There is a mistake in your table with monitor sizes:
49" 1440p 5120 1440 47" 13.2" 109
Should be:
49" 1440p 2560 1440 47" 13.2" 60
There is a mistake in your table with monitor sizes: 49" 1440p 5120 1440 47" 13.2" 109 Should be: 49" 1440p 2560 1440 47" 13.2" 60
Hello,
There are 49-inch monitors with a 5120x1440 resolution, which have a pixel density of 109. Theyโre still considered 1440p (because of the vertical resolution), and there arenโt any 2560x1440 49-inch monitors available.
32" 1440p 2560 1440 27.9" 15.7" ppi: 93
34" 1440p 2560 1440 31.5" 13.2" ppi: 110
Before I do the mathโฆ This article is saying that a particular monitor with a greater diagonal has a smaller area when compared to a particular monitor with a shorter diagonal. Iโm trying to think if itโs mathematically possible, and I think the answer could be yes. So 32" 16:9 (438.03 inches squared) is greater in area than a 34" 21:9 (415.8 inches squared). The later is not quite 21:9. So hard to do this on a phone. I gotta put a pin in this for later. If someone can help me understandโฆ