with the result.

This is the thing. Why buy a 4k screen if you need to use it @ QHD resolution? May as well get a native QHD (or UWQHD in my case), as it will likely be sharper than a non native resolution.

I'm the wrong side of 45 now so my eyes are feeling the pain of years of intense focussing on a screen

[Laszlo Nagy]

JohnJay wrote:
This is the thing. Why buy a 4k screen if you need to use it @ QHD resolution? May as well get a native QHD (or UWQHD in my case), as it will likely be sharper than a non-native resolution.

I'm the wrong side of 45 now so my eyes are feeling the pain of years of intense focusing on a screen

The reason I bought a 4K monitor has 2 reasons:
1. The 4K monitor cost about the same price as a monitor that offered only 2560x1440 resolution.
2. I did not know that 4K would result in such small details, which would be too small for me, especially as time goes by and my eyesight is not getting better.

[Lingwisyer]

JohnJay wrote:
Do you not miss the extra clarity offered by the 4k monitor?

The text sharpness on the 4K when run at native is nice, but for everything else, I do not find much difference. Though this might be due to it being of a lower quality than my UWQHD... Office budget constraints... It's a Kogan 32" IPS and I find the corner to corner colour accuracy to be mediocre.

A UWQHD is also easier to drive at home so when it comes to things that require you to push frames, it gains in clarity there. That comparison is made in relation to my laptop which runs a 15.6" 4K IPS.



Ling.