Big as in resolution or physical size?

Both pretty much but more the physical size

The pixel pitch determines how crisp the display, is.


My Dell Ultrasharp 2560 x 1600 has a pixel pitch of 0.2505mm sized pixels. The 4K Dell monitor, linked above, has a much better pixel pitch... 0.182mm sized pixels....aka sharper picture.



/e They also both have 1.07 Billion colors, rather than the 16.7 million of the $300 to $600 range monitors, of any resolution. The DELL win run at 60 Hz using the display port cable. The ASUS one will only hit 30HZ...60 Hz if you use TWO HDMI cables.

This post was edited by Ghot on Aug 17 2014 12:31am

pixel pitch is just a fancy way of saying the resolution in ratio to the size.

NO, it's a the physical SIZE of each pixel...the smaller the size, the crisper the display.


/e Pixel pitch is also almost directly related to price as well. The smaller the pixel pitch, the higher the price

This post was edited by Ghot on Aug 17 2014 12:41am

That's if you even have a graphics card that supports 10bit color.

I realize that.


If I recall Acuity has the hardware for that.


/e I know the Titan can run a 2560 x 1600, and a Dell 4K 24" monitor at the same time , no problem.

This post was edited by Ghot on Aug 17 2014 12:45am

Just saying, I've seen you 10bit color as a selling point a lot. But unless you have a supported gpu it wont work. And from what i've read you dont really notice that big of a difference.

Not trying to start an argument, Just trying to point out a few things

fuck im going to bed im so tired

Ddint catch any catfish tonight QQ

Not arguing either. Some facts that may pertain....'

1. 1 outta every 4 men is at least partially color blind.
2. Most women can see 100's more shades of red than men can.
3. If you happen to be in the grfx industry...you want 1.07 billion colors.

Well ofc gfx work you need 10bit, Was talking about more everyday joe