Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Dell ultrasharp 4K displays - is 32” ppi too low vs 27”?

F

finger11

macrumors member
Original poster
Apr 11, 2007
34
0
Hello - looking at either the Dell u3223qe vs u2723qe.

Will be using with a MacBook m2 pro and a windows pc. Just productivity - mostly code in text editors, terminals, and browsers. Cost difference is not a factor.

I’m coming from an 27” lg 4K display and so would love a reason to try a 32” but some of the posts are scaring me off, saying the lower ppi on the larger display makes the overall image poor.

Would you stick with a 27” over the 32”, if you could have them for the same price? Or am I overthinking it, and bigger is better and just go for the 32?

Thanks.
 
I used a Dell 32" 4K (U3219Q) for several years, mostly in "looks like" 2560x1440. It wasn't razor sharp, but definitely serviceable. I now have dual Apple Studio Displays, which are obviously sharper being native 5K panels (integer scaled to "looks like" 2560x1440).

My take on it is that you will not perceive a significant difference in sharpness between 27" 4K and 32" 5K if you are using a scaled resolution. There is already a slight loss of sharpness just by virtue of non-integer scaling. If, however, you plan to run at "looks like" 1920x1080 (in order to get integer scaling to 4K), the UI will look a bit over-sized at 32".

TLDR: 32" should be fine, but if you want proper sharp, 27" would be better especially if you use at "looks like" 1920x1080.
 
I’m a big fan of 4k @ 32”. I use it mostly at full 3840x2160 resolution, and like the fact that I can fit 6 1280x1080 windows onscreen simultaneously, although I do bump up the default font size or scaling a bit in text heavy apps so it is comfortable to read while sitting back in my chair.

Running in the scaled 3008x1692 renders screen elements the same size as 2560x1440 on a 27” panel and provides a bit more screen real estate. At full 4k, I get more screen real estate than 2 27” displays in looks like 2560x1440.

As long as you avoid using display modes that favor sharpness, such as the gaming modes on many displays, the text looks just fine. Yes, it’s not as nice as a true Retina display, but it is far better than 110 ppi displays.

If you are pragmatic and feel comfortable with the compromises, I think you may be very pleased. I bounce back and forth between my M1 MBP and my M1 mini with an LG 32UL500 (at the low end of 4k panels) daily. The difference is far less jarring than it was with older non-retina displays I used in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: finger11
I have the U3223QE in addition to an older 4K/27” as well as my MBP 14”. I was thinking about getting Dell’s 32” 6K display, but that costs like three times as much as the 32” 4K one. And for me it was the right decision. I think it’s a great display. But you will get all kinds of answers from people to this question, because it’s such a personal choice. I think that a lot of people overbuy tech, especially the ones hanging out in tech forums like this one. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: finger11 and meson
Thanks all for the replies. Makes me feel better going with the U3223QE - I'm going to order it!
 
Assuming you'll use it as your primary display, 32" is a weird size for 4k... if you scale it integer to 1920x1080 everything is huge, and if you run it at native resolution everything is tiny. You could scale it to 2880x1620 (might need 3rd party software, not sure) but I can't imagine it would look all that great.

6k is "Just about right" for that size display on a desk, but 6k displays are ex-pen-sive 😬
 
FreakinEurekan said:
Assuming you'll use it as your primary display, 32" is a weird size for 4k... if you scale it integer to 1920x1080 everything is huge, and if you run it at native resolution everything is tiny. You could scale it to 2880x1620 (might need 3rd party software, not sure) but I can't imagine it would look all that great.

6k is "Just about right" for that size display on a desk, but 6k displays are ex-pen-sive 😬
Click to expand...

If you had actual experience, you would know better … I have this exact screen. I use it in 3008 x 1692 and it looks great. Sure, I can spend three times as much for a 6K display. And if I put my nose onto it, I might see a difference. From the position I'm in, everything looks great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlphaCentauri and meson
  • Like
Reactions: meson
I've used Magnet for a number of years on my laptops to snap windows to various arrangements, but wanted a 3x2 grid for the larger screen. It turns out that Rectangle is a free app that offers my desired arrangement, so I've adopted it on the mini.

I use Monitor Control as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back