I asked claud: I used 4k monitor in 3008 x1692 resolution pixel is how processing ?
Claude 3.7's Response Below:
Let me explain what happens when you specify non-standard resolutions like 3008×1692 on a 4K monitor.
Processing Method
Scaling processing occurs:
- When displaying 3008×1692 on a 4K monitor (3840×2160)
- Graphics card or monitor performs upscaling
Specific Processing
-
Non-integer scaling
- Horizontal: 3840 ÷ 3008 ≈ 1.28x
- Vertical: 2160 ÷ 1692 ≈ 1.28x
-
Interpolation processing
Since physical and logical pixels don't correspond 1:1:- Algorithms like bilinear or bicubic interpolation calculate intermediate values
- One logical pixel spans multiple physical pixels
Results
Image quality impact:
- Slight blurriness may occur
- Moiré patterns can develop
- Text edges may become soft
Processing load:
- Real-time interpolation processing by GPU
- Slightly increased processing load compared to native resolution
Better Alternatives
If you want to adjust screen size:
- 1920×1080 (2x scaling): Perfect integer multiple, highest quality
- 2560×1440 (1.5x scaling): Relatively clean display
- OS scaling features: Keep 4K resolution, adjust only UI element sizes
For text-heavy work, integer scaling provides eye-friendly, sharp display.
About 175% Resolution Scaling
You're absolutely right! Let me calculate:
1.75x Scaling Calculation
Dividing 4K resolution (3840×2160) by 1.75:
- Horizontal: 3840 ÷ 1.75 = 2194 pixels
- Vertical: 2160 ÷ 1.75 = 1234 pixels
This creates 2194×1234 logical resolution.
Actual Problems
Non-integer scaling issues:
- 1.75x is non-integer scaling
- One logical pixel corresponds to 1.75 physical pixels
- Requires sub-pixel interpolation
Image quality impact:
- Text becomes slightly blurry
- Fine lines may appear unclear
- Color fringing possible
Better Alternatives
How about 1.5x scaling:
- 3840 ÷ 1.5 = 2560×1440
- More common and optimized
- Good display in many applications
Or on Windows:
- Choose 175% in system scaling settings
- OS processes using optimized methods
- More stable than custom resolution settings
It's practical to choose from standard system scaling like 125%, 150%, 175%, 200% while checking size preferences.
Why Apple Offers 1.6x Scaling
No, this is Apple's strategic compromise point.
Apple's Approach
Balance between perfectionism vs practicality:
- Ideal: 2x scaling (perfect image quality)
- Reality: Need balance with screen size
- Compromise: 1.6x scaling (3200×1800)
Calculation:
5120×2880 (5K) ÷ 1.6 = 3200×1800
It's 1.6x, not 1.75x
Why Apple Limits Options
-
Quality control
- Prevent image degradation from unlimited resolution choices
- Avoid users feeling "Mac is blurry"
-
Developer consideration
- Limited resolutions are easier to optimize
- Predictable UI element display
-
System-wide consistency
- Unified display quality across all apps
- Matches macOS design philosophy
This isn't just compromise—it's "good compromise":
- Not as perfect as 2x scaling
- But practical and sufficiently high quality
- Optimal choice for most users
Apple's philosophy: "Don't let users make bad choices." Allowing 1.75x or arbitrary resolutions could increase user dissatisfaction with image quality, so they deliberately limit choices.
The result provides guaranteed quality with usability.
Conclusion
Apple's GPU is designed to handle 1.6x scaling effectively, so image quality degradation when using a 31.5-inch monitor at 3200×1800 resolution is minimized. However, since it's not a clear multiple of display pixels like Retina's 2x, it doesn't use the method of painting four pixels with the same pixel. Instead, pixels share adjacent pixels during scaling. This means pixels are essentially creating virtual pixels through GPU processing to fill gaps. This is the fundamental difference between 4K monitors and Retina displays.
