Computer-monitor size

Hi everyone,

I don’t know if this question may be off topic for our Rhino forums. If it is, please tell me.

I would like to buy a larger monitor on which to do my Rhino work. I don’t really care about getting a higher resolution, because I am satisfied with my current monitor resolution, which is 1920 X 1080 on my 23-inch Dell S2316M. I would just like a bigger monitor so that I can see more items.

I am considering a Dell U2717D, with a 27-inch screen size and a resolution of 2560 X 1440.

So here is my question, please. I understand that the higher resolution will make the image clearer but also smaller, and I am concerned about the image’s becoming uncomfortably small. But will the larger screen size compensate, so that the image will be approximately the same size?

Incidentally, I anticipate that one of you nice people will suggest that I could just reduce the resolution. I find that not to be a useful strategy, however, because on websites you end up having to scroll left and right.

To conclude, therefore, I want to end up having the image be the same size, but having a bigger screen size so that I can see more images.

Thank you.


I used to have Two 24 fullhd screens one one machine and a 27” 2560x1440 on another (+a smaller 1600x900 on the side). To me the 27” was superior. Then upgraded to an ultrawide 34” 3440x1400 and love that even more.
It replaced those two 24”es.
I tried a 32” 4K and never liked how windows behaved on it, but that’s just me, I know other disagree :slight_smile:

I have two Dell 27" monitors running at 2560 x 1440, driven by a nVidia Quadro P2000. They are very comfortable to use.

With most systems, you should be able to scale up everything.
With Windows 10, you can go Setting -> System -> Display -> Scale and Layout; or Mac OS, you can go System Preferences -> Displays -> Resolution -> Scaled.
In both of them, you will be able to scale up everything based on your preferences to compensate the fact that you have a screen with higher resolution.

However, do notice that some software might not scale up properly. I have a 15" laptop with 4k screen with Windows 10. I don’t have the machine with me right now, but I remember that Rhino scales up properly when I set it to 200%, which makes it look just like how it would work on a 1k screen based on the proportion, but with all graphics, such as workspace and icons being HDed. However, I think Revit wasn’t running properly. But in that case, you could still force softwares to run in lower resolution.

I think it helps if you think of resolution and screen size a little more independently. Usually if you dig a bit deeper in the spec you can find pixel size or pixels/mm or inch. This is what determines how hard it is to see things. Keep in mind that Rhino allows you to set the line widths in pixels and Windows 10 has more control over text size than earlier versions. Once you have a good idea of what your favorite pixel size is, then you just get a monitor that is big enough to hold as many pixels as you want (or can afford, or have desk space for).

Another thing to keep in mind is that if you have something close to 20/20 vision (corrected or uncorrected) a monitor with significantly more pixels/mm than you’re used to will looked weirdly small for the first few days after which you will simply have a new standard and wonder how you got along for so long with such a coarse, clunky, archaic monitor. Especially after you get your line width and text size dialed in.

An upgrade from 23" to 27" monitor does not seem like a game changer since your goal is to see more and better details on-screen. I suggest to think about a 4K monitor or TV (“Sony” TV’s are really good, and the only brand with most models having no dangerous PWM a.k.a. blinking backlight) with 43" size, because they have relatively the same pixel density as a FullHD (1920 x 1080) monitor with 21"-22" diagonal. Windows 10’s scaling works best at 200%, so it’s very comfortable for people who previously used FullHD to switch to a bigger 4K screen with 200% scaling to keep the same proportion of the program icons, menus and websites. The moment you try a large 43" 4K TV or monitor you will never want to go back to a small monitor. Both “Dell” and “LG” have nice 43" 4K monitors.

PS: Make sure to look for an IPS panel, because some have TN or VA panels with very poor viewing angles and inaccurate colours that are further worsened by the former.

PS2: I strongly recommend to use a program called f.lux that will heavily reduce your eye strain, make the picture warmer according to your preference, and will automatically adjust the brightness and warmer tone depending on the time of the day.

Because that which I design has a rather lopsided aspect ratio, I prefer an ultrawide monitor. I currently have an AOC 29" 2560x1080 resolution monitor that works quite well. I am considering ramping up to a 34" 3440x1440 resolution ultrawide soon. The only bother I would consider with a monitor that size is the amount of real estate it would eat up. I have a large desk; 8’ x 3’ but communicating with a client on the other side might be a bit of a hassle. I currently angle my ultrawide 29 incher and have it sitting to my right which allows a good avenue of comunication with the one that truly counts!

1 Like

I use these since 3-4 years. two side by side. my favourite setup ever since.
the square seems strange at first, but makes a lot of sense after a while… (eg. photo editing portrait/landscape)

also you get nice long layer lists, and the resolution is not too high @1920x1920 which also helps the graphics card to save GPU Ram and can give higher frame rates compared to 4k


1 Like

I have a similar set up with side by side Flexscan S2133 monitors and find this sort of configuration effective as well.

Weird that nobody mentioned refresh rates or response times, if you have a monitor with 144 hertz and a 1ms response time, you’ll have an awesome interactive experience (if you have a high end video card). I bought a HP 22x 24in monitor 2 weeks ago and I am very happy, it feels very fluid, it’s not 4K (FHD) but I don’t feel that it would make such a difference for CAD stuff.

I have a 140 hz laptop, but turned off the high fps(sat it to 60fps) since I saw no reason for the gpu to drain more power than necessary. For cad I would say that neither latency nor fps (on the monitor) matters much, but reaching 60fps on the gpu is of course. IMO though!

You are right just for CAD something that does 60FPS and 5ms is good enough, I develop real time computer graphics apps and simulations (and sometimes I find time to game!) so for me the x22 was needed but prob overkill for the average Rhino user. Just wanted to put on the table that you should also see specs such as refresh rate and response times when buying.

1 Like

Hi everyone,

I want to thank all of you who responded to my question regarding computer monitor for Rhino.

I have studied your answers, and they have been very helpful to me.


I am learning Rhino at the moment and have a 32 inch LG UHD screen with 3840 x 2160 resolution. Everything is quite clear and the icons are very discernible as well as the text. I would highly reccomend doing a bit more looking around and to go with as high a resolution screen as you can. I love my UHD monitor and would never go back. I would also go with a larger screen if you can. The 32inch screen size is about as small as I would go at this resolution as you can make the text and icons smaller in proportion, the larger screen offsets that and you end up with more work space and finer detail.

1 Like

I’m perfectly fine with my 42,5" 4K Sony TV used as a monitor, because it has great IPS panel with wide viewing angles, natural colours and a matte finish. By the time I bought it it far surpassed any 43" monitor available on the market. It’s already 6 years old and still performs just like a brand new one! A few of my friends who listened to my recommendation also bought “Sony” IPS TV’s and use them as PC monitors, though their models are newer than mine. They would never go back to smaller PC monitors, me neither.