UHD, we hardly knew ye?

I jumped on buying my GT60 2OD-261US 3k IPS edition with both feet back in January of 2014. Why? Because I HATE 1080p. Passionately. So here I am, 3 years later & looking for a refresh. Naturally, I'm looking for the latest generation of GPU's. Only--to my dismay--there are virtually NO 15" laptops with 3k/4k displays & a 1070 GTX.

-MSI's GT60 has the 1070 but with 1080p. In fact I've only seen the 4k version available on Amazon UK.
-MSI's GS60 has 4k, but only a 1060 GTX.
-ASUS ROG's GL502VS only has 1080p.
---
In fact besides Clevo (whom I have sworn off after my 8662 died YET AGAIN), only Alienware & Gigabyte offer this combination.

I don't get it. Why don't I even have the OPTION to upgrade to 4k? Why are mid-range GPU's offered with 4k and not top-end GPU's?

I'm back on my wife's GX660 for the time being, and the 1080p pixelation is driving me bonkers currently. I had to come to terms with not having 16:10 laptops available anymore--but for the love of god, why must I be saddled with craptastic 1080p?

/rant

 

Do you sit 3 inches away from your screen?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

15-20". I'm completely dumbfounded at all the myths propagated about how UHD is bad on a laptop. I've used 3k for 3 years & going back to 1080p temporarily is just...awful. Not to mention that most of my games don't have HUD scaling so I can at least mimic my 3k & bring the menus down to reasonable size.

 

got my 4k P35X in today. Comparing it side by side with the 1080p on my old GX660 is not even a contest. It's a damn shame that 1080p is even sold anymore. UHD is just such a substantial improvement. I'm at arm's length from the screen right now...and It's just breathtakingly better.

 

... -_- I'm arms length from a 25" inch screen and 1080p is still good. I have 2k on my phone.. don't even notice the bump in resolution. I think its all in your head.. maybe you had shiaty 1080p screens. my current and last laptops run awesome 1080p screens. 4k would just be un-needed cost and stress on the system and gpu. I can go with a 4k external when the time comes.

 

you come to my house and bring your best 15" 1080p laptop & we'll compare it to mine with 4k. $20 says even you'll see a difference. It's NOT in my head.

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...ng-were-glitching-our-way-to-gaming-nirvana/3

Just playing trek online, windowed on 1080p & 8X MSAA--I can still see jaggies. Windowed at 4k & FXAA = no jaggies. Granted, older game--but this bears true even for newer games. No, you won't see much on a 5" smartphone display. But if you can't see a difference on even a 15" laptop between 2k and 4k--then you probably need to get re-examined before your next driver's license renewal.

 

I like higher resolutions primarily because of the extra screen real estate. 1080p is hard to do any real work with, but I find 1080p perfectly fine for gaming. I do not like Windows screen scaling at all, it's atrocious. 2.5k - 3K is perfect resolution to me for a 15-17" laptop. 2560x1440 would be my ideal preferred resolution.

We are still not there with 4K gaming either. Even GTX 1080 desktop struggles, unless you're fine with 30-40 FPS (or lower) frequent dips on some newer titles.

 

http://www.laptopmag.com/articles/laptop-screen-resolution-ripoff

if we're going by the ~172 PPI at 20" rule of thumb, then 1080p at only 141 PPI doesn't cut it. I could live with a 1440p display...and I probably couldn't tell much difference between it an 4k on a 15".

What's not to like about windows' scaling? Desktop works as I want it...and browser is simply ctrl+mousewheel to adjust text size on the fly.

P.S.

I've yet to compare 1440p vs 1620p side by side...but with my eyes, I probably could see a wee bit of difference in 15" factor.

 

Text and windows on many apps don't scale properly. Many have oversized text in undersized buttons, or no scaling at all so you're trying to read 4K text that's too damn small. And IMHO why go wtih 4K if you scale screen to look like 1080p anyhow? And scaling to anything but 1080p looks horrid for productivity apps on 4k. Talk about jaggies and what looks like blurred images and text. I'll take native resolution, especially for productivity apps and desktop space over any kind of scaling any day.

Gaming doesn't matter so much. I can play at 720p on 4k with 4xAA and it looks pretty damn decent.

With my desktop, I use an Acer Predator x34 34" 3440x1440 ultra-wide and I think the resolution and size is perfect.

 

I would never scale the screen to 1080p, as that resolution is too grainy on a 15" display. Even so, if I were to do so...it would likely appear smoother--even though the net resolution is the same. Personally, I don't really use any aps that have scaling problems--but if games I use did...that would just be incentive not to support their programmers who cannot get out of the dark ages. Word, Firefox, etc--no issues with scaling and seeing small font text (because again, small text is much clearer & more visible).

P.S.
I'd rather play 1080p on a 4k with AA off...than 720p with AA on. Hell, I prefer FXAA or no AA on 4k native vs 1080p on a 4k with MSAA 8x.

 

As everyone knows; I don't game.

But a (quality) higher resolution monitor is substantially better than even a 'great' low resolution monitor. Regardless of how bad the O/S scaling is (granted; I don't have/use many programs that don't scale though...).

You don't need a 15" screen to see this; I can see it with a 5.7" screen... Even with my old eyes...

More is always better - don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Just as long as the 'more' is the end goal - an actual higher quality viewing experience (and not just theoretical 'paper specs'...).

We went through the same thing 18 years ago when the original Nikon D1 came out... More pixels gave a quality that even the impeccable 2.74MP of the D1's CCD couldn't win against. Even with more noise (when viewed at 100%) and other technical 'defects' when compared against the CCD of that great pioneer.

An image is meant to be printed to be viewed as the photographer intended... and when printed - the new was hugely improved over the old.

A monitor is meant to be looked at (constantly)... and looking at even once excellent 1920x1200 monitors today besides a 4K monitor is like looking at a 60 year old former Miss America vs. a fresh faced 21 year old . It's not just your eyes that tell you which they prefer.

Even with Windows horrible scaling...

 

^ I agree 100%. And I'm left with the distinct impression that all the poo-pooing about higher-resolution displays is (mostly) from people who have never really tried them. It's not just gamers who can benefit from the increased resolution. Battery life is about the only legitimate argument against higher resolution at this point...but if that is the argument, why even get 1080p? Why not just stick with WXGA? Heck, regular VGA would probably improve battery life nearly 8 times.

But that's silly isn't it? Just about as silly as all these "1080p is da bestestst rez for all laptopz" will be in 5 years, when 4k is the default standard--and comparing the two will be morbidly amusing.

 

I'm used to 9pt fonts on 1080p, but I had to be careful about my font choice (Schumacher Clean). Perhaps 4k would really make a difference, but I'm not sure I'd want my fonts much smaller. 4pt is the smallest I've used on printed material for 4 up printings and that wasn't the most relaxed reading. (You may only bring one page of notes to the exam. )

Also, for a laptop, does the GPU have heat dissipation issues for graphics intense games at 4k? Are fan noise levels anoying? It sounded like even the PS4-pro gave you options between higher graphics effects at 1080p or fewer effects at 4k. To get both you needed an NVIDIA Titan X or something about as beefy.

Maybe I'll save 4k for the TV, but perhaps I just don't know what I'm missing.

 

For some, it is a matter of they not knowing what they're missing. For some, it is a matter of 'I can see the difference - but I'm not willing to pay for it'. For others, they really don't know what they're missing even when they compare/contrast two monitors side by side.

What is the real indicator though? Like already mentioned in this thread; use 4K for a few days/a week and then go back to a 1080p for a few minutes. Your eyes will tell you very quickly the differences are obvious (and painful...).

Human 'resolution' is around 121MP or higher - when monitors approach or get above that level - I'll stop worrying about getting the next/newest model.

 

^ I agree, tiller. There's lots of talk about the "science" of the eyeball...but in real-world tests, we simply haven't gotten there yet; I've "seen" it. Just because laptop cards aren't crushing 4k resolution games with 120+ FPS...doesn't mean that 1080p is where it's at. Perhaps in a perfect world where intermediate resolutions are available, something between 4k and 1080p is available as a stop gap. For now, since that's not the case, the choice is accepting a resolution below the capabilities of my GPU, or a display a tad above the capabilities of my GPU. I can't speak for everyone, but I'd rather game at 4k in medium settings, than 1080p in ultra settings.

 

No laptop can effectively game at 4K yet. Well except the SLI 1080 monsters. But 99% of the rest of laptops, 4K gaming is not a possibility with the latest games. Fan noise can be annoying as well. Fan noise isn't necessarily related to resolution. If anything run at 720p without FPS restriction will push the hardware harder than 4K because either the CPU or GPU are waiting on each other for information. Where at 720p it's able to push everything out as fast as possible running them at near 100% output.

I have a 4K TV, 4K LCD, and two 3440 x 1440 LCD's. I have had personally reviewed many 4K LCD laptops but it just was an unpleasant experience for me personally. But that wasn't with games. It was with doing actual work with apps that didn't scale well or work well with high resolutions.

I'll take my dual 3440 x 1440 LCD's over a single 4K LCD any day. Better workspace for me personally.

 

^ I believe that's a logical fallacy though. Laptop GPU's (the 10 series GTX ones anyways) area easily capable of > 1080p gaming. Maybe not full-bore 4k gaming--but definitely something > 1080p. So by saddling yourself with 1080p, you're not able to effectively capitalize on this. And because you and I both know that 1440p & 1600p aren't going to have any kind of lifespan in the laptop display market--3k or 4k is your choice for the time being.

Fan noise is an acceptable byproduct of needing bleeding-edge performance & not having the luxury of a job that allows one to cozy up to a desktop every night. Don't blame the display for software limitations. That's the fault of the programmers/companies who can't get with the march of technological progress. It's more damning on those software companies than anything--and I'm not about to hamstring myself (or punish the 4k manufactures) for this heinous atrocity.

 

See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...1080p-on-a-laptop.796704/page-6#post-10426663


(Oops... I think I may have posted that in the wrong thread, originally...).

 

And to go with those 8K resolutions, we need the connecting cables too...

See:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11003...20-dynamic-hdr-new-color-spaces-new-48g-cable

 

Ugh, I'd honestly prefer a different connector rather than this it-looks-the-same-and-is-backwards-compatible BS that makes everything confusing.

 

I agree too. But then everyone else would complain why they didn't make it compatible with the old/ancient...