I don't really get this monitor when a 4K 32in QD OLED exists. Running the 32in at 100% scaling will yield more usable space on the left and right, essentially the same height, way better colors, way better refresh rates, and no oddities like the weird remote. The 32in is also likely the same price or cheaper, from a real manufacturer with a real warranty.
32" is too large, it makes you turn your head a lot, and the distortion at the corners is noticeable. You can put it farther away (which requires a nonstandard desk), but it sort of defeats the purpose.
To me, 28" 4K is near the sweet spot: it's exactly 4 14" screens of my ThinkPad. I wish the screens had higher resolution and smaller size though.
How shallow is your desk? I'm on a pretty regular sized desk and have no issues with a 32in monitor.
You said you wished the screens had a smaller size? You'd want a smaller than 28in screen? Wouldn't that get pretty uncomfortably close to view, even with scaling?
I recently scored an amazing deal on the Samsung Odyssey G8 G80HS, which is 32", 6144 x 3456 at 165 Hz for only $700 via perks at work [1]!!! Even if computers typically cannot game at 6144 x 3456 px, it is incredibly nice to simultaneously have the fast refresh rate to glide your mouse cursor around smoothly, and have the super high image resolution to read super crisp text. The monitor can also be run at half resolution but at twice the framerate of 330 Hz, which is amazing for older or competitive titles. The only downside is that the quality control is not too great (my friend ordered the same one and it was defective) and the plastic bezel of the monitor seems very generic.
I’m personally considering the 5K 27” 27GM950B from LG, but I’m hesitant and wonder if I should save the disappointment or inevitable and just spring for the Studio Display XDR. But its quite a jump and I don’t get paid for coding like that anymore so it’s harder to justify now, hah.
However, as another commenter mentioned in the thread it seems like nearly every non-Apple monitor has some sort of negative compromise outside of port selection.
That being said $700 is a steal for that monitor easily and the price overcomes a lot of possible downsides (at least for me it would).
For programmers, there's very little incremental gain by going from 4k/32" to 6k/32". I've tried both and there's a limit to how small the text can be, but then I'm kinda middle aged.
For graphics work, of course the answer might be different and I'm no expert. Personally I think screen size does matter, and I've noticed a fair improvment going from 28 to 32.
I’m a software engineer (or well, was since I’ve moved on) and a single Pro Display XDR was hands down the best display I’ve ever used for productivity and programming work. It’s night and day and going down to 4K at 27” or 32” is extremely painful not just from a clarity standpoint but for the amount of space. With the XDR I was basically able to have nearly full-width browser viewports on half the screen and the ide on the other half.
With 4K it feels like I have to do a lot of tabbing between apps on a single monitor.
But I get people’s experiences obviously vary since display preferences are extremely subjective and overall it seems like the 27” 5K and 32” 6K fans are in the minority.
I have 20/20 vision and a pretty normal desk setup. I run my 32 4K at 100% scaling in Windows, and while I could maybe push it down a little smaller, some of the least PPI-aware interfaces and text would start to be too small.
If you're running 6K scaled to 150%, you basically just have a slightly sharper 4K monitor - effectively 0 extra space. If you're not running it scaled, I'm betting you're sitting closer to the monitor than is recommended for long term use (or have like 20/10 vision).
With 5k its 200%, with the 6K I think it was 150% or 200%. I do site closer to monitors lol, but I never bought into the “just push the monitor back” argument to simulate higher PPI, you can always tell the difference (imo).
Isn't that such little effective working space though? 4K 100% is fine, but I literally could use more effective real estate to have multiple things up.
Apple mnitors for whatever reason use ancient 450nm backlight, which strains my eyes like no tomorrow. All modern 5k and 6k use 455-460nm backlight. Otherwise, yes, APples are good.
Comments
I don't really get this monitor when a 4K 32in QD OLED exists. Running the 32in at 100% scaling will yield more usable space on the left and right, essentially the same height, way better colors, way better refresh rates, and no oddities like the weird remote. The 32in is also likely the same price or cheaper, from a real manufacturer with a real warranty.
32" is too large, it makes you turn your head a lot, and the distortion at the corners is noticeable. You can put it farther away (which requires a nonstandard desk), but it sort of defeats the purpose.
To me, 28" 4K is near the sweet spot: it's exactly 4 14" screens of my ThinkPad. I wish the screens had higher resolution and smaller size though.
How shallow is your desk? I'm on a pretty regular sized desk and have no issues with a 32in monitor.
You said you wished the screens had a smaller size? You'd want a smaller than 28in screen? Wouldn't that get pretty uncomfortably close to view, even with scaling?
The PPI of a 32” 4K is horrendous for anything that’s not media consumption or gaming though.
I recently scored an amazing deal on the Samsung Odyssey G8 G80HS, which is 32", 6144 x 3456 at 165 Hz for only $700 via perks at work [1]!!! Even if computers typically cannot game at 6144 x 3456 px, it is incredibly nice to simultaneously have the fast refresh rate to glide your mouse cursor around smoothly, and have the super high image resolution to read super crisp text. The monitor can also be run at half resolution but at twice the framerate of 330 Hz, which is amazing for older or competitive titles. The only downside is that the quality control is not too great (my friend ordered the same one and it was defective) and the plastic bezel of the monitor seems very generic.
[1] https://i.dllu.net/2026-09-09-20-40-23_b59cb931ec7bd913.png
I’m personally considering the 5K 27” 27GM950B from LG, but I’m hesitant and wonder if I should save the disappointment or inevitable and just spring for the Studio Display XDR. But its quite a jump and I don’t get paid for coding like that anymore so it’s harder to justify now, hah.
However, as another commenter mentioned in the thread it seems like nearly every non-Apple monitor has some sort of negative compromise outside of port selection.
That being said $700 is a steal for that monitor easily and the price overcomes a lot of possible downsides (at least for me it would).
For programmers, there's very little incremental gain by going from 4k/32" to 6k/32". I've tried both and there's a limit to how small the text can be, but then I'm kinda middle aged.
For graphics work, of course the answer might be different and I'm no expert. Personally I think screen size does matter, and I've noticed a fair improvment going from 28 to 32.
I’m a software engineer (or well, was since I’ve moved on) and a single Pro Display XDR was hands down the best display I’ve ever used for productivity and programming work. It’s night and day and going down to 4K at 27” or 32” is extremely painful not just from a clarity standpoint but for the amount of space. With the XDR I was basically able to have nearly full-width browser viewports on half the screen and the ide on the other half.
With 4K it feels like I have to do a lot of tabbing between apps on a single monitor.
But I get people’s experiences obviously vary since display preferences are extremely subjective and overall it seems like the 27” 5K and 32” 6K fans are in the minority.
Are you running any scaling on 5K 27 or 32 6K?
I have 20/20 vision and a pretty normal desk setup. I run my 32 4K at 100% scaling in Windows, and while I could maybe push it down a little smaller, some of the least PPI-aware interfaces and text would start to be too small.
If you're running 6K scaled to 150%, you basically just have a slightly sharper 4K monitor - effectively 0 extra space. If you're not running it scaled, I'm betting you're sitting closer to the monitor than is recommended for long term use (or have like 20/10 vision).
With 5k its 200%, with the 6K I think it was 150% or 200%. I do site closer to monitors lol, but I never bought into the “just push the monitor back” argument to simulate higher PPI, you can always tell the difference (imo).
Isn't that such little effective working space though? 4K 100% is fine, but I literally could use more effective real estate to have multiple things up.
Apple mnitors for whatever reason use ancient 450nm backlight, which strains my eyes like no tomorrow. All modern 5k and 6k use 455-460nm backlight. Otherwise, yes, APples are good.
What? 32 4K is 138PPI, which is better than 27in 1440P, and it's "retina" at 25in.
27” 1440p was not part of this discussion, I was referencing your comment comparing the P20 with higher PPI against the 4K 32”…