Monitor size affect resolution?

[BRUTUS]

There are 2 monitors Im interested in buying, they are both 2560x1440 while one is 23.8 inches and the other is 27. If I'll purchase the larger screen will I see a lower quality image when compared to the smaller one?

[Andrius227]

Yes, they have different ppi (pixels per inch). But 1440p at 27 inch is perfect in my opinion. If it was 1080p, 24 vs 27 inch it would be quite different.

[Cathulhu]

It will not affect resolution or frame rate, but having a bigger display results in less pixel density.
But with 1440p you will have no issues with a 27" display.

A 27" 1440p display has a pixel density of ~109ppi (pixel per inch)
A bog standard 24" FullHD display has a pixel density of ~92ppi.
A 24" 1440p display has a pixel density of ~122ppi. Which is just 10.6% more. Not that big of a difference.
So, even by having a bigger display you still get a higher pixel density than with a common 24" FullHD display.

Will you see a difference? If you look close enough, yes.
Will you note a difference when actually using it? No.

[_I_]

you can get a 65+in 1080p tv, thats the exact same res as a 5-6in phone with a 1080p display

the smaller display will have tighter pixels
imho for a desk viewing distance of a few feet (2-3ft, arms length) 100ppi or .25mm
around a 27in for 1440p, or 22 for 1080p

[Autumn_]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Butcher_Of_Blaviken:

There are 2 monitors Im interested in buying, they are both 2560x1440 while one is 23.8 inches and the other is 27. If I'll purchase the larger screen will I see a lower quality image when compared to the smaller one?

Are you talking about the S2417DG and S2716DG?

And, what is your viewing distance?

[jason]

The extra physical screen space is worth a small loss of clarity.

[tacoshy]

Oprindeligt skrevet af jason:

The extra physical screen space is worth a small loss of clarity.

It's not clarity, it's sharpness - highly depends on what you do and what you prefer. Also the distance to the monitor.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

1440p of any kind = get at least 27 inch screen or larger.

[BRUTUS]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Bad 💀 Motha:

1440p of any kind = get at least 27 inch screen or larger.

don't think my desk space will agree with you on that

[BRUTUS]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Autumn:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Butcher_Of_Blaviken:

There are 2 monitors Im interested in buying, they are both 2560x1440 while one is 23.8 inches and the other is 27. If I'll purchase the larger screen will I see a lower quality image when compared to the smaller one?

Are you talking about the S2417DG and S2716DG?

And, what is your viewing distance?

Not sure what you meant in your first sentence. My viewing distance is fairly limited.

[Autumn_]

Oprindeligt skrevet af BRUTUS:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Autumn:

Are you talking about the S2417DG and S2716DG?

And, what is your viewing distance?

Not sure what you meant in your first sentence. My viewing distance is fairly limited.

They're monitors models.
But, what ones are you looking at?

And, personally, I like 1440p at 24 inches, it's the perfect size. (I can see pixels on 27inch, but I have to look for them.) And I sit fairly close to the monitor.
If you're sitting close, and don't have desk space, 24 inch is the way to go. (And they're cheaper iirc.)

[Azza ☠]

Consider the "Retina" of the display...

Then match that with the resolution / monitor size you want, keeping it retina. This is where the human eye can no longer count between pixels.

Finally match to ensure the graphics card can meet that resolution smoothly.

So for Retina, it's a calculation of: Screen resolution <> Monitor size <> Viewing distance

At the standard viewing distance of 3 feet, optimal retina display would be:

1080p resolution - 19 to 24 inch monitor (max 27 inches)
1440p resolution - 27 to 32 inch monitor (27 inches is a sweet spot, max 36 inches)
UltraHD 4K resolution - ideally at least 32 inches (minimum of 27 inches, below that is a waste)

---

The average human eye (20/20) can see 300 microradians of visual acuity and has a near point of 25 cm. That works out to 75 microns, or 338 pixels per inch. But that doesn't mean you can't tell dots are there, it just means you can't see the white space between two dots.

The average computer monitor viewing distance is about 2.5 feet (762 mm). p@0.4 is 89 microns or about 300 ppi/dpi. p@1 is 222 microns or about 115 ppi/dpi.

So a standard magazine would be printed at 300 dpi and a standard monitor would have 100 ppi.

---

So in your case, WQHD (2560×1440) resolution is ideal for a 27-inch monitor. You get 108 PPI (pixels per inch).

ps: 2560x1400 on a 23.8 inch monitor would be 123 PPI (pixels per inch). You would notice the size difference of the monitor more than the Rentina change for your eyes, unless you like sitting extremely close to the monitor. Just take in other factors of the monitor, such as is it an IPS Panel (richer and brighter colours over a TN Panel), low response time (at least 5ms or below), and high refresh rate (60Hz or higher)?

[Autumn_]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Azza ☠:

Consider the "Retina" of the display...

Then match that with the resolution / monitor size you want, keeping it retina. This is where the human eye can no longer count between pixels.

Finally match to ensure the graphics card can meet that resolution smoothly.

So for Retina, it's a calculation of: Screen resolution <> Monitor size <> Viewing distance

At the standard viewing distance of 3 feet, optimal retina display would be:

1080p resolution - 19 to 24 inch monitor (max 27 inches)
1440p resolution - 27 to 32 inch monitor (27 inches is a sweet spot, max 36 inches)
UltraHD 4K resolution - ideally at least 32 inches (minimum of 27 inches, below that is a waste)

---

The average human eye (20/20) can see 300 microradians of visual acuity and has a near point of 25 cm. That works out to 75 microns, or 338 pixels per inch. But that doesn't mean you can't tell dots are there, it just means you can't see the white space between two dots.

The average computer monitor viewing distance is about 2.5 feet (762 mm). p@0.4 is 89 microns or about 300 ppi/dpi. p@1 is 222 microns or about 115 ppi/dpi.

So a standard magazine would be printed at 300 dpi and a standard monitor would have 100 ppi.

---

So in your case, WQHD (2560×1440) resolution is ideal for a 27-inch monitor. You get 108 PPI (pixels per inch).

ps: 2560x1400 on a 23.8 inch monitor would be 123 PPI (pixels per inch). You would notice the size difference of the monitor more than the Rentina change for your eyes, unless you like sitting extremely close to the monitor. Just take in other factors of the monitor, such as is it an IPS Panel (richer and brighter colours over a TN Panel), low response time (at least 5ms or below), and high refresh rate (60Hz or higher)?

I've used both 27 inch, and 23.8 inch 1440p displays, I have pretty bad eyes, I do sit close (~40cm) to the monitor, and I can see the difference between them, pixel density wise.
So, people insisting that 24 inches isn't good are just plain wrong.

Also, where did you get the average viewing distance from? That seems way to far away to be true, imho.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Well using below 27-28 inch is pretty terrible and never worth buying if you are a gamer, unless its a 1080p panel. Rearrange your desk space to make room for a 27 inch or larger.

If going to settle for a 23 or 24 inch, then stick to 16:9 1080p 144hz

1440p shouldn't even be used on below approx 27 inch anyways. Look at what's released to market, do you see a wide range of 1440p panels below 27 inch. NOPE...

Now if you were to compare two decent panels that are 1080p, between 24 inch amd 27 inch you would notice the difference because the same res at 27 inch is going to have slightly larger pixels. This shouldn't happen on a 27 inch 1440p panel unless it's junk, cause it would have better pixel pitch being that it was made with 144hz in mind.

[Autumn_]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Bad 💀 Motha:

Well using below 25-28 inch is pretty terrible and never worth buying if you are a gamer. Rearrange your desk space to make room for a 27 inch or larger.

If going to settle for a 23 or 24 inch, then stick to 16:9 1080p 144hz

24 inch 1080p looks like ♥♥♥♥.

Edit;

Oprindeligt skrevet af Bad 💀 Motha:

1440p shouldn't even be used on below approx 27 inch anyways. Look at what's released to market, do you see a wide range of 1440p panels below 27 inch. NOPE...

Now if you were to compare two decent panels that are 1080p, between 24 inch amd 27 inch you would notice the difference because the same res at 27 inch is going to have slightly larger pixels. This shouldn't happen on a 27 inch 1440p panel unless it's junk, cause it would have better pixel pitch being that it was made with 144hz in mind.

Why shouldn't 1440p be sold below 27 inches??
I CAN see the difference between 24 and 27 inches, and I like a smaller monitor, but didn't want to suffer 1080p, so I got 24 inch.
You may not agree with it, but there ARE uses for it.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

20-25 inch was made for 1080p
And if the monitor isn't junk it will have a good pixel pitch to reflect that.

It's not that I don't agree... maybe go ask all the brands out there why they aren't making 1440p panels below approx 27 inch ranges.

Acer Predator 27 inch 1440p looks fantastic. So does many of the Asus 24 inch 1080p panels.

Many of the cheap panels around the 23/24 inch sizes though usually have poor pixel pitch. Again it's something you need to look at within the monitor specs and know what pixel pitch ranges are good vs bad. Unfortunately most consumers don't understand that spec and just have to decide based on actually viewing the screen. This is also why many of have suggested to go to a good store that has a range of monitors on display and demoing something on the screen so you can better judge it in person.

If that isn't an option for you cause of where you live and such, then I'd look at in depth tech reviews of a few monitors before ever buying if you are very picky about them.