No the opposite- all Cubase pages are too big and have to be scaled down.
Windows recommended scale is 300% so scaled down to 200% makes windows pages workable.
In Cubase I need to reduce HiDPI by a further 25%.
I hope this explaination is clearer…?
thanks, joe
I use 0% scaling. That’s what no scaling means and not the windows recommended. I’ve no idea how windows comes to the conclusion of 300%.
It’s kind of odd how it determines that. We use Surfaces at work, and it even tries to scale the Surface’s built in display by default. I have a couple of ViewSonic (where I work) 2K displays connected to it, and the default it wants to set scaling too is like 1080p its irritating. I’m using 2K displays because I want 2K resolution, otherwise I would’ve asked for 1080p ones.
At home on my Mac I have to use it. I have a 28" 4K Samsung and at 28" 4K is painful to try to read. Looks neat but I have to sit about 2 inches away from it to read the Mac’s desktop icons… Some of the icons and text in Cubase gets REALLY hard to use at that size haha. If I had a 43" (or even a 32") that thing would stay at its native resolution 24/7.
Just to make sure: What Cubase version do you have?
On a Windows 11 PC, with Cubase 12 and a 4K High DPI monitor, I set the preferences like this:
It’s based on:
Generally, Windows wants your display to look similar to what a 1080p display looks like at 100% scaling on a 24" display, or thereabout. I don’t disagree with this. Anything less, and even my good eyes are questioning the decision.
This is also why even some 1080p Laptops come scaled to 125% or 150% by default (14" or 15.6"). At those screen sizes, things may not be ergonomic for many users at 100% scale.
This means that it will suggest higher scaling if you have high resolution at smaller screen sizes, because even though the screen is HiDPI, it simply isn’t ergonomic to run it at minimal scaling. No scaling on a 27" QHD display is borderline unusable for me, personally. I’d have to scale it up to about 125 or so. UHD on a 27-28" display isn’t usable for anyone. It has to be scaled up significantly. I think when I checked, 175% was the lowest I could go before the display became unusable, and my vision is quite good.
This is also why no Apple Retina Laptops run at native resolution. They ALL run scaled up - even the “More Space” preset is scaled. Apple doesn’t even give you the choice. If you ran them at native resolution, you wouldn’t be able to see anything, and it would be the same as running a 27-28" UHD display at native scaling. Hook up a 24.5" FHD panel to a MBP and it won’t allow you to scale the display in either direction, because the Display Size-to-Raster ratio is already in balance.
The benefit of those HiDPI displays is not only the resolution, but also in the DPI (less pixelation, etc.), so the user has to find a “balance” that works for them - but there are extremes that simply make no sense regardless (to the point that it [literally] doesn’t make sense to allow you the choice to use them).
If Windows is suggesting 300% scaling, then I’d assume the display in question was in the 27-28" range… that seems fine. I’d probably go down to 200-225% as well, but … younger eyes, and all. In ten years, maybe not.
Many people opt for larger displays. I prefer smaller displays because I really don’t have like having to pan physically to see my entire display (gaming habits/preferences).
Hi Trensharo
Many thanks for your carefully detailed explanation. You clearly know your way around this topic!
I’m not sure why this topic can raise so much debate. There have been a lot of helpful suggestions for someone like me journeying over the decades from Atari (midi only) tiny screens to Cubase to Pro 12 with 4 K.
Your comments clarify a lot of the debate points: my 43” screen is 4 feet away to allow me work space for (music) keyboard and amp modellers, mic preamps etc. I need to choose scaling that works for my eyesight.
My current settings are working For Me though they may lose some screen ‘real estate’…
Thank again to you and all contributors,
joe
It’s different for us all then. The ratios given make no sense to what I want to see. I were reading glasses and they are fantastic for a 32” screen at zero scaling. It means I get a lot more on screen which is exactly what I want.
Reading glasses that magnify what you’re looking at? Well, that’s kind of a different scenario. If I wear reading glasses, I will barely be able to see the display. They are for vision correction, not vision enhancement 
What you experience is a small beneficial side effect of them, but people who don’t need them often cannot see well if they try to wear them.
UHD is 400% the pixels of FHD, so even at 200% Scale Factor you’re still getting a ton more room. At 300%, you’re still around what you’d get on a QHD display @ 100% Scale Factor, just sharper.
Scaling a UHD to 125-160% is going to give you a massive amount of extra screen real estate over a FHD or QHD display at the same display size.
The alternative is to stop at QHD but get an UWQHD display. IPS UWQHD displays are pretty cheap, these days. I saw a decent IPS Samsung model for like… $200 or so at the store some weeks back. That will give you the equivalent of about 2 FHD displays in horizontal pixels, and a decent chunk of extra room in vertical pixels.
Whats the question again? 
I must emphasize that for me, things are the way they are because single large video displays add too much sonic compromise if I value a sweet spot with an equilateral triangle.
Therefore the attachment does not very well document how much my 2 LG-34-inch ultra-wides are aimed upwards and slightly inwards from just above knee height. The divider between the 2 main displays doesn’t bother me much…or maybe I have just gotten used to it. This pic really distorts reality. The Focal monitors are even pointed slightly downwards aiming directly toward my head. The 3rd ultra-wide to the right is an LG 28, and the small display is just a basic beater, for meters and usually the history window.
My point is that I’m very happy without re-sizing, scaling, resolution, too small/too big GUIs and don’t worry about HiDPI. Using Cubase and Wavelab, it just works well.
The output is nothing special, a NVIDA GTX 1070Ti.
If you don’t care about legibility, then nothing being discussed is going to matter
My glasses are actual computer screen reading glasses which I got through work and I can see all the fine detail. I am actually long sighted through age but it really does work for me.
I have been using a 43-inch LG 4k monitor @ 60Hz as my only screen for years. I am sitting about a meter from the screen.
If I am really tired I will switch to a lower resolution for bigger text, but I hardly need to.
Works well for everything.
