4K Monitor Recommendations?

Sure, you can use 100% dpi (no scaling) on any sized monitor and resolution combo. There is a high chance that the 27" 4K monitor's 100% scaling was also using bigger (than default) fonts though... Just think about it. a 3" bigger screen and four times the information being displayed than your current 24" 1200P monitor. My eyes were that good... I don't know about yours (or their health using such a setup for the next few months).

I cannot work on two different resolution monitors. Not only is it jarring on the eyes, but also using the mouse too, to move between them.

What can I say? Save your $$$ until you can buy two?

Another solution is to have three monitors on your desk in Portrait mode. If your poker sites allow/are optimized for that kind of setup with multiple tables.

One of the best setups I have used is two TV's (60" or larger) one above the other in Landscape mode, with two TV's on each side, in Portrait mode. The desk was tiny, but all that was needed was a Lenovo Bluetooth Keyboard ( TrackPoint included).

 

Hey. Well i wear contact lenses... but my vision without it is extremely bad. I can't even see the big letter E when you do an eye test... so you can imagine how bad my eyes are. But when using my current monitors with what i wear... contact lenses, no issue.


Yea I was a bit concerned the different resolution thing would be a huge issue. But i don't think the 43' 3840x2160 with my monitor would be much of an issue because i seen a picture of how the tables look... someone opened a few of those tables on their 43' 4k samsung tv and i could clearly see the actual physical size of those tables match those of my 24' 1920x1200 monitor. Like if you see 4 tables of it on my current monitor... and measure it with a ruler compared to the 43' 4k tv... im close to certain they are same size. But if i use a 32' 4k monitor... let say i have 8 tables opened. No way would they be the same actual physical size right if i used a ruler and measured it? Thus imagine i drag a table from my 24' to the 32... isn't it going to be like a big table but when it goes to the 32' monitor... it will be physically smaller so to speak?


Well I don't want to buy 2 of them at once... because thats pretty expensive.


What in the world did you do having two tvs 60' or larger? I seen someone on youtube who had 2 tvs as their 2 monitor setup... one was 50' other was 43' and it looked ridiculous. You said you had them one above another. How far back were you from it? Wouldn't you be staring like at the ceiling that way?


So in my situation, you still recommend just getting a 43' 4k tv then right? Because as im using my 2 monitors now ... i feel very limited because once i have more than 8 tables... well those tables are behind the other tables if you know what i mean so i can't see all the action.

 

I'm in the photography field, more monitors are better, and the bigger they are, even more so.

Don't forget that you can mount anything at any height you want. With a 'table' big enough to hold the keyboard I linked above, the monitors mounted to the wall could even be mounted 'too low'. (Btw, I'm tall too...).

To be clear, 4, 4K TV's 60" or larger. Two are one above the other and two others on each side, in Portrait mode.

I'm not sure if a 4K anything (TV or otherwise) will be suitable for you. I have already asked/hinted to see a full resolution picture of two rows of tables on a 1080P screen. But you say that requires a 1200P screen. I find that hard to believe that poker sights would not include so many potential players for such a silly limitation of 120 extra pixels (60/table). Would it work on a 1080P screen if you allowed the taskbar to hide automatically?

 

It think the monitor is probably more optimised for desk use. It's an Acer Et430k. It has a tiltable stand, there is no PWM dimming/flicker, and it has good antireflective coating. The downside is that it has a bit of ghosting. Not saying a 43 inch TV won't work, just take care around those particular points.

With 120 or 144Hz, animations and scrolling are much smoother - not something super-relevant to poker though.

I wouldn't want more than 43 inch for 4k though: the real estate would be the same, but it would be tougher to read fine detail around edges. 43" is perfect. To go bigger I would need to suffer from serious vision issues and in this case I would need a curved display too (say for 50 inch). 60 inch would be a bit insane at the desk.

Alternatively you would need 4 24 inch FHD monitors to get the same screen real estate, which would cost more and take up more space. The upside would be in the ability to arrange the monitors at varying angles. BTW There is no point in going larger than 24 inch for FHD, unless you have a very bad vision issues and need stuff to be bigger.

Another option would be to go with 6 19 inch screens. That way you could arranged them in a curved shape: 3 in top and 3 at the bottom.

 

Hey well I wouldn't want to mount it. If I do, its a huge hassle unmounting it right?


To me, I think any 4k tv bigger than 43' is way too big for a monitor. I seen many ppl say that as well.


Well 4k would be nice because I could fit more tables in it. Again, If I didn't play, I wouldn't really need a 4k monitor/tv. My current setup is fine if I did not play.


I can post a link soon of how 6 tables look on half a 43' 4k samsung tv... as that person who does the software took a screenshot of it for me. So when looking at that picture, you see big tables and thus had he filled whole screen it would been 12 tables.


Well my laptop is 1080p but screen is 15.6. So I can take picture of that... but if you see a 24' monitor with 1080p and tables and compare it to 1920x1200... you would know exactly what i mean. Because the 1200 means no overlap which is very important.


Its like this. Imagine you draw 4 quadrants. On a 1080p screen 24', you see overlap... with the 1200 vertical... you don't. I am pretty positive hiding taskbar won't do anything. Its very noticeable trying to put 4 tables on a 1920x1200 screen and tileing them. The term that is use is tile... which is like so you could see every table.

 

Well from looking at youtube videos, 43' just looks really big if you are doing non playing things I think. Like if i use it for not playing, i think it would look very awkward and not comfortable even though you mention you could split it into windows.


But playing... I feel like it would be good. But someone else told me when you keep moving your neck around... it would be annoying because instead of looking left to right... you going to look up vertically as well. Also he said big difference is because if im playing, im looking from corner to corner and that is much different than someone staring at mostly the middle. Do you agree on that?


What do you mean if you get bigger, you would suffer big serious vision issues? Because your eyes too close to a 50' or 60 would make your eyes much worst? But for a 43', its not that bad? Again my concern was staring at a tv as a monitor all day is not only bad for eyes... but causes eye strain... which a monitor... doesn't.


Well for me, the current monitor setup I have is the absolute minimum. Well... actually I use to play on a 20.1 1600x1200 monitor back then. That would still work. But 24' 1920x1200 is pretty much the absolute minimum requirement for me. Thus any monitor smaller than a 24'... would not be useful for me. Thus its basically a 27' or 28' or 32' monitor or the 43' 4k tv.

 

43 inch is usable across the entire surface for me, I'm not a gamer.

 

It seems to me that you're confused about size vs. resolution.

You need to get to see these things for yourself to realize how they are related.

You keep saying that 1200P is a requirement.

Yet, you fail to realize that 4K has less vertical space than you seem to want.

I still can't believe you can't resize the tables as you need. 120 pixels (60 per table) is not that much to 'lose'.

 

Okay so i bought the 32' 4k monitor online and it will take a while for me to receive it. Decided on it as oppose to the 43' 4k tv.


Now i know i could connect it with one of my current 24' 1920x1200 monitors side by side. Thus using a usb-c to display port 60hz 4k cable with it... and using a hdmi to hdmi cable with my other 24' monitor.


Now if i want to use both my current monitors... with the new 32' 4k monitor... what exact product do i need to buy? Is it a docking station or can it be something cheaper?


I am planning to use only the 32' 4k monitor and 24' 1920x1200 monitor side by side... but i kind of want to use all 3 monitors. Thus imagine the 32' 4k in the middle and a 24' 1920x1200 to the left and right of it. Im not sure i would have enough space though on my desk for this as if i do this.. i would need to put my laptop somewhere else.


Would something like this work or not?


https://www.amazon.com/Display-Dock...qid=1608262863&sprefix=docking,aps,256&sr=8-3

Thanks.

 

I know exactly what you are saying. I used to 9-table Pot Limit Omaha, tiled on a 17" 1080p laptop screen. Those were the days, grinding in pain.

I've seriously been looking at the 48" LG CX to double at a monitor/TV. I feel like it's the perfect size for my desk.

 

@Kevin, that looks like a nice TV.

See:
LG CX OLED Review (OLED48CXPUB, OLED55CXPUA, OLED65CXPUA, OLED77CXPUA) - RTINGS.com

But OLED on an effectively static image over many hours? I'd think twice about that.

 

How in the world did you even 4 table on a 17' 1080 laptop screen... let alone 9 table. When you open 4 tables and tile it.. there is still overlap right? Because i know with my 15.6 dell xps 15 9550 laptop screen, if i open 4 tables and tile them... there is overlap. So I don't know how people play with the 1080 vertical.... it needs to be minimum 1200 i say.


Well I ordered the 32' 4k monitor... but going to be a while to receive it. You think i should have gotten a 43' 4k tv instead? Again if you read my thread, you see me trying to decide on whether going with a big 43' 4k tv... or a 32' 4k monitor. And again... i have 2 monitors of 24' 1920x1200 im using side by side at the moment.


So im going to use the 32' 4k monitor with one of my 24' monitors. I would like to use all 3 monitors though as imagine the 32' in the middle... but then i need to buy a docking station. Should i have gotten the 43' 4k tv instead? Thing was if i gotten the tv... i would have used it by itself or... paired it with one of my 24' monitors.

 

Is this what i need to buy if i want to connect all 3 monitors to my dell xps 15 9550 laptop?

I will be using my two 24' 1920x1200 monitors... and also like to use the 32' 4k monitor.




https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07QKVY23Q/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?smid=A1V0B25HYT8EJ1&psc=1


https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07X5KSBNJ/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?smid=A1QTGXAMH2TVVP&psc=1

 

4-tabling seems hard to you? I just took this screenshot of my desktop with 4 random tables open and tiled:



There is plenty of room on a 17" display, to tile without overlap. I can't imagine how many I could fit on a 32"-46" 4K monitor. I don't need full size tables to be comfortable.

 

Hi there. So that resolution is 1920x1080? Well did you open those tables and then clicked on tile? Or you had to manually do that? Yea i see there is no overlap which is good.

 

I like to add to this.


I bought the 32' 4k samsung monitor. At first it looked huge for a monitor. I still believe it is.


I could put 6 full size tables on it without resizing... compared to 4 tables on a 24' 1920x1200 monitor. Now if i resize and tile it... i could get 12 tables. The tables are smaller but still okay... but it doesn't feel that comfortable.


Now i have a few issues with the 32' 4k monitor.


To those of you who have 4k monitor... whether 32' or 27' or 28', what DPI setting do you put? My recommended is 150%... i changed it to 125% and i like it. Now the big issue? When i play on it... the program that i use that shows the stats of players... its called a hud... the numbers ARE WAY TOO BIG on the screen. The only way i can fix this would be dpi 100%... which is the lowest. Of course that is the dpi on the 24' 1920x1200 that i use but 100% is recommended and standard on it. Now the issue is when i use web browsing... 100% DPI is way too damn small when browsing. Do almost all of you agree with this? I can't imagine how you guys view web pages or excel for example on 100% dpi? I have no idea how anyone would do that on say a 27' 4k monitor. That would be even more insane right?


Now i could put 12 tables on the monitor no overlap... but tables are a bit small but not that bad. But its way too hard to use chrome when playing because i have the dpi set to 100%. Again when i set the dpi to 125%... the numbers on the table for stats is way too big. I also find it annoying going from one side of the monitor to another when moving my neck because of the table size. I also connected 1 of my 24' 1920x1200 to my laptop so im using a 32' and 24' next to each other... but the 24' monitor is more like to the diagonal right side.


Thoughts on this? I like how big the monitor is but the dpi is annoying. Because i need to make it 100% when playing. But when im done playing... i go and change the dpi back to 125%. So web browsing is a huge pain looking at the tiny font when playing.


Anyone have opinion on this? I do know that had i gotten a 43' 4k tv... well the dpi would be 100% and there would be zero issues with dpi. But of course the screen would be so big. I mean... if i feel uncomfortable with how big a 32' 4k monitor is... would i feel much worst with the 43' 4k tv when playing? I do however... find web browsing on it pretty good at 125% dpi and better than my two 24' monitors though.

 

@Drew1 some fonts are atrociously small when browsing, so I just set 120% scaling in browsers (via browser settings), and keep the OS at 100%.

 

@Drew1 43" to 50" is necessitated for a 4K monitor as I've stated to you many times before.

Huge is relative. You can get used to anything. Believe in yourself!

@1.25 scaling, you're effectively looking at a 32" window of a 40" screen (with all the negatives that scaling is bringing). @1.5 scaling, you're effectively looking at a 32" window of a 48" screen. This is a waste of a 4K desktop to me.

All these issues were brought to your attention before, but you didn't want to listen. As was the fact that your 1200P monitor was not 'required' to see the number of tables you seem to need on-screen too. Stop making assumptions of how things 'should' be and use them for what and how they are meant to.

 

I'm bit confused by this. So you could set the OS at 100% DPI... but make chrome 125% or so? Again... when im playing... i just make the setting for the computer 100% so i could play... but of course looking at chrome when its set at 100% dpi is very small. How do you do that? Because once im done playing... i then set my dpi back to 125%.

 

Hey... well 43' 4k tv would been the max size i would have bought... i would not even try a 50' 4k tv as that is way too big already.

Okay so with using the 32' 4k monitor right now... what DPI should i be using then? For playing... i have to use 100% as the font is way too big on the tables i play if i make it 125%. But when using chrome... font is very small. So when im playing... but using chrome tabs... its hard to read. But when im done playing... i change the dpi back to 125% as i find that much more comfortable. I find 150% way to big.

Well... on the forums... majority of the ppl said go with a monitor. There were few ppl who said go with the TV but much more ppl said go with monitor so i went with it. Again its a pain looking from corner to corner on the 32' 4k monitor.... when i have the tables i play on small... but if i had a 43' 4k tv... im not sure if it would be worst or not... because i would make the tables much bigger though... which would make it easier. The screenshot that the person posted on their laptop with 1920x1080 worked... but the issue is you see how small the tables were? That was the issue there. With the 1200P... that allowed to make 4 tables full size... the 1080p does not. Now if you make the tables really small... then its possible but i thought it wouldn't be that good.

 

Okay so i just made my settings in dpi 100%. Then i am using chrome now and zoom went from 100% to 125%.


So basically just make my dpi 100% so i could play... and just set my chrome zoom at 125% then right? I had no idea this could be done. I thought i had to stick with everything dpi 100% or 125%... so everytime before i play, i needed to set dpi to 100%.

 

I don't want to use anything other than 100% scaling, always.

The tables don't look that small to me. You're making too much of what 60 extra pixels per table can offer. And you're ignoring the size they will be when you have a right-sized display panel for 4K resolution. 43" is the minimum. 48" or larger is ideal (as you go larger, you can physically move the display further from you too) a wall mount option at desktop monitor height is also a great idea (and not at a normal TV height which puts the center of the screen at eye level for an ideal TV viewing experience).

I would get a pain too looking corner to corner on a 32' 4K monitor. Those pixels would be huge!

But having/needing to move my head to see the entire screen is not a bother at all. It is a blessing. My neck hasn't been sore (from keeping it in one position for hours on end) for a very long time now, and that wasn't always the case.

Next time don't listen to the herd mentality. Most people know $#$#.

 

1. Open Chrome
2. Press on three dots in right top corner
3. Change Zoom to 125%

The same can be done in other browsers, should you use them.

^This!

 

Hey. Well whatever computer i used... i never even looked at or knew about the DPI setting. So i assume i always used the default... which is 100%. For example, thats the default dpi on my laptop screen as well for 1920x1080. And its also that for the 1920x1200. But for the 32' 4k monitor... recommended is 150%... which i found is way too big.




Im not sure what the default was set at for the 32' 4k... it should have been the recommended right? I know i played around with it... and notice 125% looked decent. And well 100% looked way too small. I mean... i would rather have the OS at 125%... but 100% is fine. Again when playing... i need the stats to be in 100% dpi.




You say 43' 4k should be the minimum for 4k. But if that is the case, then why are the majority of laptop monitors that are 4k... either 27' or 32' then? With some rare 28'... which is basically like a 27' then? Why is it there are very few 43' 4k monitors on the market then? And of course its much more expensive as well.



I have no issue looking from corner to corner on a 32' 4k monitor when web browsing or looking at say excel... but when playing and looking at the resized tables... its a bit of a pain. But i think the main reason might be because im also using one of my 24' monitors next to it.



So because my folding table is only 4 feet wide... i have my 32' 4k monitor on the left side of the table... and the 24' to the right of it... but i put it like slanted if you know what i mean... like it goes to the right like a triangle sort of?




The thing though is my eyes are not like looking straight in the middle of the 32' 4k monitor though because if i do that... then i have to turn even more right to look at the 24' monitor. So i guess if im only looking and playing on that one monitor... by just me centering right on the middle of the 32' 4k monitor... that would be better than right?



The thing is imagine someone with two 32' 4k monitors. The perfect setup would be like making an upside down V when putting them side by side... most agree on this right? But for me... i can't even do this with my 2 monitors... the 32' and the 24' because i dont have enough space on my table because my laptop is on the bottom left of my 4 foot wide folding table.



Im guessing one way i could fix this would be buy one of those things that lift your laptop up so to speak to hold it? I saw it in one of those youtube videos and was shocked because that looks nice. Like it basically saves you desk space... but also gives you another screen to look at... as its like lifting it up. Opinion on that?

 

I notice one issue with this though. I set zoom to 125%. But whenever chrome opens on my 24' monitor... i need to manually change it from 125% to 100%. So its like... the 32' 4k monitor... uses 125% DPI.... but 100% DPI would be used on the 24' monitor... or say my 15.6' laptop screen as well.

 

To be fair, you were warned about the scaling mess with small 4k screens.

 

@Drew1 you can have multiple Chrome profiles, with different settings. Create a separete Chrome profile with 125% zoom for your 4K monitor, and only use it there, while using your regular Chrome profile with 100% zoom on all other monitors.

 

What do you mean small 4k screens? If people use a 4k monitor for their computer, isn't 27'/28' or 32' the most popular 4k monitor? If you check amazon... there is actually more 27' and 28' 4k monitors compared to 32' 4k monitors. There are very few 40'+ 4k monitors available on amazon and if so, they are very expensive. Like the 43' 4k monitors. But if its a 43' 4k tv... obviously the price is much less.

 

Can you tell me how I can do this? Because I find it annoying when i drag a chrome page from the 4k monitor to the 1920x1200 monitor... i need to manually change it to 100% zoom. And if say a chrome page is opened on the 1920x1200 monitor and moved to the 4k monitor, i need to change it to 125%.

 

Okay Im considering another 4k monitor to use along with my current 32' 4k samsung monitor. Would you say it would be bad idea to get another 4k monitor but different size such as a 27' or 28'? Currenting using it together with a 24' 1920x1200 monitor but I don't have much space on my 4 foot folding table. But even with a 6 foot table, it might look awkward?


Thing is with my table, I can't even put those 2 monitors like an upside down letter V because i don't have much space on my table since my dell xps 15 9550 laptop is put on the bottom left of my table and I put it sideways.