2014 - The year of 4k? 28" 4k $699+. 1440p 120Hz too!

[NTMBK]

I watched the video and it looked like you just replace the entire board. Not exactly something very hard. You just have to make sure everything is back in the right place. If you had to actually solder the chip on or something, I'd probably not recommend it, but this isn't really that difficult.

I am hoping a generic DIY kit comes out for other monitors.

You also have to snap part of the chassis off with pliers, and invalidate your warranty in the process. If I was in the market for G-Sync, I would go with a preinstalled model.

 

[smackababy]

You also have to snap part of the chassis off with pliers, and invalidate your warranty in the process. If I was in the market for G-Sync, I would go with a preinstalled model.

I didn't see a snap part, but I only made it like 80% of the way through the video. Of course this would invalidate your warranty though. Who thought otherwise?

The 30 Hz hasn't been confirmed 100%, afaik. The couple articles cite the same non-technical site as the source.

Yes. They also claim Dell has a 5ms response time (which is incredibly high for a TN panel). I wish we'd get some official specs.

 

[DigDog]

as stated before, the cost of adoption is too high right now; i can have my 770 pull 120FPS on most games, and get a lightboost BenQ for £250.

Or i can buy 3x R9 290 and run a $800 display that will look marginally better than my 1920x1080.

When did HDTV become "ugly"? I grew up with VCRs and horrible stripes, and simply don't feel this driving need to go 4k.

Besides, if i had money to burn, it still wouldn't be my choice of tech; with enough GPU horsepower, i'd rather have 3x 120Hz displays in portrait mode.

Viewing angles are also a moot point for PCs; unless you really care about your colleagues who look at your monitor from across the office, my guess is that you only notice when you *try* to; the rest of the time, you're looking at the screen dead-on.

Mind you, this is great tech for TVs, but on PC, i'll wait until it's redundant.

 

[Makaveli]

http://www.techspot.com/review/769-dell-ultrasharp-32-uhd/

 

[JDG1980]

The 30 Hz hasn't been confirmed 100%, afaik. The couple articles cite the same non-technical site as the source.

I was hoping that would be the case, but unfortunately, Legit Reviews has just posted what looks like an official spec sheet from Dell, and it does indeed specify 30 Hz at 4K. This is absolutely unacceptable, and I can't believe Dell is trying to pass off this garbage as a monitor.

Asus has announced a 28" 4K monitor, presumably using the same panel, for $799. The ad copy promises "native 60Hz operation". If this is accurate, the Asus monitor will be the one to go for. I hope the marketers aren't lying by omission here (I suppose they could claim they do support 60 Hz, just not at 4K, but I would consider that a lie, because 4K is the only reason anyone cares about it in the first place.)

 

[smackababy]

I was hoping that would be the case, but unfortunately, Legit Reviews has just posted what looks like an official spec sheet from Dell, and it does indeed specify 30 Hz at 4K. This is absolutely unacceptable, and I can't believe Dell is trying to pass off this garbage as a monitor.

Asus has announced a 28" 4K monitor, presumably using the same panel, for $799. The ad copy promises "native 60Hz operation". If this is accurate, the Asus monitor will be the one to go for. I hope the marketers aren't lying by omission here (I suppose they could claim they do support 60 Hz, just not at 4K, but I would consider that a lie, because 4K is the only reason anyone cares about it in the first place.)

The legit reviews doesn't give a source on the specs (or even mentions anything other than "here are the full specs", despite them not being officially announced...). I am not saying they are wrong, but I want to hear it from Dell. And 5ms is in the realm of IPS. I can't believe they are using TN and only getting 5ms. Their panel can't be the same one used in the Asus.

 

[24601]

The legit reviews doesn't give a source on the specs (or even mentions anything other than "here are the full specs", despite them not being officially announced...). I am not saying they are wrong, but I want to hear it from Dell. And 5ms is in the realm of IPS. I can't believe they are using TN and only getting 5ms. Their panel can't be the same one used in the Asus.

5ms is the value of not overdriven TN. IPS doesn't go below 6ms when overdriven.

 

[smackababy]

5ms is the value of not overdriven TN. IPS doesn't go below 6ms when overdriven.

All the 21:9 monitors are advertised as 5ms and are IPS. So, unless they are lying...

 

[24601]

All the 21:9 monitors are advertised as 5ms and are IPS. So, unless they are lying...

Only eIPS goes below 6ms, and eIPS is the worst of all worlds, and needs to die in a fire.

 

[Makaveli]

Only eIPS goes below 6ms, and eIPS is the worst of all worlds, and needs to die in a fire.

while i'm not an eIPS fan its still better than TN.

 

[smackababy]

Only eIPS goes below 6ms, and eIPS is the worst of all worlds, and needs to die in a fire.

Some of them are AH-IPS.

 

[24601]

Some of them are AH-IPS.

e-IPS is a subcategory of AH-IPS.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/content/panel_technologies_content.htm#ah-ips

 

[MysteriousRJC]

While not 4K, the newly announced ASUS PG278Q with a 2560x1440 resolution, 120 Hz refresh rate, 1 ms response time and G-SYNC looks awesome! 4K is simply too difficult to drive at the moment although I still want it .

I have a really dumb question. If you have a radeon card what does it mean in terms of using a monitor that is tagged As g-sync?

 

[24601]

I have a really dumb question. If you have a radeon card what does it mean in terms of using a monitor that is tagged As g-sync?

At the moment, you don't get G-Sync, everything else works fine.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Maybe later on this will all sort itself out and become more affordable for us.

 

[MysteriousRJC]

At the moment, you don't get G-Sync, everything else works fine.

Oh, okay. So the monitor would just perform as well as it specs are intended to, it's just you wouldn't get the claimed benefits of g-sync. But a high-end radeon card would still perform very well with it. Thanks

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

http://www.techspot.com/review/769-dell-ultrasharp-32-uhd/

That review really shows just how bleeding edge 4K really is.

 

[Makaveli]

That review really shows just how bleeding edge 4K really is.

Yup which is why I don't understand why so many people are getting hard ons for it in this forum.

Its too new too expensive and comes with a whole bunch of first gen issues.

And some of the members have been doing this forever why do you want to put yourself through it?

 

[Anubis]

TBH i love a 4k monitor for work but do not want one for gaming, id rather not have to tripple my gfx card budget to power the damn thing, running 1440p is already annoying enough

 

[Makaveli]

TBH i love a 4k monitor for work but do not want one for gaming, id rather not have to tripple my gfx card budget to power the damn thing, running 1440p is already annoying enough

That is one of the reasons i've stayed with a 1200p screen to keep my GPU budget manageable.

When there is a single gpu that can push 1440p or 1600p with most settings on and I don't have to play at medium is when I will upgrade.

 

[Midwayman]

That is one of the reasons i've stayed with a 1200p screen to keep my GPU budget manageable.

When there is a single gpu that can push 1440p or 1600p with most settings on and I don't have to play at medium is when I will upgrade.

That's the deal killer for me. GPUs are barely upto 1440p. However since 4k is 4x 1080p it will scale perfectly. I'd be fine running games at 1080p so long as we get monitors that support 120hz +

 

[Gunbuster]

However since 4k is 4x 1080p it will scale perfectly. I'd be fine running games at 1080p so long as we get monitors that support 120hz +

This is the problem, none of the companies can seem to figure this out.

The TV's have no clue about scaling, you would think that would be like second on the list for these Chinese panels.


1: make it work at 4K 30hz (not their fault HDMI 2.0 is MIA) Bonus points for 60Hz via displayport MST
2: make sure it steps down to 1080p 120hz perfectly.
3: make it cheap.
4: Stab the dick reviewers at cnet with their incessant "you cant see the difference" "what about content?" commentary.

Solid gold plan for a successful 4k display.

 

[Mondozei]

Even if we got a really solid 4K panel with great calibration for a super low price and decent 60 hz support, we're still stuck with the fact that the vast majority of software doesn't support it at all and games are horrible to play unless you can splash a fortune on 4x 290(X)/780(Ti) cards.

Sweclockers did a thorough review of Dell's 24" 4K panel(IPS) and it has 60 hz. So it ought to be decent, right? Well, they found a bunch of issues with downscalding to 1080p(for gaming sessions) as well as calibration stuff gone awry even when finetuned(although they said it wasn't horrible, merely middling).

4K isn't quite ready for mainstream just yet but I think the panels we'll see next year will prove enough.

Software should catch up by then and the childhood diseases should be dealt with. As long as downscaling will work good for gaming, because doing max settings on the latest games at 1080p will still make most of the best single GPU's suffer below 60 fps today and likely tomorrow too, then we'll be set. Of course, I'm talking about the mainstream. People who won't consider 4K monitors unless they drop below 500 dollars and who can't afford quad-GPUs because they are poor and/or have no inherent need to be at the bleeding edge(for reasons Techreport and SweClockers made abudantly clear).

 

[Midwayman]

Even if we got a really solid 4K panel with great calibration for a super low price and decent 60 hz support, we're still stuck with the fact that the vast majority of software doesn't support it at all and games are horrible to play unless you can splash a fortune on 4x 290(X)/780(Ti) cards.

Who cares about games at 4k? That's not a realistic use for years. All my normal 2d apps and desktop are plenty of reason to want a 4k monitor. I think 30-32" 4k would be perfect for day to day use.

 

[wand3r3r]

Who cares about games at 4k? That's not a realistic use for years. All my normal 2d apps and desktop are plenty of reason to want a 4k monitor. I think 30-32" 4k would be perfect for day to day use.

I care about both, but I agree the 2D world is enough reason to want more screen estate. Sure if you just browse the web and don't do much else it's a bit early.