PC Construction

I'm now looking at 24" QHD monitors instead of 28" UHD. For one thing, I don't think I can accommodate 28" on my desk!
 
The die is cast. Weigh up the options, make a decision, move on.

Even considering QHD, the 24" UHD electriQ is wayyy cheaper than any other option and gives me 185dpi. No doubt purists will say it's crap, but I have every expectation it will serve my needs adequately... so maybe I don't need a very special graphics card either.

For comparison:
  • 32" HDTV: 1920x1080 pixels = 70 pixels/inch (ugh!)
  • Acer P193W (stand-alone monitor acquired for £0): 19.0" screen, 1440x900 pixels = 89 ppi
  • HP G61 Notebook PC (my current workhorse): 15.6" screen, 1366x768 pixels = 101 ppi (adequate at working distance)
  • electriQ 244kMHDR UHD monitor: 23.8" screen, 3840x2160 pixels = 185 ppi
  • iPad Pro: 9.7" screen, 2048x1536 pixels = 264 ppi (very crisp, even at close reading distance)
For print, I wouldn't normally consider less than 300dpi, although 150dpi is usually adequate (75, 150, 300, 600dpi are the normal options). Professional printing is 1200dpi, typically.
 
Last edited:
Black Hole said:
so maybe I don't need a very special graphics card either.
Click to expand...
...but hardware accelerated video encode starts at GeForce GTX 1050 (~£140) / Radeon RX 4xx (~£100).

Useful/interesting references:


However, maybe GPU encoding isn't as desirable as I anticipated:


There's nowt so effective at concentrating the mind than there being a cost implication. GeForce GT 710 it is!
 
Last edited:
Black Hole said:
..... It would need something to back up to though, and a config export tool should produce a much smaller image.
Click to expand...
If you have a spare HDR drive knocking around and has over 300MB free space, you can probably connect it up as drive 3 or 4 onto the PC to use as storage. Probably won't need to reformat the drive either.
 
Ohhhh yeahhhhh!!!

CBF2FAF8-68DD-4722-BB0F-8C81226FE5EC.jpeg

B868179F-D94B-4ED1-AF86-9ACB89117C12.jpeg

(Ignore the moire effect - that's a clash between the screen pixels and the camera pixels)

The monitor was auto-detected and video set to 3840x2160 straight off, the task bar etc was tiny until I found the "Hi DPI" desktop setting (and that didn't adjust the mouse pointer).

Dunno why it says "do not use" though!
 
I was looking for a Linux way to test the monitor, and found this very useful on-line (and therefore OS-agnostic) tool:

www.eizo.co.uk

Monitor Test - EIZO

EIZO Tools The EIZO monitor test lets you quickly and easily assess your monitor’s image quality.
www.eizo.co.uk www.eizo.co.uk

I'm pleased to say this monitor passes with flying colours (no hot or cold pixels).
 
If you can't see the missing (cold) pixel on the all-red, all-green, or all-blue fields, either you don't have a missing pixel or you haven't looked hard enough. On the all-black field you're looking for any R, G, or B pixels that are stuck "on" (hot).
 
Black Hole said:
If you can't see the missing (cold) pixel on the all-red, all-green, or all-blue fields, either you don't have a missing pixel or you haven't looked hard enough. On the all-black field you're looking for any R, G, or B pixels that are stuck "on" (hot).
Click to expand...
I know there is a missing pixel. I've not seen it for years. Didn't notice it in the test. Perhaps my eyes are failing (very likely!).
 
EEPhil said:
I know there is a missing pixel. I've not seen it for years. Didn't notice it in the test. Perhaps my eyes are failing (very likely!).
Click to expand...
There are reports and claims that some kinds of stuck pixels can be fixed by exercising them. Maybe it's fixed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top