24" or 27" 4k Monitor

[survivalist]

Having recently seen the new 5k iMac I am impressed with the sharpness and clarity of the screen. As I already have a PC capable of running 4k I'm deliberating which size would be best for a monitor/pair of monitors.

Anyone made the decision? Currently using 2 x 24" monitors with 1920x1200 resolution.

This is mainly for photo and video editing, rather than gaming or consuming 4k videos.

Thanks
S

[survivalist]

Had a quick look and can't see a 34" 4k monitor on their website. The 31" looks interesting though.

I guess the question is whether the additional pixel density on the smaller screen is worth the sharpness.

The difficulty is that the 5k screen is 2 x the res of the 2560x1440 (old standard for 27" display), whereas 4k is only 1.5 x the res. This is what made me think that to get to the same sharpness/smoothness of the 5k screen I'd need to drop down to a 4k screen at 24". Going bigger than 27" won't get additional sharpness, just the same pixels per inch on a larger panel - so at around 100 ppi I may as well stick with the multiple 24" 1920x1200 ones I already have.

[survivalist]

All that jazz said:

If you'll be using it to run a version of Windows be prepared for a whole world of pain. Suggest you search the interweb for Windows 7/8 and 4k monitors, there's plenty about the issue which basically boils down to Windows and their programs not being designed for UHD which means when you rescale your screen in order to make the icons and text bigger than a pinprick you will find most of it pixelated and half of the words off the edge of the dialogue boxes, unable to click buttons etc.

Thanks, just the kind of info I was after. It made me realise that I've never seen windows running on a UHD screen, only OSX. Any idea if it's supposed to be fixed in Windows 10? My plan would be to run both Windows and OSX, so if windows is unusable I might hold off for a while.