Yeah, I run my 4k monitor in 2k for scaling purposes. Menus work better, old games don’t fuss as much due to incompatible resolutions, etc… There’s also no appreciable reason to use 4k on an monitor-sized screen unless your face is three inches away from it.
It’s not - unfortunately, even professionals often use it wrong. the “K” refers to columns of pixels, in thousands.
2K was never used as a term for a consumer resolution, it only existed as DCI 2K really.
4K in the original form of DCI 4K is 4096x2160. But consumer screens are usually 16:9, so in consumer 4K we keep the 2160, but divide it by 9 and multiply by 16 to get 3840.
I just avoid gtk. And avoided scaling since I don’t buy monitors with to high resolution for my eyes.
I use scaling to make things smaller on my laptop screen. It’s invariably chrome and electron apps that can’t do scaling. It’s infuriating.
Yeah, I run my 4k monitor in 2k for scaling purposes. Menus work better, old games don’t fuss as much due to incompatible resolutions, etc… There’s also no appreciable reason to use 4k on an monitor-sized screen unless your face is three inches away from it.
Obligatory mention that 2k is roughly 1080p (2048x1080) and what you probably mean is QHD/WQHD but you can just use 1440p for clarity
TIL 2k is not synonymous with QHD
It’s not - unfortunately, even professionals often use it wrong. the “K” refers to columns of pixels, in thousands.
2K was never used as a term for a consumer resolution, it only existed as DCI 2K really.
4K in the original form of DCI 4K is 4096x2160. But consumer screens are usually 16:9, so in consumer 4K we keep the 2160, but divide it by 9 and multiply by 16 to get 3840.
Blame Google.