Any high resolution displays below 24"?

[Bucic]

I'm using a 15" laptop display at 1680x1050 and it's great! It gives ~120 ppi. I'm looking for a standalone display of similar ppi. Aaand I could find squat so far. Any hints?

 

The perfect display for me is:

120+ ppi

22"

16:10/5:4

non-professional (sane price)

 

Cannibalization of a laptop display IS an option.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Bucic

[pacotito]

Here is a 24" that should be released soon. For the low price of around $1400 usd.

http://www1.la.dell.com/bz/en/corp/peripherals/dell-up2414q/pd.aspx?refid=dell-up2414q&s=corp

[agrasyuk]

a very nice monitor indeed

[pacotito]

If only I could make the money disappear without my wife noticing. They are also releasing a 28" 4k without the ultrasharp name. Rumored to be <$1000. Not sure as to what features it would be missing.

[kk0425]

The problem with that is when the physical size of the screen increases, the pixel size also increases so you get less PPI (or pixel pitch). The only real solution is to increase the resolution if you increase the physical dimensions. Here's a chart anyway that might help.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_pitch#Common_dot_pitches_in_monitors

[Night]

I have a 15" 2880x1800 display (retina macbook pro) with windows 8 on it via bootcamp, and it runs DCS very well at full resolution. The only problem is that text is so small that since I primarily do multiplayer, I set it to 1920x1080. My main gaming desktop uses a 2560x1600 monitor and it works great.

[Bucic]

The problem with that is when the physical size of the screen increases, the pixel size also increases so you get less PPI (or pixel pitch). The only real solution is to increase the resolution if you increase the physical dimensions. Here's a chart anyway that might help.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_pitch#Common_dot_pitches_in_monitors

Yup, please guys, let's not OT here. 2560x1440 monitor which is 24 inches is NOT a high pixel density display this topic is about. Also anything over 24", which may even be 4k, is not within the topic's scope.

 

Please be considerate. Finding such a display is a difficult task.

[blkspade]

The problem is what you're looking for just doesn't exist. No one produces a monitor that would meet your criteria. So you're stuck just using your laptop, or having to compromise on your requirements.

 

Yup, please guys, let's not OT here. 2560x1440 monitor which is 24 inches is NOT a high pixel density display this topic is about. Also anything over 24", which may even be 4k, is not within the topic's scope.

 

Please be considerate. Finding such a display is a difficult task.

[Koekemoeroetoe]

The problem is what you're looking for just doesn't exist. No one produces a monitor that would meet your criteria. So you're stuck just using your laptop, or having to compromise on your requirements.

 

+1

 

Double checked it and, at least in the Netherlands, the highest resolution on a 24" or smaller screen is 1920*1200. Smallest and cheapest 2560*1440 screen available here is 27" and costs €440 (roughly $570).

[Bucic]

The problem is what you're looking for just doesn't exist. No one produces a monitor that would meet your criteria. So you're stuck just using your laptop, or having to compromise on your requirements.

Two things have led me into thinking it was possible:

- my laptop screen pixel density (if such a screen has 120 ppi, why not a standalone display)

- I've recently read that after apple has introduced the Retina series, other manufacturers are considering defending their decency by coming up with similar products (I was wrong, as it seems)

 

24" or smaller screen is 1920*1200.

Could you post a link?

 

 

So, I guess what's left is:

1. Canibalization of a laptop display.

2. Finding smallest full hd (1920x1080) display.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Bucic

[Koekemoeroetoe]

Two things have led me into thinking it was possible:

- my laptop screen pixel density (if such a screen has 120 ppi, why not a standalone display)

- I've recently read that after apple has introduced the Retina series, other manufacturers are considering defending their decency by coming up with similar products (I was wrong, as it seems)

 

I understand why you thought it would exist and share your thoughts. I think that it doesn't exist because there is no real need for such a high PPI on 'normal' screens.

 

With a lot of portable devices, you sit so clos in front of the screen that a higher PPI has it's advantages. On a normal screen though, the user stares at it from such a distance that a higher PPI is barely noticeable. The only notice might be that you get lower FPS in games, since your GPU has a harder time keeping up with the relatively high resolution (compared to a regular 1920*1200 display).

 

Could you post a link?

 

It's a Dutch website, but I'll post it anyways. Clicking the link should get you right into the right webpage, with searchfilters.

 

http://tweakers.net/categorie/344/monitoren/producten/#filter:JYw7CoAwEETvMrVIIoKaAwgWVp4gxFUW4odoIYbc3Q1W83nMRBxhptAz-RkG10mOF3b25mNH8cNJykFo0xU47UoTvwSjlZIY2NHIO4yEPO7Z3xQumAhdVyrrljGqspW_zT7Z16VCSukD

 

If not, adjust the slider that says "Schermdiagonaal" (Screen diagonal) to max 24" and at "Sortering" (on top of the result list) select "Resolutie". This will sort the list and put the highest resolution on top.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Koekemoeroetoe

[kk0425]

That's exactly why I posted that link. You HAVE to increase the resolution as the physical screen gets larger in order to keep the pixel pitch high. It wasn't OT at all.

[Bucic]

That's exactly why I posted that link. You HAVE to increase the resolution as the physical screen gets larger in order to keep the pixel pitch high. It wasn't OT at all.

I said that 24" is too much. 'No such displays exist' is fine with me.

 

I've used the Dutch site to go lower and lower with the diagonal while keeping 1920x1080 and 1920x1200. Here's what I got (from best choices to worst):

http://tweakers.net/pricewatch/327662/lg-22ea53vq-p-zwart.html

http://tweakers.net/pricewatch/338408/hp-691224-001-zwart.html

http://tweakers.net/pricewatch/347245/asus-mb168-%281920x1080%29-zwart.html

http://tweakers.net/pricewatch/275108/eizo-flexscan-sx2262wh-zwart.html

 

The EIZO is too expensive and the laptop replacement panel is just to show the canibalization I mentioned is a viable option. Does anyone know what kind of adapters it would require to get such a display fed from a Display Port?

[Bucic]

Some allinones sport high ppi! I've been looking into barebones anyway.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Gigabyte-Outs-21-5-inch-Barebone-AIO-for-Intel-Sandy-Bridge-CPUs-247476.shtml

 

http://mobile.idealo.co.uk/compare/3981227/intel-loop-lp-2151-l5-aio.html

Edited December 9, 2013 by Bucic

[wasyl00]

I was wondering if its possible to use panel screen from laptop or ideally chain 3 together for example.

I'm playing on Dell XPS laptop with the 15.6" with 1920x1080 which gives me sweet ppi. but it is small and I need to seat very close to the screen.

 

I was wondering if enyone was experymenting with connecting laptop panels together for better overall resolution instead of using standalone screens. Probably some controller would be necessary bacause the panels alone are really cheap. Below is the auction to the same panel I have on my laptop:

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NEW-DELL-XPS-15-L502X-15-6-FULL-HD-FHD-LAPTOP-LED-SCREEN-/250541649838?pt=UK_Computing_Laptop_Screens_LCD_Panels&hash=item3a55722fae#ht_5049wt_927

[Boltz]

I looked at using laptop screens a while back and I know a few people have done it including some 737NG cockpit builders for their upper and lower EICAS displays. From what I read it can be done with certain screens that have available schematics and those that people have worked out. Here is an instructable that I'm sure you've already looked at http://www.instructables.com/id/Laptop-Converted-to-2nd-Monitor/step1/Laptop-Modification/

A quick look on ebay shows that laptop for $1.00

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Compaq-Presario-F700-Series-No-Power-Cord-/251399025507?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item3a888cb363

 

I have never actually done this but would be very interested if anyone tried it.

[Rhinox]

...it is small and I need to seat very close to the screen...

And *that* exactly is the point why desktop LCD-displays do not have high ppi-values. They do not need it!

 

An average human's eye has angular sensitivity ~4′ (arc-minutes, that is ~0.07[deg]), give or take. That is minimal angular distance where eye is able to recognise two points. It is an angle at which you see two points 0.6 mm apart, from perpendicular distance ~50cm. Anything closer (on screen) does not matter. So either you look from very small distance, or you do not recognise anything more than ~50ppi.

[Bucic]

https://help.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.10/more-core-ux.html

[Bucic]

And *that* exactly is the point why desktop LCD-displays do not have high ppi-values. They do not need it!

 

An average human's eye has angular sensitivity ~4′ (arc-minutes, that is ~0.07[deg]), give or take. That is minimal angular distance where eye is able to recognise two points. It is an angle at which you see two points 0.6 mm apart, from perpendicular distance ~50cm. Anything closer (on screen) does not matter. So either you look from very small distance, or you do not recognise anything more than ~50ppi.

No, this is not the reason why desktop LCD-displays do not have high ppi-values. It's because desktop systems have vintage, fixed-pixel design. But this is slowly changing. See the link I posted above. Even Windows 7 has an option to scale desktop fonts. But we're going to need global-scaling in the future, that's for sure.

 

Let's simplify. 1280x1024 19" display at 0.6 m - I can clearly see jagged lines, pixels the windows system clock comprises of, jagged fonts in MS Office.