4k at 33" is awful too. 5k text is visibly better than 4k at 27".

I mean, sure, but you're basically saying "anything other than the absolute top-end displays are absolutely awful". 133 PPI is going to be higher pixel density than >99% of desktop monitors that people are actually using.

e.g. The Steam hardware survey only goes down to 0.23% usage, and doesn't have any >4K resolution listed.

It’s a $3000 monitor, so yeah, other top end monitors are what I’m going to compare it to.

You said 4K@33" is "awful". That's not $3k territory, that's what you get for $300.

4k@27" is borderline too coarse. 5k@27" is preferred.

Which is a poor pixel density.

If compared to a smartphone, maybe.

No, it is a poor pixel density when compared with a printed book, which should be the standard for judging any kind of display used for text.

At the sizes of 27" or 32", which are comfortable for working with a computer, 5k is the minimum resolution that is not too bad when compared with a book or with the acuity of typical human vision.

For a bigger monitor, a 4k resolution is perfectly fine for watching movies or for playing games, but it is not acceptable for working with text.

Compared to a smartphone it's not just poor it's complete dreck. Smarphones are in the 400s.

Do you hold your 32" monitor the same distance from your face as you hold your smartphone?

Exactly, that’s the point

That’s not a point it’s nonsense thought termination.

There’s a gulf between 130 dpi and 460 dpi, and in that gulf there are densities which stop being poor at monitor viewing distances.

That smartphone densities are excessive for that purpose does not make middling standard densities good.

I have an LG OLED C3 as a monitor, 42". I may be able to distinguish separate pixels if looking at a '.' or something like that (a stuck pixel happened for a few weeks, which I could notice on a white background).

But the density is definitely enough for text for the distance required for such a screen size. At least when using grayscale AA, because OLED subpixel...

I fail to see how that is relevant as I neither introduced nor advocated for smartphone pixel density?

Then what was the intent of your comment? There's no point to making a 400dpi 32" display (even if that were remotely physically possible).

> Then what was the intent of your comment?

Pointing out to the other guy that their reply made no sense?

> There's no point to making a 400dpi 32" display

Thank you captain obvious.

You do know that there are densities between 130 and 400+ though, right?