Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 164 posts

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#151

Post by m463 »

MBCook wrote: post #43
Xeoncross wrote: post #27

I really wish more people wanted screens that looked as good as their cellphone. Bright, sharp text, great color. We've had the great Apple Studio Display for years now, it's about time others came to fix some of it's short-comings like 27" size, 60hz and lack of HDMI ports for use with other systems. So many of us have to stare at a screen for hours every day and having one that reduces strain on my eyes is well wor…

The company I work at gives all new developers a pair of 1080p displays that could have come right out of 2010. It amazes me, and it’s so sad. They have no idea what they’re missing. I’m sure high PPI would pay off fast in eye strain. And it’s not like monitors need replacement yearly. Tons of time to recoup that small cost. I’m not arguing for $2k 37” monitors, just better than $200 ones.

Just about every company does something like this.

At one point in my career, I just started buying my own monitors and bringing them into work.

I remember when ~19 or 20" was the norm, and I bought a dell 30" 2560x1600 monitor. Best $1400 I ever spent, used it for years and years.

(I still have it although I retired it a few years back because it uses something called dual-link DVI which is not easily supported anymore)

I think if you are an engineer, you should dive headlong into what you are. Be proactive and get the tools you need. Don't wait for some management signoff that never comes while you suffer daily, and are worse at your job.

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#152

Post by seanmcdirmid »

Xeoncross wrote: post #27

I really wish more people wanted screens that looked as good as their cellphone. Bright, sharp text, great color. We've had the great Apple Studio Display for years now, it's about time others came to fix some of it's short-comings like 27" size, 60hz and lack of HDMI ports for use with other systems. So many of us have to stare at a screen for hours every day and having one that reduces strain on my eyes is well wor…

I have 27" 5K monitors at home since I WFH. One reason I don't really want to RTO is because these monitors aren't standard yet even if they have been out for more than a decade now (and my FAANG employer won't spring for the good stuff). That and my mechanical keyboard would never work in an open office :P.

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#153

Post by seanmcdirmid »

MBCook wrote: post #2

It amazes me it’s so hard to find monitors around 210+ PPI. Glad this is one. That said I would be scared to buy this. I’ve heard so many horror stories about the LG UltraFine 5k and the ports breaking and then having to send it in for repair for a long time. At this point I don’t trust their build quality for monitors. In general though, I am so glad to see big high DPI monitors have more than one or two options fin…

I just bought an Asus 27" 5K to replace my Samsung 27" 5K S9 that bit the dust. They are around 700 bucks now, at least, you can get a 4K 28K for 2-300, but those are just at 157 PPI.

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#154

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jonpurdy wrote: post #73
seemaze wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found it much easier to increase your viewing distance for an equivalent effect. All else being equal this provides the additional benefit of reduced eye strain from a decrease in parallax. For example, I've settled on ~160 PPI viewed at 100cm as my optimal desktop solution. It has an identical perceived pixel density as ~220 PPI viewed at 75cm. Use a PPD (pixel per degree) calculator to find a setup that suits…

I was forced to do this as my eyes have aged and I can't focus at 5K 27" at a reasonable distance, and can't read the text when I sit far enough back to focus. Hence why 4K 27" (~160 ppi) has become perfect for me. Would be nice if Apple supported non-integer scaling so I could just dynamically resize everything (without the current technique and performance hit/blurriness of upscaling then downsizing).

I'm pretty sure your 4K is 28 inches, not 27 inches. 4K 27 inch panels don't exist. That still puts you at 157PPI though.

Edit: it looks like 27 inch is really a thing now and not some sort of labelling trick:

    Monitor Size (Diagonal)  Width (approx.) Height (approx.)               Width (Metric) Height (Metric)
    27-inch (26.9" actual) 23.5 inches 13.2 inches 59.7 cm 33.6 cm
    28-inch (27.9" actual) 24.45 inches 13.43 inches 62.09 cm 34.13 cm

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#155

Post by JoshTriplett »

busywaiting wrote: post #145
BoredomIsFun wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their, rtings.com "conclusions", "scores" and "recommendations" do not always correspond to their own numbers.

Exactly. Their ten-point scales have no obvious relationship to the underlying measurements, where measurements are even provided, and they rescale the points every so often. (They call this their "methodology version.") I've noticed that, when a new (expensive, high-commission-generating) product comes out, it often has middling scores at first, and then, a few months later, they've revised their methodology to show…

1) I trust rtings to not change their position on the basis of what makes them money; that trust is their whole brand.

2) I have not seen products jump from middling to high before, but I have seen the scores change with new methodologies, and sometimes that has the net effect of lowering the scores of older devices. Typically, that seems to represent some change in technology, or in what people are looking for in the market. For instance, I would expect (have not checked) that with the substantially increased interest in high-refresh-rate monitors, the "gaming" score has probably changed to scale with gamer expectations of higher frame rates. That would have the net effect of lowering the score of what was previously considered a "good" monitor. This seems like an inherent property of improving technologies: last year's "great" can be this year's "good" and next year's "meh".

Personally, I never pay much attention to the 0-10 scores in the first place, and always just make tables of the features and measurements I care about. The only exception is for underlying measurements that are complex and need summarizing (e.g. "Audio Reproduction Accuracy").

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#156

Post by nozzlegear »

John23832 wrote: post #143
nozzlegear wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a Studio Display and would also love if it had a much higher refresh rate, but only because I play WoW on it. Why isn't 60hz enough for programming? I don't think I notice the refresh rate at all when not playing a video game or watching videos.

When I move my mouse, or if I'm moving between full screens (terminal to IDE to browser), I see the stutter and slowness. I code on a LG UltraGear OLED 4K HDR 240 Hz Gaming Monitor. Could be my sensitivity though.

I'm personally not very sensitive to refresh rates, I only really notice it in video games and it wasn't enough to keep me from replacing my 120hz primary monitor with the Studio Display. I was just curious about why you prefer higher refresh rate for programming, thanks for answering!

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#157

Post by MBCook »

bostonfinance wrote: post #134
MBCook wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company I work at gives all new developers a pair of 1080p displays that could have come right out of 2010. It amazes me, and it’s so sad. They have no idea what they’re missing. I’m sure high PPI would pay off fast in eye strain. And it’s not like monitors need replacement yearly. Tons of time to recoup that small cost. I’m not arguing for $2k 37” monitors, just better than $200 ones.

I work for a white-shoe law firm in Boston. I and most of my peers have total compensation approaching $500k. And we have 1280x1024 monitors from the 00s, and we're not allowed to have anything better, even out of our own pockets, because "that's what we use here".

Out of all the places I would think would want fancy monitors to show off how fancy they are…

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#158

Post by MBCook »

lazylizard wrote: post #100
MBCook wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company I work at gives all new developers a pair of 1080p displays that could have come right out of 2010. It amazes me, and it’s so sad. They have no idea what they’re missing. I’m sure high PPI would pay off fast in eye strain. And it’s not like monitors need replacement yearly. Tons of time to recoup that small cost. I’m not arguing for $2k 37” monitors, just better than $200 ones.

the old monitors still work. its a waste to throw them away. something like that?

I’ve never heard a specific reason, but I fully suspect “it’s fine, why do you need that?” to be the answer.

May be people who have never used HiDPI. Maybe they’ve seen it and don’t get the hype. Maybe they’re just penny pinching. IDK.

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#159

Post by JasonADrury »

MBCook wrote: post #157
bostonfinance wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work for a white-shoe law firm in Boston. I and most of my peers have total compensation approaching $500k. And we have 1280x1024 monitors from the 00s, and we're not allowed to have anything better, even out of our own pockets, because "that's what we use here".

Out of all the places I would think would want fancy monitors to show off how fancy they are…

Too much creative vibes, fancy monitors do not necessarily communicate seriousness.

Re: LG UltraFine Evo 6K 32-inch Monitor Review

#160

Post by tracker1 »

acchow wrote: post #93
tracker1 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have trouble making out details on my 45" UWQHD (3440x1440) displays... so I don't see much point.. maybe slightly easier to read typefaces... I am already zooming 25% in most of the time. On the plus side, I can comfortably fit my editor on half the screen and my browser on the other half.

Most people run in some hiDPI mode so text doesn’t become tiny But 1440p on a 45” is not good PPI. That could be why you’re struggling to see text clearly

Or... it could be my general vision loss issues in that I can't hardly see...

I can't make out a native pixel as it is. I understand that if it had 2x the PPI that it might handle rendering better and that may help, some with visibility... I had a first generation MBP with retina display, and it was amazing. But that's not my issue here. Not to mention the trouble having my work laptop push effectively 4x the pixels if such a mythical beast existed.

The size is so that I can actually work with a single screen, editor on one side, browser on the other... it's almost like 2x 3:2 displays in one. For a workflow it's pretty good... I don't game much, but it's nice for that and content viewing as well. I had considered using side by side displays, like 2x 27" in portrait mode... but settled on this, which is working surprisingly well for now.

Post reply on HN