4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
User avatar
RooseveltG
Posts: 636
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 2:56 pm
Location: The Rust Belt

4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by RooseveltG » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:40 am

I work with an open PDF file and Quicken (using Parallels on a Mac) side by side on an Apple Thunderbolt display. Using this setup, only part of the Quicken program is visible; even when the PDF is reduced to a more difficult to read size.

I have considered upgrading to either the LG 27 inch 5K Ultrafine display that Apple sells for Macs or a 32-inch 4K display that supports 3840 X 2160 resolution. The latter is less expensive but lacks the convenience of charging and connecting through a single USB-C port. I am not sure I fully understand resolutions but it seems like everything will be smaller on the 27-inch monitor but it may display more vertically.

Any thoughts on which approach is most optimal to view a PDF and see all of Quicken without scrolling?

Thanks in advance.

Roosevelt.

Veni Vidi Decessi
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:09 am

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Veni Vidi Decessi » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:08 am

Ideal maximum monitor size
for 24" viewing distance 20/30 20/20 20/15 20/10
1080p (1920x1080) 23" 15" 11.5" 7.5"
2K (2560x1440) 30.5" 20" 15.5" 10"
4K (3840x2160) 46" 30.5" 23" 15.5"
5K (5120x2880) 61.5" 41" 31" 20.5"

Dottie57
Posts: 3707
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:43 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Dottie57 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:39 am

RooseveltG wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:40 am
I work with an open PDF file and Quicken (using Parallels on a Mac) side by side on an Apple Thunderbolt display. Using this setup, only part of the Quicken program is visible; even when the PDF is reduced to a more difficult to read size.

I have considered upgrading to either the LG 27 inch 5K Ultrafine display that Apple sells for Macs or a 32-inch 4K display that supports 3840 X 2160 resolution. The latter is less expensive but lacks the convenience of charging and connecting through a single USB-C port. I am not sure I fully understand resolutions but it seems like everything will be smaller on the 27-inch monitor but it may display more vertically.

Any thoughts on which approach is most optimal to view a PDF and see all of Quicken without scrolling?

Thanks in advance.

Roosevelt.

I have a 20” iMac. It views well. 27”is pretty big but doable for up close work

32” is too big if sitting really close at a desk. My preference of course.

dsmclone
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 8:50 am

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by dsmclone » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:41 am

I think spending $1,200 for LG 27 inch 5K Ultrafine would be a waste of money in your situation. I'd go into a best buy or something similar and see how they play in real life with apple products. It's really tricky because you have differences between apple/windows, difference in resolution and how each handles it, ultrawide/wide differences, 4k/5k/refresh rate, etc., hardware limitations, etc. I think monitors are something you really need to use hands on.

autolycus
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 3:01 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by autolycus » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:34 am

RooseveltG wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:40 am
I work with an open PDF file and Quicken (using Parallels on a Mac) side by side on an Apple Thunderbolt display. Using this setup, only part of the Quicken program is visible; even when the PDF is reduced to a more difficult to read size.

I have considered upgrading to either the LG 27 inch 5K Ultrafine display that Apple sells for Macs or a 32-inch 4K display that supports 3840 X 2160 resolution. The latter is less expensive but lacks the convenience of charging and connecting through a single USB-C port. I am not sure I fully understand resolutions but it seems like everything will be smaller on the 27-inch monitor but it may display more vertically.

Any thoughts on which approach is most optimal to view a PDF and see all of Quicken without scrolling?

Thanks in advance.

Roosevelt.
I am very happy with my 27" 4k display from Dell. I'm not using it for any of the extra features like USB hub, etc. because I already have a separate USB hub. It's just connected to my work laptop or personal macbook pro by Displayport. Dell has nice monitors for great value. You might lose a few of the high-end extras, but a good 4k 27" model is $500 or less if you wait for a decent sale. If I'm right about the prices on what you're looking at, a Dell display will do the job very well at a much better value.

And yes, generally you are correct that the 5k display will show more "information" but it will appear smaller. Unless you're sitting further back than most people do at a desk, 27" should be plenty big. 4k resolution should also let you see way more information than you need.

User avatar
Ruprecht
Posts: 528
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:34 pm
Location: a very nice cardboard box
Contact:

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Ruprecht » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:51 am

RooseveltG wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:40 am
I work with an open PDF file and Quicken (using Parallels on a Mac) side by side on an Apple Thunderbolt display. Using this setup, only part of the Quicken program is visible; even when the PDF is reduced to a more difficult to read size.

I have considered upgrading to either the LG 27 inch 5K Ultrafine display that Apple sells for Macs or a 32-inch 4K display that supports 3840 X 2160 resolution. The latter is less expensive but lacks the convenience of charging and connecting through a single USB-C port. I am not sure I fully understand resolutions but it seems like everything will be smaller on the 27-inch monitor but it may display more vertically.

Any thoughts on which approach is most optimal to view a PDF and see all of Quicken without scrolling?

Thanks in advance.

Roosevelt.
I have a similar situation, where I need to view vertically-oriented PDFs while also viewing other stuff on horizontally-oriented main screen. The best answer is two monitors. Keep your current monitor as-is, and add a vertically-oriented monitor right beside it. The vertical monitor needs to be at least 24” in order to see PDFs well. 27” is probably ideal and would be plenty big enough — I wouldn’t get anything larger than 27” for the vertical. The good news is the vertical monitor doesn’t have to be quite as high quality resolution to work well. Mine is just HD - 1920x1080 which is good enough, but if I were buying new I’d probably go with higher resolution.

Glockenspiel
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Glockenspiel » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:58 am

I am currently sitting behind (2) 24" Dell monitors and it's quite nice. I think two monitors is typically the way to go if you're ever working in more than one application at a time.

lazydavid
Posts: 1631
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by lazydavid » Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:39 am

Go big or go home:

https://www.abt.com/product/112135/Sony ... X720E.html

There's a 43" version also if that seems excessive. But I've been using mine for a month and can confirm that it's not. :) Sharp, bright, very low input lag in present/game modes, supports 4:4:4 chroma at 60Hz.

rgs92
Posts: 1995
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:00 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by rgs92 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:16 pm

I personally have always used and liked a 24-incher. So I guess 27 is OK and 32 would be overdoing it.
I like Eizo monitors the best for fatigue free viewing and natural image boundaries, texture and color.
I prefer to spend more on image quality than size.

I like Eizo more than Apple for monitors after considerable staring.

User avatar
RooseveltG
Posts: 636
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 2:56 pm
Location: The Rust Belt

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by RooseveltG » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:22 pm

Thanks but not sure that answers the question.

Roosevelt

User avatar
RooseveltG
Posts: 636
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 2:56 pm
Location: The Rust Belt

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by RooseveltG » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:23 pm

Sorry. I was responding to the first response.

Appreciate all the posts.

Roosevelt.

User avatar
Pajamas
Posts: 5760
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Pajamas » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:34 pm

Can't address the Quicken issue specifically but:

Generally, get the best overall quality monitor you can afford for use as your primary monitor.

A 27 or 32 inch monitor will probably be fine, either one. The 32 inch has significantly more area but resolution also affects the way things display. If you are having trouble deciding on the size, cut out newspaper or cardboard to those respective sizes to compare.

The LG 27 inch monitor has lots of really poor reviews on the Apple website, enough for it to be rated 2.5/5 stars with 389 reviews. Have you read through them? I would not buy that monitor after skimming through some of those reviews, especially not from Apple since you have to pay up for it because Apple is selling it but Apple doesn't service it. It appears to be an Apple-exclusive model although similar models are sold elsewhere.

Gee, I hadn't priced monitors in a while. Looking on Amazon, there are some really nice 32 inch monitors available for under $500. No way would I pay $1300 for that one.

LeisureLee
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 6:52 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by LeisureLee » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:19 pm

I use two 25" 2,560x1,440 monitors. I tried a 30" 4K monitor but the pixel size is too small. 1,920x1,080 isn't quite bit enough for windows which are side by side, but 2,550x1,440 works really well. =)

MindBogler
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:05 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by MindBogler » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:27 pm

If you are going to buy a 4K monitor you are wasting your money under 32 inches IMO. My personal opinion is that you'll get more benefit from a higher refresh rate at 1440p than you will at 4k. Higher refresh rates are easy on the eyes. Get a 144Hz 1440p monitor and you'll never understand how you lived without it (and it'll be less than either 4K choice).

User avatar
Alexa9
Posts: 1365
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 9:41 am

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Alexa9 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:10 pm

1080 is sharp enough for a monitor to me. I always lower the resolution so everything is larger anyways. LG 32" on Amazon for $200. I would compare side by side with a 4K display and see if it's worth it to you. I prefer one large monitor to two medium sized monitors.

ceperry
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:45 am

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by ceperry » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:11 pm

Your thoughts as described in your post are essentially correct. The 27-inch display will have a smaller image in inches, but will have more screen real estate in pixels. The one thing I’d throw in is that 32-inches may be “too big” for a 4K display. This article is an excellent guide to resolution, screen size, and pixel density in modern displays: https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/

JoinToday
Posts: 732
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by JoinToday » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:57 am

LeisureLee wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:19 pm
I use two 25" 2,560x1,440 monitors. I tried a 30" 4K monitor but the pixel size is too small. 1,920x1,080 isn't quite bit enough for windows which are side by side, but 2,550x1,440 works really well. =)
Dual 27"'s on my desk. Life is good. I am not sure if I can go much bigger. 5 foot wide desk. I can see well leaning back in my chair. Once you go with dual monitors, you can't go back. Like a couple other things in life, bigger is better :D :wink: .
I wish I had learned about index funds 25 years ago

mggray17
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:09 am

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by mggray17 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:30 am

I have a 27" Dell monitor, 2K resolution. Use it for Side by side documents all the time and love it.
Comparing it to dual 21" monitors I use at work, I see no downsides.

User avatar
jharkin
Posts: 1602
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by jharkin » Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:03 am

I held out upgrading my home setup for years and was still using a 4:3 20inch dell (1600x1200) up to a couple years ago. Then I splurged and got a 25 inch dell 1440. I thought about a 27 but decided not to because I have a small desk and sit close - plus I like very high res/small fonts.

Well, new job just gave me dual 27s (also 1440)... and now I wish I went bigger than 25 at home!


I think for home casual use - like web and games, any single monitor 24 and up is good.. But for business use when you have a lot of apps open at once, dual monitors is totally the way to go.


This is a good resource for display reviews that goes much more in depth with measurements, etc than the big consumer review sites like CNET:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/

tmcc
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:38 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by tmcc » Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:15 am

at work i have a 27" 4k and at home i have a 32" 4k. 100% get the 32. your eyes will thank you. I might have them swap out my 27 for a 32 at work because i am squinting more than I thought.

jwaxjwax
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 3:46 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by jwaxjwax » Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:51 am

I got a 32" 4k and am very happy with it. It is not too big.

anonymousboglehead
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:15 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by anonymousboglehead » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:56 pm

Resolution is more important than screen size when determining a display's "real estate." A 24-inch 4k monitor has far more effective space than a 32-inch 1080p monitor, for example, because a large, low-resolution screen just makes wider/taller windows blurry. That being said, there's a point of diminishing returns, and I doubt you'd be substantially better off with 5k resolution than 4k. I would sit in front of a 27-inch and a 32-inch monitor if possible and see which you like more. I like the idea of a 32-inch 4K monitor and have contemplated buying one on many occasions, but I used to have a 27-inch monitor and it was almost too large to use at a desk, so I've never been able to pull the trigger.

You may also want to consider graphics processing requirements; if all you're doing is viewing PDFs this doesn't matter, but any remotely graphics-intensive process will require more power (read: more expensive graphics card) on 5K than 4K. Good luck!

Danny

Finridge
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Finridge » Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:44 pm

I am writing this using a 4K TV as a monitor. It is 43 inches and I am very happy with it.

If you are getting a 4K display for use as a monitor, I would not go below 40 inches. At 24 or even 32 inches, I think the display will be too small to fully take advantage of your 4K capabilities. If I was doing it over, I'd go with 45 inches (but 43 inches is working fine).

If you are buying a TV for use as a computer monitor, make sure the TV you get supports chroma 4:4:4. See https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/ ... pc-monitor

Also, you will need a graphics card that can support 4K.

User avatar
BolderBoy
Posts: 3945
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:16 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by BolderBoy » Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:41 pm

Ruprecht wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:51 am
I have a similar situation, where I need to view vertically-oriented PDFs while also viewing other stuff on horizontally-oriented main screen. The best answer is two monitors. Keep your current monitor as-is, and add a vertically-oriented monitor right beside it.
When it is monitor-upgrade time for me, this is precisely my plan as well. Will be like having 3 monitors available.
"Never underestimate one's capacity to overestimate one's abilities" - The Dunning-Kruger Effect

User avatar
munemaker
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:14 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by munemaker » Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:43 pm

Finridge wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:44 pm
I am writing this using a 4K TV as a monitor. It is 43 inches and I am very happy with it.
Is this 43 inch monitor positioned on a desk? How far are your eyes from the screen when you use it? Trying to imagine a 43 inch monitor on my desk. Do you have room for anything else on your desk? Right now I have 2 X 23 inch monitors which seems to be about right. Obviously I am behind the times.

User avatar
gtownsend
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:52 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by gtownsend » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:08 pm

I use a 40" Samsung 4K TV as a monitor on my Mac. I'm really pleased with the setup. At that size it's not a "retina" display, of course, but 110 pixels/inch is still pretty good. I think of it as equivalent to a seamless 2-by-2 tiling of four 20" HD monitors. The larger screen means I can simultaneously display and edit multiple letter-size documents at actual size. It's also really useful to have a huge screen when displaying maps or aerial photos or a "light box" display for arranging photos.

j9j
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:46 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by j9j » Sat Jun 23, 2018 8:21 am

I had the exact same dilemma and still have it to some extent. I have used both displays.

The Apple 27 Thunderbolt display has a resolution of 2560x1440(1440p for short).

The LG 5k connected to the Mac will have a native resolution of 5120x2880. Apple OS by default pixel doubles to to effectively present you a desktop of 2560x1440 but much sharper(retina-like). You can adjust the resolution to native resolution or some in-between resolution. The problem is the text will much smaller and harder to read than at 1440p.

I tested out a few 32 inch 4k but scaling to see text reduced the amount of space so still had the original dilemma of not seeing two windows fully side by side. I also tried 40inch 4k with no scaling which solved the side by side problem. The downside is it was too much surface area and winded up moving my head around to be comfortable.

I finally settled on a Dell 34(u3417w) widescreen model which runs at 3440x1440. It will look identical to your 27 Thunderbolt display and add about a third more width. If you wanted even more space there is 38 inch model(has a USB-C port) which caused too much head movement. Both include a mini-displayport cable will connect to Thunderbolt port. Hope that helps

lazydavid
Posts: 1631
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by lazydavid » Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:18 am

munemaker wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:43 pm
Finridge wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:44 pm
I am writing this using a 4K TV as a monitor. It is 43 inches and I am very happy with it.
Is this 43 inch monitor positioned on a desk? How far are your eyes from the screen when you use it? Trying to imagine a 43 inch monitor on my desk. Do you have room for anything else on your desk? Right now I have 2 X 23 inch monitors which seems to be about right. Obviously I am behind the times.
My 49” is wall-mounted. I haven’t measured, but I have a relatively deep desk and I would guess I sit about 3.5-4’ from it. Previously used a 37” 1080p display in the same place, that finally died last month after 13.5 years.

Finridge
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Finridge » Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:31 am

munemaker wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:43 pm
Finridge wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:44 pm
I am writing this using a 4K TV as a monitor. It is 43 inches and I am very happy with it.
Is this 43 inch monitor positioned on a desk? How far are your eyes from the screen when you use it? Trying to imagine a 43 inch monitor on my desk. Do you have room for anything else on your desk? Right now I have 2 X 23 inch monitors which seems to be about right. Obviously I am behind the times.
Yes, it's on my desk. My eyes are between 2 and 3 feet away. it does take up a lot of space on the desk. But it is so worth it. The way I look at it, your monitor is effectively, your new "desk" -- more and more, the furniture desk is just a pedestal for it. I'm not entirely paperless let, but I'm getting a lot closer.

Finridge
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: 4K Computer Monitors: 27 vs 32 inches?

Post by Finridge » Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:32 am

gtownsend wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:08 pm
I use a 40" Samsung 4K TV as a monitor on my Mac. I'm really pleased with the setup. At that size it's not a "retina" display, of course, but 110 pixels/inch is still pretty good. I think of it as equivalent to a seamless 2-by-2 tiling of four 20" HD monitors. The larger screen means I can simultaneously display and edit multiple letter-size documents at actual size. It's also really useful to have a huge screen when displaying maps or aerial photos or a "light box" display for arranging photos.
A screen like this just has so many uses. I could never go back...

Post Reply