Post #4260860
2026-07-31 01:15 UTC
@azonenberg@ioc.exchange yeah, I’m a fan of 1440 vertically, but if you’re talking even more than that portrait is definitely the way to go, in which case I’d want 4K since 2160 is greater than but near 1920 (I’m bigger on width than height). You should be in the clear up through the 43” class TVs/monitors on width, maybe even larger, though height and ergonomics eventually comes into play I’m sure.
Replies (1)
-
@azonenberg@ioc.exchange 2026-07-31 01:32
@ajn142@infosec.exchange i want roughly the same DPI and width as a 24" 1080p but as tall as i can reasonably get under that constraint. Wiki says a 24" 16:9 is 19.2 x 14.5 so if i want something portrait that has the same or smaller bezel, as an initial approximation, a 32" is 25.5 x 19.2. So I'd go from 14.5 to 25.5 inch height (75% increase) in the same width. 24" 1080p is 91 dpi, 32" 4k would be 137 dpi so slightly finer pitch. Which makes sense since I'd be going from 1920 to 2160 pixels wide in the same width.