Number of pixels does not define resolution and I hate that the industry uses resolution wrong. For example, if you have a two 4K screens and one is 100" and the other is 55" which screen has the better resolution? The definition of resolution is "a measure of sharpness of an image or the fineness can produce....as expressed by total number or density of pixels. So 4K does not define sharpness or density, it's just number of pixels. In my example, the 55" screen would have a much higher pixel density and therefore much higher resolution than the 100" screen. Resolution should be pixels per inch or PPI. Regardless of screen size you know what that image will look like on the screen.

I think you don't know "DPI".

3440x1440 best compromise

1680x1050 is not much different than 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. The advantages of owning a 1920x1080p and or 1920x1200p is that many of those monitors can be upscaled to 2k and 4k resolution. You will notice a quality difference upscaling games at that resolution. However if played natively it will be a small improvement from 1680x1050. 1050 is actually gorgeous on monitors that only support that resolution from my experience with my 1050 monitor. I own 1050, 1080p, 1200p, and 4k monitors at my house. The 4k easily wins but there's not a huge difference between 1050, 1080p, and 1200p unless you are upscaling. If you are upscaling the 1080p and 1200p will beat the 1050 and by a lot. In my personal opinion upscaling is very beautiful looking.

1080 is 2k because its 1/4 that of 4k.

And secondly, even going by your way, which is PLAIN WRONG, 1/4 of 4K is 1K, not 2K.
By your way, 1/2 of 4K is 2K.
So, even by your misguided way, 1080p is 1K, not 2K.
1080p = 1K (EVEN BY YOUR WAY)

Now, let us take a look at the WORLDS's way, shall we?
1280p x 720p = HD
1600p x 900p = HD (Seen mostly on older laptops)
1920p x 1080p = (FHD or Full HD)
2160p x 1440p = 2K (QHD or Quad HD)
2560p x 1440p = 2.5K (WQHD or Wide Quad HD)
3840p x 2160p = 4K (UHD or Ultra HD)
4096p x 2160p = 4K (WUHD or Wide Ultra HD)
7680p x 4320p = 8K (UHD or Ultra HD)

A few more pointers:
1. HD stands for High Definition.
2. There are many more resolutions, but these are the ones most commonly seen.
3. Anything below 1080p is not considered High Definition or HD anymore as technology has progressed. So, 720p is technically HD, but not practically. Anything below 720p is both NOT HD and is obsolete.
4.1080p is not obsolete yet, but many don't consider it to be Full HD nowadays. However, it definitely qualifies to be HD, and technically is FHD.
5. 2560p x 1440p or WQHD, not so long ago, was not very widespread. However, it is rapidly becoming very popular, as people start buying widescreen monitors in lieu of their benefits. Still, 2160p x 1440p or QHD is more popular. Both have the same number of vertical pixels, it the number of horizontal pixels that varies. The case of UHD and WUHD is similar.
6. Everything above 3840p x 2160p or 4K is called UHD or Ultra High Definition.

That is NOT how it works, dude!
4K is called 4K NOT because it has 4x more pixels than 1080, but because it has around 4000 (4K) horizontal pixels (3840, to be exact), get it?
2K (QHD) does not have 2x more pixels than 1080, it is called 2K as it has around 2000 (2K) horizontal pixels (2160, to be exact).
8K (UHD, everything above 4K is called UHD, standing for Ultra High Definition) does NOT have 8x more pixels than 1080, it is called 8K as it has around 8000 (8K) horizontal pixels (7680, to be exact).
The 'K' stands for '1000' or 'One-Thousand', just like 'M' stands for '1.000.000' or 'Million'.
Understood?

Hi! My laptop screen resolution is 1080p . But when I am watching video songs on YouTube it gives me the option of 2560x1440 and 4k options also . I didn't understand that, how YouTube and Netflix give me 4k option.

The options on YouTube and Netflix are determined by the quality available from the videos. They are not determined by the resolution of your monitor. If you set the videos to 1440p or 4K, you will be streaming the larger-resolution video size (larger download size / bitrate), but at fullscreen you will still only be seeing 1080p.

Hi! Thanks for the article! I just looking for new monitor, and can't decide what to choose. I'm choosing between Samsung LC32JG52QQUXEN and ASUS VP28UQG (i use this comparation - /www.bestadvisers.co.uk/comp... ). The first one is 32" with 2560x1440, and the second one is 28" with 3840x2160 (and it's cheaper). But the first one looks really better. Any suggestions?

1440p is sort of the 'sweet spot' right now for a combination of high frame rates and high resolution, so if you're leaning that direction, you can probably safely make that choice. That said, what resolution and refresh rate of monitor to get should be heavily determined by what you'll be doing with the PC and what hardware is in it, so if you can provide details on those two topics then we can advise further.

according to my calculations, 4k uhd is twice the size of 1080, not 4 times.

its 4x.
2x 2. vertical and horizontal.

If you mean by physical dimensions, then yes, many 4K monitors are only about twice the size of 1080p monitors. But by resolution, 4K is over 4 times the size of 1080p:

4K = 4,096 x 2,160 = 8,847,360 pixels

1080p = 1,920 x 1,080 = 2,073,600 pixels

8,847,360 / 2,073,600 = 4.27

4096p x 2160 is NOT the official definition of 4K, though it is 4K.
Official definition of 4K is 3840p x 2160p, which means that 1920p x 1080p (FHD) has been exactly doubled both vertically and horizontally.
So, 4K UhD (3840p x 2160p) has EXACTLY 4 times more pixels than FHD (1920p x 1080p).

Modern CPUs have the GPU built in for HD630 resolution. Where do these processors (like the i3 8100) fit in relative to screen resolution? Are the AMD processors much better?

Recent low-tier AMD chips (specifically, the R3 2200G and the R5 2400G) have the best integrated GPUs on the market, and may be suitable for 1080p gaming in some situations. Intel iGPUs are typically only suitable for gaming on laptops with monitor resolutions below 1080p. For a specific ranking of these iGPUs alongside discrete GPU options, take a look at where they are listed in our graphics card comparison chart.

I'm running a 2009 Mac Pro tower (4,1 flashed to 5,1) with the NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512 MB graphics card and MacOS 10.13.6 High Sierra. It has dual 1080p displays.
If I set graphics to Full Screen, WOT runs nicely on one screen but the other is blacked out, so I need to run in Windowed mode. That way I can see Teamspeak on the other display and know who to teamkill :-) Or to learn the voices in my head/in the headphones.

I have read that the Radeon RX 560 will run nicely in the Mac and is Metal capable so it can run MacOS 10.14 Mojave. See Macvidcards.com
The RX 560 costs about $150US as of mid Oct 2018.

A very helpful article from the Logical Increments team. The effort you put on this is very informative.

Thanks! We're glad you like it.

nice article, logical increments!
tooK somE digging to find it though - maYBe add a tab fOr ARticles next to 'blog' on the home DiSplay, perhaps?

Thanks for the feedback! We'll consider it for certain.