Share your HOME WORKING workstation environment - pics

[ben5575]

Carbon Sasquatch said:

Here's mine - not very PH as it used to be a garage before I converted it.

Very nice, well done for getting the two Eames in it.

I'm still halfway through my garage/office conversion. I have a bunker full of toys to put in the finished article...

[Horace Van Khute]

Horace Van Khute said:

Looking at the specifications, your laptop should be able to run 2 4k screens through USB C and the HDMI port, but if you want to be sure only Dell (specs) could give you a concrete answer. Important thing is if both can be run at 60Hz (iGPU can handle this but it depends on how Dell implemented it). It might be that you would have to get their docking station to fully utilise the available throughput.

Eek, this is sounding complicated- if it’s not implemented that way would it just downscale the quality, or not work at all?

Well there are 2 ports on your laptop (I believe), one USB C with display port the other HDMI 1.4, so in theory it should work. If it doesn't the refresh rate might drop to 4k@30Hz, which is a bit cack but would still work.

[xeny]

TameRacingDriver said:

Not who you were asking, but having used plenty of screens of various resolutions, I would be surprised if anyone preferred 1080P over 1440P.

At 23", the text and icons are a similar size if you run the 1440P @ 125% (v's 100% for the 1080P) however the text and icons look far better and sharper. Naturally, if you run the 1440P at 100% you're going to get far more screen real estate but at the cost of it being very much on the small side. Some people don't mind this but for me when I'm staring at a screen for hours every day, I'd rather it was easy to read.

Personally, I run a 34" 1440P ultrawide, which is the 21:9 equivalent of a 27" monitor at 125% and find that this gives me ample real estate but very clear fonts and icons. Running at 100% is doable, just, but I wouldn't want to do it on anything smaller.

Personally I don't find scaled LCDs that great to look at, so I aim to run them at native resolution if at all possible, I was interested if 1440p native at that size was usable or needed scaling to be pleasant to use.

[grumbledoak]

xeny said:

Personally I don't find scaled LCDs that great to look at, so I aim to run them at native resolution if at all possible, I was interested if 1440p native at that size was usable or needed scaling to be pleasant to use.

I don't like scaling. I would go 1080 to 24" and 1440 at 27"

[Carbon Sasquatch]

ben5575 said:

Very nice, well done for getting the two Eames in it.

I'm still halfway through my garage/office conversion. I have a bunker full of toys to put in the finished article...

Looks like it will be a great space - I do like a vaulted ceiling

My desk chair is great - I thought it might be too hard, but I can happily spend all day sitting in it.

The lounge chair/ottoman is something I couldn't get out of my system, but I don't use it as much as I told myself I would....

[Horace Van Khute]

xeny said:

Personally I don't find scaled LCDs that great to look at, so I aim to run them at native resolution if at all possible, I was interested if 1440p native at that size was usable or needed scaling to be pleasant to use.

grumbledoak said:

I don't like scaling. I would go 1080 to 24" and 1440 at 27"

Scaling makes sense on high resolution screens, 4k and such as then the pixels are small enough. 1080p and even 1440p are not great for scaling.

Also depends if it's scaling on Windows, where it works great or on macOS where anything that isn't even (as in 200%) looks off due to the way macOS handles scaling (it renders in virtual scaled resolution and then it downscales)

[TameRacingDriver]

xeny said:

TameRacingDriver said:

Not who you were asking, but having used plenty of screens of various resolutions, I would be surprised if anyone preferred 1080P over 1440P.

At 23", the text and icons are a similar size if you run the 1440P @ 125% (v's 100% for the 1080P) however the text and icons look far better and sharper. Naturally, if you run the 1440P at 100% you're going to get far more screen real estate but at the cost of it being very much on the small side. Some people don't mind this but for me when I'm staring at a screen for hours every day, I'd rather it was easy to read.

Personally, I run a 34" 1440P ultrawide, which is the 21:9 equivalent of a 27" monitor at 125% and find that this gives me ample real estate but very clear fonts and icons. Running at 100% is doable, just, but I wouldn't want to do it on anything smaller.

Personally I don't find scaled LCDs that great to look at, so I aim to run them at native resolution if at all possible, I was interested if 1440p native at that size was usable or needed scaling to be pleasant to use.

Fair enough. Though for me, I'd much rather a 1440P @125% scaling than a 1080P @100%. The text is a lot sharper, the icons tend to look better and more detailed, and 125% scaling doesn't really cause any issues in Windows. For the few apps that do, you just use compatibility mode and disable the scaling for that app. I find most of them still look 25% larger but without blurring. It's only really north of 125% that has any issue with scaling, and for the most part, even that's not much of an issue these days IMO.

[Glade]

xeny said:

Glade said:

This thread is annoying. I have a 23" 1080p monitor, and brought a 1440p similar size monitor home from work.

I noticed it to start with.... but forgot until the pixel count discussion on this thread.

Now i can't unsee the difference!!

Presuming you run them both at 100%, which resolution do you prefer?

Pretty sure 1440p is scaled 125%.

Things look the same size, but 1440p monitor is sharper.

[xeny]

TameRacingDriver said:

The text is a lot sharper, the icons tend to look better and more detailed, and 125% scaling doesn't really cause any issues in Windows..

I agree 125% doesn't cause any Windows issues, but somehow I don't find I prefer the text like that.

Hardly the end of the world, just means I save a little money buying slightly lower res screens and don't mind.

[TameRacingDriver]

xeny said:

TameRacingDriver said:

The text is a lot sharper, the icons tend to look better and more detailed, and 125% scaling doesn't really cause any issues in Windows..

I agree 125% doesn't cause any Windows issues, but somehow I don't find I prefer the text like that.

Hardly the end of the world, just means I save a little money buying slightly lower res screens and don't mind.

Yeah I get that. The fonts do look different and not just bigger. I had similar concerns but I just stuck with it and now don't notice it at all now. If I do go back to 100% the first thing I now notice is how small everything looks

[ben5575]

I'm getting lost in all this pixel stuff.

I have a new macbook pro 2560 x 1600 and Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645 1536 MB graphics (whatever that means).

I've just taken delivery of a iiyama XB3270QS-B1 32" (2560 x 1440) https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B078W9DL4Q/ref...

It's untested/not opened as the office isn't ready yet.

I'd really quite like one of the Ultra Wide monitors (coz new, bigger and I think would work well for Serato DJ). These run at 3440 x 1440

https://www.amazon.co.uk/iiyama-ProLite-ultra-wide...

Is there any problem running the ultrawide from my macbook (it would need to be via thunderbolt 3 to HDMI)???

[768]

It'll drive the number of pixels fine - I've got a 5120x2160 on a 2019 13" with that graphics.

I think you'll be fine on the HDMI too as long as everything along the chain is HDMI 2.0 onwards.

[Sy1441]

fastraxx said:

Very nice sir - what is the monitor and desk? Love that minimalist but modern set up.

Monitor is the Dell 49" Ultrawide and the desk is just a proper office which I quite fancied from national office furniture.

[Sy1441]

wiggy001 said:

Very nice setup. If you wouldn't mind, could you let us know what desk and drawer unit you have?

Work are supplying a new 27" monitor and laptop to sit alongside my current 24" and personal laptop, so I need some more space. Currently using a cheap Ikea desk but am limited for space, and cannot find a drawer unit in the right dimensions for love nor money.

TIA

It's this one, super comfortable to work at which is what I was after.


https://www.nationalofficefurnituresupplies.co.uk/...

[Sy1441]

techguyone said:

Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but is there a desktop PC somewhere - or is that all being powered from the laptop?

Just the laptop, previously had a 27" iMac and a 27" dell monitor before switching to the 49" ultra wide.

[ben5575]

768 said:

It'll drive the number of pixels fine - I've got a 5120x2160 on a 2019 13" with that graphics.

I think you'll be fine on the HDMI too as long as everything along the chain is HDMI 2.0 onwards.

Much obliged, thanks.

[TameRacingDriver]

ben5575 said:

768 said:

It'll drive the number of pixels fine - I've got a 5120x2160 on a 2019 13" with that graphics.

I think you'll be fine on the HDMI too as long as everything along the chain is HDMI 2.0 onwards.

Much obliged, thanks.

I managed to drive my ultrawide with a 2014 Macbook Air so you should be fine.

[ZesPak]

TameRacingDriver said:

I managed to drive my ultrawide with a 2014 Macbook Air so you should be fine.

Will depend greatly on the resolution of course, "ultrawide" can mean:
2560x1080
3440x1440 (most of them)
3840x1080 (some of the 32:9 screens)
5120x1440 (higher end 32:9 screens)

Decent laptops will power these, but it's good to check beforehand of course.
Also "driving" it can vary. I think just about every laptop will struggle with doing GPU intensive stuff on the 1440p ones.

Edited by ZesPak on Friday 26th June 14:32

[TameRacingDriver]

3440x1440 in this case

[Sy1441]

ZesPak said:

Will depend greatly on the resolution of course, "ultrawide" can mean:
2560x1080
3440x1440 (most of them)
3840x1080 (some of the 32:9 screens)
5120x1440 (higher end 32:9 screens)

Decent laptops will power these, but it's good to check beforehand of course.
Also "driving" it can vary. I think just about every laptop will struggle with doing GPU intensive stuff on the 1440p ones.

Edited by ZesPak on Friday 26th June 14:32

What's interesting is my MacBook Pro 13" 2019 won't drive the ultra wide even though it can output higher resolutions that the monitor. I've resorted to driving it as 2 individual monitors via 2x USB C which is a bit of a pain but hey ho.