JAN 2022 MAXIMUMPC 13
Jeremy Laird
TRADE CHAT
©^
LG
8K screens and the future
of high-DPI computing
MICROSOFT HAS BEEN PUSHING the idea of high pixel
density computing since the release of Windows 7
10 years ago. That it hasn’t happened yet—a fact
we were reminded of by a recent question on 8 K
gaming from a reader—is odd, because consumers
are used to high-DPI displays on their smartphones.
The benefitof a high-DPI display
isn’t reallyto do with movies or
games, it’smostly about fonts.
That smartphone experience generates a sense of
cognitive dissonance. Any handset launching with
less than 30 0dpi would get laughed off the internet
these days. But most PC users are lucky if their
monitor manages 120 dpi. Of course, smartphone
screens are normally held closer than the typical
viewing distance for a PC monitor, but not so as to
make up for the chasm between the pixel densities.
Many smartphones have pixel densities of
400dpi or more, with some high-end models
reaching 5 00dpi. Meanwhile, a typical 144 0p
27-inch PC monitor manages just 109 dpi. Even
a 27 -inch 4K monitor is only 163 dpi. So why does
this matter? It’s not about content, at least not in
the sense of video or gaming. Virtually no content
exists that fully leverages the capability of a high-
DPI PC monitor. You’d need beyond-4K resolutions,
which presents numerous problems. For starters,
the 8 K format remains nascent. Besides a few
pioneering broadcasts, such as the recent Tokyo
Olympic games, virtually no TV is made in 8 K.
Admittedly, a few movies are now shot in 6K and
above, but they are still typically mastered in 4K or
below. Special effects are rarely rendered in 6K or
8K, even when that format is used for the primary
digital video capture. As for gaming, 4 K presents
a big enough challenge for today’s GPUs, let alone
8K, which contains four times as
many pixels as 4 K, no fewer than
33 million pixels in fact. Compared
with 108 0p, 8 K has 16 times as
many pixels. That’s 16 times the
rendering load for a graphics card.
It’s a nightmare for any GPU.
So, the benefit of a high-DPI
display isn’t anything to do with
movies or games, at least not
anytime soon. Instead, it’s mostly
about fonts. Text is much crisper
and clearer on a high-DPI display.
You get more desktop real estate or
at least the option to create more
depending on your preferences.
That may not sound like a big
deal, but I’m surprised that
smartphone-savvy consumers are
willing to put up with the fuzzy text
on PC monitors.
Question is, what level of pixel
density is required to deliver a
true high-DPI experience? That’s a
subjective call, albeit one based on
empirical fact. It all hinges on the
pixel density required to prevent
the human eye from resolving
individual pixels. Beyond that
point, adding further pixels makes
no difference. That, in turn, hinges
on both pixel density and viewing
distances. I’d say 2 00dpi is a pretty
good rule of thumb. So, a 4 K 2 7-
inch monitor isn’t a million miles
away. But it isn’t quite there.
This brings us back to that 8 K
reader question. As ever in the PC
monitor market, trends in TVs will
drive prices down. It took a million
cheap TVs before 4K monitors went
mainstream. The same applies to
8K and thus affordable high-DPI
computing.
The prospects look good. The
TV industry is pressing on with 8K
panels, despite the lack of content.
It’s already possible to pick up an
8K TV for around $1,0 00 if you shop
hard. The cheapest 8 K monitors
still cost thousands more.
Right now, the smallest 8 K TV
is 5 5-inches, which somewhat
undermines the high-DPI remit.
But a 4 0-inch set would deliver
220dpi. These days, they’re pretty
much giving away 40-inch 4K TVs.
Here’s hoping, a few years down
the road, the same will be true of
40-inch 8 K sets and I can finally
have the fonts of my fantasies.
Previous-gen 8K TVs, such as the LG
Nano 95, now sell for around $1,000.
Six raw 4K panels for
breakfast, laced with extract
of x86... Jeremy Laird eats and
breathes PC technology
