[rootusrootus]

32 inch 4K is perfectly fine. I recently switched to a Samsung CRG9 (I can only have one external display on this computer) and the resolution is pretty crappy compared to the 32 inch. But either one of them is perfectly fine for coding.

[copperx]

I don't trust people who say "it's fine" anymore. After a lot of tests with people I know, many young(!) acquaintances are not able to distinguish between 2k and 4k. People of my age can't sometimes distinguish the difference between HD and 4k on a monitor. And that's for static images. No one I know is able to notice the difference between motion interpolation on/off on a TV.

This is going to sound dismissive and entitled, but I've learned that people's eyesight and visual processing is extremely bad in general.

[rootusrootus]

I won't try to convince you if you don't want to be convinced, and from your perspective I'm just a rando on the 'net. I get that.

But I have my 32in monitor above my CRG9 (I use the 4K screen for my work computer) and I somewhat regularly end up with the same text displayed on both at the same time. The CRG9 resolution is noticeably inferior to my 48 year old eyes. Which I have to tell you, don't have the acuity they once had. 20/20 the last time I tested, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's falling below that now. Getting old blows.

The difference isn't too bothersome unless I'm bouncing back and forth between them. I get used to the lower resolution of the CRG9 pretty quickly and forget about it. And of course it's totally fine for coding.

[411111111111111]

If someone can't distinguish 4k and 2k on a 32" display then the image they're looking at has horrible quality.

Its instantly visible as soon as you see any sharp edges / letters.

2k 32" is 80 dpi, that puts it at the same pixel density as fullhd on 24". That's perfectly usable but not particularly sharp at normal viewing distances