[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