+1 to that. Also get 120Hz if you can (but has it's own headaches to solve, including e.g. HDMI 2.1 isn't supported in open source drivers).
I recently started using a LG 42" C2. Coming from two 27" monitors at 2560x1440, the 42" 3840x2160 is about the same pixel density and only 12.5% more pixels total
(3840*2160/(2*2560*1440))
The 42" screen is like portrait mode on demand. Whenever I tried portrait mode on the 27" screens, it was nice sometimes but usually felt limited in width. With the 42" a quick tile of a window to either side (Super+Left/Right) gives you the height of portrait mode, plus more width (and adjustable to your liking).
Also for those now spare 27" monitors kicking around, I grabbed a vertical monitor mount to stack them (both landscape, stacked vertically) next to the 42". This has proven to be even better and I love having the zones this creates.
It might be worth checking the modes available, perhaps cinema or eyecare modes may help if available. Not a monitor but on our Samsung TV some modes flicker visibly while others don’t. Fiddling around the settings accidentally turned it on for me.
Look for an in-depth review of your display model. Just checked for my Asus VG278QR and I found out that the background illumination isn‘t reduced by PWM.
That's what I do. Not with that specific product, but with a sub-$300 television from Amazon.
I've done the separate monitors thing, I've done the "portrait monitors for text" thing. Really the best solution is just a big flat plane that subtends ~60 degrees horizontally and just about (9/16)*60 vertically, which is enough to put the top just above eye level and the bottom just above the table. Plenty of space to put your windows where you need 'em without all the fussing about optimizing layout.
I worry about all the code I don't know about. Who knows what other software I can't control relies on RGB layout. Maybe irrational, but I don't want to risk it. Especially since you gain nothing in return.
I think it's completely orthogonal issues, no? You probably refer to OLEDs superior black levels etc. But this thread was about subpixel rendering. One can be bad while the other can not. It's unrelated.
They're related because many OLEDs use a non-RGB pixel layout, so it's necessary to turn off sub-pixel anti-aliasing, and the net result seems worth that tradeoff now that screens are high-resolution enough that sub-pixel anti-aliasing makes less of a difference.
I used a 30hz 4k tv as a monitor back in the day, it was not enjoyable with substantial input lag making photoshop etc impossible to use. Be patient, it will happen eventually.
> I used a 30hz 4k tv as a monitor back in the day
I used that exact same monitor!
I'm hopeful, but I'm a little less sanguine than you.
A big part of the reason why 4k got so popular is because there was so much 4k content available. And because it was easy to see how much better 4k looks than 1080p.
because its full of features I actively don't want (smart tv apps, integrated IoT hub, voice assistants, etc etc) and only a 60hz VA panel. Spending money on spyware while having a relatively low end panel.
I recently started using a LG 42" C2. Coming from two 27" monitors at 2560x1440, the 42" 3840x2160 is about the same pixel density and only 12.5% more pixels total
The 42" screen is like portrait mode on demand. Whenever I tried portrait mode on the 27" screens, it was nice sometimes but usually felt limited in width. With the 42" a quick tile of a window to either side (Super+Left/Right) gives you the height of portrait mode, plus more width (and adjustable to your liking).Also for those now spare 27" monitors kicking around, I grabbed a vertical monitor mount to stack them (both landscape, stacked vertically) next to the 42". This has proven to be even better and I love having the zones this creates.