Recent content by Regev

I don't intend to game on it - it's purely for productivity uses (my onboard graphic card can push 4K@60hz). I was just worried with the 42.5" 4K TV because of the whole window arrangement inside of it (as opposed to 2-3 multi monitor setup). But then I thought wait a sec, a tiling window...

I'm building a computer for productivity uses (I'm an author and a copywriter/advertiser who spends a massive amount of time reading, writing, researching). Considering these monitor setups: #1: Single 42.5" TV - 3840x2160 (8.3m pixels at 103PPI) - 94x53 cm (37x21 in) - $385 #2: Dual Vertical...

These are 188k (in fact 2k for the 9900, not the K version) running UserBenchmark's software to measure CPU speeds. But it tells me nothing really on real, day-to-day activities (for my kind of use). For example if you measure the i3 and the i9 on 4K gaming, there's going to be about 10%...

Hey, thanks. These are synthetic tests, I'm talking real-world usage difference. Will the 3200g be a bottleneck in any of those applications? Will the i9 load faster and let me finish things quicker or is the 3200g enough to max out the speeds anyway and give the same practical operation?

....for someone who only works with text (mega-long documents, many tabs open simultaneously on the browser, spreadsheets, managing and creating websites, etc etc). Zero gaming. Zero video editing. Photo editing? Maybe a little bit - just to give some vibrance to my travel photos :) Maybe I'll...

Thank you so much !!! I'd love to be able to get a 200% scale, but the only way to get as much real estate as a native 2k would be to scale a 5K, with 4K scaled 200% it'd be like 1080p, 70% less real estate right?

So the text will actually look better (crispier, sharper, easier to read, etc) on a native 2K monitor than on a 4K scaled 150%, even though it has smaller pixel density?

But I read some people reported "fuzziness" to text scaled fractionally (like 150%)..." ? Lets ask it that way: will the text look better and sharper using a 32" 2K natively (100% scale), or a 32" 4K scaled 150% (from 4k --> 2K)? This is for pure productivity, text-based usage. I want as...

The 4k and 2k costs the same here :) I just don’t want to be stuck with small screen real estate if I end up scaling 200% on a 4k compared to running 2k natives Unless scaling 150% is possible without quality loss

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Do you *not* use scaling at all on the 4K 27"?! I remember using a 5K iMac scaled 200% (2560x1440) - even then it was too small for me! I figured 32" on 2560x1440 (scaled from 4k or 5k/ or just native) will be the perfect text-size for me. But I want the text to...

Oh, thanks. I want the screen real estate to be bigger than a 1080p screen tho, what do I do in that case? Just buy a 2K screen or use ~150% on a 4K monitor? Where will the text look sharper?

Does that mean I should just pick a 2K and avoid the headache? :) p.s Does anyone have a good experience running Arch on a 4K screen scaled to 2560x1440?

I'm torn between a 4K and a 2K monitor (32"). Both models have IPS panels and cost about the same. I'll effectively run it at 2K res (2560x1440) anyway (so I can read the text and see the UI), but I think it would be nice to have crisp, sharp text of a 4K monitor scaled down to show in 2560x1440...

I'm buying a new monitor to increase my productivity (writing, sites management, reading studies, etc) y. At first I was considering a 4K monitor, but I realized I'd have to scale it to 2K (on a 27-32" - which yields about 95-110PPI) to see the UI elements and fonts big enough. So what's the...

Hey, thanks! Looking to get my hands dirty :) In fact the reason I'm moving to Linux is because of the unnecessary bullshit installed on my Mac. I want a clean OS with just what I need - that's why I thought Arch would fit. I learn fast, so I'm not worried =) Thanks for the warm welcome. Could...