Why no 1440p monitors under 27"?

[U6b36ef]

Dear TH folk,

There aren't any higher resolution monitors than 1080p for 22" - 24" screen.

Is there a definitive reason why? I think the manufacturers are trying to squeeze money from buyers. As you need to buy larger monitors for lower dot pitches, they get larger purchases.

We know laptops can have full HD on 15.6" screens. Why can't we get that on desktops up to 22".

I bought a 22" (21.5") in full HD and it was the smallest I could find in 1080p. Originally I wanted an 18.4" or 20" in full HD but found they don't exist. I had built my computer first with a 1280x1024, and then went looking for a monitor. I was disappointed to find what I wanted doesn't exist.

Now sometimes when gaming I want a bigger monitor, but 24" max. (Preferably 23" in 1440p and 120Hz refresh. Ideal! Only they don't make them.)

However a 24" would mean a higher dot pitch scaling up from 21.5", so I will not buy it. I would be forced into spending top dollar for 27" to get a better dot pitch than I have. The problem is 21.5" in 1080p does leave jaggies around and forces us to use anti-aliasing. Only some games don't support enough AA to tidy them up enough. Often in these obstinate games you can't force AA through the Nvidia Control Panel, as AA for the game is greyed out.

Such a shame because tighter dot-pitch produces richer colours, better resolution accuracy, and so a better picture.

N.B. I added a poll to the thread, so see above. If you want to bear your grievance for smaller factor higher resolution monitors, please add your vote. Maybe it will let the manufacturers know we have thought it through and are not happy.

 

[jakjawagon]

I know right? You see smartphones and tablets with >1080p screens, and there's the huge and ridiculously expensive 4k/UHD TVs constantly being announced, but between 15 and 24 inches, there's very few monitors with such high resolutions.

When I was looking for a new laptop recently, I saw quite a few 13" >1080p laptops, but almost none in the 15 to 17 inch range that I wanted. The price premium for 1080p laptop screens is ridiculous too. Especially as most manufacturers have stopped making 15" 1600*900 screens, which I would have been happy to settle for, so it was either pay significantly more for 1080p or get stuck with 1366*768.

I'm going to be upgrading my gaming PC soon too, and I don't have much more room on my desk, so while I'd like to get a new >1080p monitor, and would be happy to go bigger than my current 22", I may have to find somewhere else for my printer to live first.

I did find this, but it's only 60hz:
http/uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/dell-monitor-up2414q

 

[U6b36ef]

Good post.

I googled the 24" Dell you mentioned. At first glance you think, oh man, will I do it, will I pay for it, at £500? On reading reviews though you soon see it's maybe not an option.

In gaming you would need an extraordinarily powerful graphics card to run modern games like Metro: Last Light. Check out page three of this review. http/www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/monitors-and-projectors/monitors/dell-ultrasharp-up2414q-1222644/review/3#articleContent

It says: "Nvidia GeForce GTX 780Ti, the fastest single graphics card you can buy, (NB this was last year). It can only just cope with that colossal native resolution at full detail gaming in moderately demanding titles. You're looking at just 15 frames per second in Metro: Last Light."

Then the review goes on to describe Scaling Problems (check out that paragraph on page three).


Something 2560x1440 I think would be better at about 22"-24".

Good find though, the Dell UltraSharp UP2414Q, and something to drool at for now.

 

[Le_hazzard]

there should be a couple of korean monitors on ebay that claim to run at 1440p, the only problem about the korean monitors are that they normaly have alot of back light bleed but that can be sorted by the various guides online. The reason that most monitors are not made in 27 inch is that the size of the pannel is easier to produce and the manufactures belive that 27 inch is the perfect size for the high resolution of 1440 p. I would personaly go for a high end ips pannel maybe monitor. Hope this helped

 

[U6b36ef]

I think that is what we object to though, it being the manufacturer's decision. Since laptops and tablets use high resolutions it gets rid of any claim 1440p belongs on 27".

I think the only way to explain it is draw an analogy. If you read reviews of the Dell 24 UP2414Q that 'jakjawagon' pointed out, they claim the image is extremely sharp. That is what gamers want, and even non-gamers would benefit with a 22" in 2560x1440. (We know they can make higher than full HD panels for tablets and laptops, so should we accept any less.)

When Intel produced the 4th gen i-cores there was a reaction from the gaming community about the lack of overclocking. (Intel saw the shift towards tablets and laptops and saw no need for CPU's needing overclocking.) Intel responded to the gamer community response by saying OK we will make CPU's over-clock-able. Hence Haswell refresh and what comes for 5th gen. Gamers are after all one of it's desktop CPU most loyal customer base.

Thus I think the demand is there for 2560x1440 under 27". Gamers would buy them. I would buy one. I would have bought one last year if they existed, instead of the 22" full HD I have now. My slightly old, slightly game capable Acer 8920G laptop had full HD at 18.4". Thus when I went looking for a new monitor I wanted dot-pitch to match, or lower, as it was brilliant. 22" @ 1080p was the best dot-pitch I could buy close to the size I want. (This is why I think gamers have been squeezed by manufacturers into buying 27" for higher resolution than 1080p)

I have never heard of online help to reduce light-bleed. My IPS is OK and I would recommend it. I will look it up though. It would still be interesting to find and see these Korean monitors you suggest.