• Venator@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    While it is pretty subtle, and colour depth and frame rate are easily way more important, I can easily tell the difference between an 8k and a 4k computer monitor from usual seating position. I mean it’s definitely not enough of a difference for me to bother upgrading my 2k monitor 😂, but it’s there. Maybe I have above average vision though, dunno though: I’ve never done an eye test.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      Well, i have +1.2 with glasses (which is a lot) and i do not see a difference between FHD (1980) and 4k on a 15" laptop. What i did notice though, background was a space image, the stars got flatter while switching to FHD. My guess is, the Windows driver of Nvidia tweaks Gamma & light, to encourage buying 4k devices, because they needed external GPU back then. The colleague later reported that he switched to FHD, because the laptop got too hot 😅. Well, that was 5 years ago.

        • ayyy
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          We’re bringing back briefcase computers!

      • Venator@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        Interesting: in that sense 4k would have slightly better brightness gradiation: if you average the brightness of 4 pixels there’s a lot more different levels of brightness that can be represented by 4 pixels vs 1, which might explain the difference perceived even when you can’t see the individual pixels.

        The maximum and minimum brightness would still be the same though, so wouldn’t really help with the contrast ratio, or black levels, which are the most important metrics in terms of image quality imo.