30" 2560x1600 Korean IPS or 27" 1080 120hz TN?

[Dice144]

1600p is harder than 10% FPS on the GPU. There is 10% or so more pixels but this doesnt scale with FPS.

.

Alot more than 10% more pixels

1920 x1080=2,073,600
2560x1600=4,096,000
So double the pixels!

Use a 2560x1440 27". Also game on my 50" plasma when I want to sit on my sofa. Sitting halfway across the room but looking at a 50" screen is great for games like AC3. However for starcraft etc give me the higher res anyday of the week.

 

[Fx1]

Alot more than 10% more pixels

1920 x1080=2,073,600
2560x1600=4,096,000
So double the pixels!

Use a 2560x1440 27". Also game on my 50" plasma when I want to sit on my sofa. Sitting halfway across the room but looking at a 50" screen is great for games like AC3. However for starcraft etc give me the higher res anyday of the week.

10% between 1440p and 1600p

 

[cmdrdredd]

whats laughable about a korean 30inch IPS?

Im fairly sure those korean OEM vendors are supplying samsung and LG with pannels, and selling off extra panels which those vendors arent buying.

Its a repeat of nike all over again.

Whats the difference between a korean nike and american nike? the shoe size printed on it... that was IT.

Actually the Korean brands like Yamakasi etc are getting their panels from LG mostly. They are panels that would have been going to Dell, Apple or other big OEMs. There are typically some flaws with them. Be it bright or stuck pixels or some irregular color etc. Most of them are pretty good considering the cost difference between the APple or Dell display and a Yamakasi. However, you don't have much of a warranty with them and do take a chance on getting a dead or bad one. Generally Dell and Apple will accept only certain grades of panels like A+ or A but won't accept A- or lower which is what you get when you buy a Korean monitor off ebay. This is the case with the 27" models and I expect the 30" ones appearing around are similar.

 

[Grooveriding]

IPS.. but get a Dell. TN is already horrible enough, I don't even want to imagine how bad the PPI on a 27" 1080p monitor would further that horrible nature...

 

[blackened23]

IPS.. but get a Dell. TN is already horrible enough, I don't even want to imagine how bad the PPI on a 27" 1080p monitor would further that horrible nature...

Normally I would advocate the same thing because Dell's support is nothing short of outstanding, however he's in Korea where the price disparity is very large. I believe he said the 30 incher korean model is 400$ in his neck of the woods, which would make it slightly more compelling.

There's no way I would purchase one in the states, though. Most of the korean 30 inchers here sell for around 800-850$ USD which makes it very unattractive compared to other options.

 

[slayernine]

MINE!!

First post after 7 years. I'm only 4 years away from the highest!

I bet there are older ones yet hiding in the shadows.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Normally I would advocate the same thing because Dell's support is nothing short of outstanding, however he's in Korea where the price disparity is very large. I believe he said the 30 incher korean model is 400$ in his neck of the woods, which would make it slightly more compelling.

There's no way I would purchase one in the states, though. Most of the korean 30 inchers here sell for around 800-850$ USD which makes it very unattractive compared to other options.

I don't see them with the regularity of the 27" models especially on ebay. Two current auctions are in the mid $500 range and I do expect them to sail north of $800.

 

[blastingcap]

Actually the Korean brands like Yamakasi etc are getting their panels from LG mostly. They are panels that would have been going to Dell, Apple or other big OEMs. There are typically some flaws with them. Be it bright or stuck pixels or some irregular color etc. Most of them are pretty good considering the cost difference between the APple or Dell display and a Yamakasi. However, you don't have much of a warranty with them and do take a chance on getting a dead or bad one. Generally Dell and Apple will accept only certain grades of panels like A+ or A but won't accept A- or lower which is what you get when you buy a Korean monitor off ebay. This is the case with the 27" models and I expect the 30" ones appearing around are similar.

This is my understanding as well. I was fine with the 27 IPS I got but my gf didn't like it so I sold it. It came with one dead pixel way over to one side, and the backlight bleed wasn't as horrible as I've seen some others ones have, but some people aren't as lucky. All told, I am not interested in buying these "halfies" anymore because we're on the verge of 4K screens anyway, and I would rather not have scaling problems with 2560x1440 resolutions. 1080p movies scale well to 4K, not so well to these oddball resolutions like 2560xwhatever.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I don't believe we are on the verge of 4k yet. 1080p isn't even standard for broadcast signals yet. I haven't heard much about it being adopted for PC monitors yet either. Time will tell.

Also 2560x1440 is 16:9 just like 1920x1080 so it scales perfectly in my experience.

 

[Lee Saxon]

For me, the scaling artifacts with 1600p panels (whose vision is good enough run those things at native resolution? not me!! I need my icons more than 3mm wide) are worse than the shitty color of the TN panels and TVs. YMMV.

1080p movies scale well to 4K, not so well to these oddball resolutions like 2560xwhatever.

If by "scales well" you mean "fits and is the same shape." It looks like complete garbage, though. Hell, scaling 720p to 1080p looks like garbage. Everyone who shot / is shooting in the shitty inferior-to-film-because-technology-wasn't-ready stopgap 1080p format is screwed. Productions which stuck with 35mm film until 4K was available are the only ones whose films will look any good in five years.

 

[cmdrdredd]

For me, the scaling artifacts with 1600p panels (whose vision is good enough run those things at native resolution? not me!! I need my icons more than 3mm wide) are worse than the shitty color of the TN panels and TVs. YMMV.



If by "scales well" you mean "fits and is the same shape." It looks like complete garbage, though. Hell, scaling 720p to 1080p looks like garbage. Everyone who shot / is shooting in the shitty inferior-to-film-because-technology-wasn't-ready stopgap 1080p format is screwed. Productions which stuck with 35mm film until 4K was available are the only ones whose films will look any good in five years.

If you're not running a 2560x1440/1600 monitor at native resolution you're using it wrong.

 

[nightspydk]

Forgive me for saying, but are we back at response rates. Lets just game on a TN.

 

[KingFatty]

For me, the scaling artifacts with 1600p panels (whose vision is good enough run those things at native resolution? not me!! I need my icons more than 3mm wide) are worse than the shitty color of the TN panels and TVs. YMMV.



If by "scales well" you mean "fits and is the same shape." It looks like complete garbage, though. Hell, scaling 720p to 1080p looks like garbage. Everyone who shot / is shooting in the shitty inferior-to-film-because-technology-wasn't-ready stopgap 1080p format is screwed. Productions which stuck with 35mm film until 4K was available are the only ones whose films will look any good in five years.

I thought one benefit of 4K is that you are just doubling the height and width of 1080p? So you just use 4 pixels of the 4K display to show one pixel of the 1080p signal?

I know that has got to approach perfection from a scaling point of view, because there are no "fractions" of a pixel?

so, unlike other fractional scaling, the 4K scaling perfectly represents the original, just uses multiple pixels to blow it up bigger.

 

[blastingcap]

I thought one benefit of 4K is that you are just doubling the height and width of 1080p? So you just use 4 pixels of the 4K display to show one pixel of the 1080p signal?

I know that has got to approach perfection from a scaling point of view, because there are no "fractions" of a pixel?

so, unlike other fractional scaling, the 4K scaling perfectly represents the original, just uses multiple pixels to blow it up bigger.

Yup, well said, this the scaling I was referring to. Exact multiples.

 

[Lee Saxon]

If you're not running a 2560x1440/1600 monitor at native resolution you're using it wrong.

As I said, whose vision is good enough for that? Even running a 30" at 1920x1200 I have trouble seeing the text and icons in some programs.

 

[Lee Saxon]

I thought one benefit of 4K is that you are just doubling the height and width of 1080p? So you just use 4 pixels of the 4K display to show one pixel of the 1080p signal?

I know that has got to approach perfection from a scaling point of view, because there are no "fractions" of a pixel?

so, unlike other fractional scaling, the 4K scaling perfectly represents the original, just uses multiple pixels to blow it up bigger.

There's no question that 2:1 scaling is far better than some oddball resampled uneven amount (I'm looking at you, Nexus 10 [beautiful 326ppi panel ruined by nondefeatable odd scaling]).

But you can only get away with that below a certain size, after which the insufficient amount of detail becomes painfully visible.

Look at the image I've attached. The left is the original 600x800 crop, the right is what it would look like recorded at 300x400 and then doubled in size. The difference would be invisible on a smartphone screen, but which would you want to have if you were going to be displaying on a screen 10x that size, to say nothing of projecting on a 40' movie screen?

http://www.leesaxon.com/forums/Anandtech-Upsampling.jpg

 

[blastingcap]

There's no question that 2:1 scaling is far better than some oddball resampled uneven amount (I'm looking at you, Nexus 10 [beautiful 326ppi panel ruined by nondefeatable odd scaling]).

But you can only get away with that below a certain size, after which the insufficient amount of detail becomes painfully visible.

Look at the image I've attached. The left is the original 600x800 crop, the right is what it would look like recorded at 300x400 and then doubled in size. The difference would be invisible on a smartphone screen, but which would you want to have if you were going to be displaying on a screen 10x that size, to say nothing of projecting on a 40' movie screen?

http://www.leesaxon.com/forums/Anandtech-Upsampling.jpg

True and this is a known problem, but I'd rather have this problem than oddball upsamples. Many people sit so far away from their HDTVs that they can't even tell the 720p to 1080p difference, so perhaps playing 1080p content on a 4K screen won't be completely horrible in the living room. http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/

Naturally it will be somewhat different on a desktop, but if the pixel density is high enough it might offset some of the pixellation as well.

 

[bp_968]

I bought my wife one of those 27" 1440p korean monitors microcenter sells (2560x1440). If you can really get a proper ratio (16:10) 2560x1600 30" for that price I'd be all over it!

As for specifics, I tried a number of games on her 27" 1440p panel and they all played amazing! This is with a i5 3570k, 16GB of ram and a GTX 460 (256bit version I believe).

I'm a big hater of 16:9 ratios for PC monitors, so I would avoid a large 1080p panel. 1440p gives you enough extra vertical resolution that it makes 16:9 more bearable but I'd still prefer the 16:10 ratio if it was available at near the same price point. She is also a wedding photographer so she has to be able to have a calibrated monitor. The 27" 1440p IPS panel tends to be a little brighter then it should be we still managed to get it calibrated and matching prints, so its useful as a professional panel as well.

Hey all, i'm looking @ upgrading my old Samsung P2770 27" TN LCD. It was a great monitor at its time, but i'm currently working in S Korea and seeing so many incredibly cheap IPS panels here in the $300-$400. My Korean friends recommended i avoid crossover, Yamasaki, and all the others that i find on Ebay and go with "Microboard" brand name which is higher quality and more expensive. Check out their monitors:

http://www.microboard.co.kr/

Anyways, its either the i3006WQ (LG IPS Q5 panel), or a 27" TN panels @ 120hz. I'm a gamer, but mostly a RTS & RPG gamer, so don't really play that many FPS games (only BF3 and even then just occasionally). Will i notice a hugh issue with ghosting on the 30" IPS? Also, i own a GTX 670, i understand i'll hafta turn off AA in most new titles to game @ 2560x1600, but i always figured AA was for the lower resolutions anyways, no?

Thanks in advance for any feedback and advice! Cheers.

 

[cmdrdredd]

As I said, whose vision is good enough for that? Even running a 30" at 1920x1200 I have trouble seeing the text and icons in some programs.

Get corrective lenses. My vision is fine with contacts or glasses and 2560x1440 is perfect.

 

[blackened23]

As I said, whose vision is good enough for that? Even running a 30" at 1920x1200 I have trouble seeing the text and icons in some programs.

I'm not trying to be rude or anything but if this is an issue, you have some major vision issues. Especially the part about 1200p on a 30 inch monitor. Your vision would have to be poor to have any difficulty with that.

IMO, for normal vision - there is no difficulty in reading 2560x1600 on a 30 inch screen. Additionally, with XP style DPI in conjunction with browser scaling you can adjust it upwards if you wish (but do not use non-XP style, non XP style causes blurring). But your issue is deeper than that. Respectfully, you're in dire need of corrective lenses if you can't view 1200p on a 30 inch screen, that resolution is very large and pixellated to my eyes on a 30 inch screen. Horrendously so - 1200p is typically used on 24 inch monitors. Not being readable on a 30 incher should not happen.

 

[KingFatty]

Look at the image I've attached. The left is the original 600x800 crop, the right is what it would look like recorded at 300x400 and then doubled in size.
http://www.leesaxon.com/forums/Anandtech-Upsampling.jpg

I'm concerned there is a problem with the example image. It does not represent the situation of perfect scaling that 4K provides.

My concern is because you seem to have degraded the original crop, doing some destructiveness instead of simply enlarging it the way perfect scaling would do. Instead of preserving all original info, you seem to have recorded it at a lower resolution of 300x400?

The argument that I think is very convincing about 4K is that no information is lost or added. It's just that for 1080p material, you are using 4 pixels on the 4K screen to display every pixel from the 1080p material.

So to analogize to your image, for fairness, you should have simply enlarged the 600x800 image to 1200x1600. It would appear perfectly the same, only bigger. That might reveal some of the original pixelation, but would be no different than simply holding a magnifying lens to enlarge the original and see the original pixels.

 

[Shmee]

I if you can get a 30" IPS 2560x1600 for $600 bucks, I would jump on it, unless there is something seriously wrong with it. It may not be a dell 3014, 3011 or HP ZR30W, but all these cost more. The U3014 is probably the best overall, it is the newest and has a USB3 hub

 

[blastingcap]

I'm concerned there is a problem with the example image. It does not represent the situation of perfect scaling that 4K provides.

My concern is because you seem to have degraded the original crop, doing some destructiveness instead of simply enlarging it the way perfect scaling would do. Instead of preserving all original info, you seem to have recorded it at a lower resolution of 300x400?

The argument that I think is very convincing about 4K is that no information is lost or added. It's just that for 1080p material, you are using 4 pixels on the 4K screen to display every pixel from the 1080p material.

So to analogize to your image, for fairness, you should have simply enlarged the 600x800 image to 1200x1600. It would appear perfectly the same, only bigger. That might reveal some of the original pixelation, but would be no different than simply holding a magnifying lens to enlarge the original and see the original pixels.

Good point--that might explain why the pixellation is worse than I would expect. Maybe what happened was that something is getting lost in the saving to the second file, perhaps because it's a JPEG or something. Rather than a literal bitmap screen capture.

 

[R0H1T]

Depends on what you want really ~
if you're fine with poor(er) viewing angles, slightly washed out colors then go with TN, you'll get better response times & less of an input lag though.
IPS will give you the best picture quality but will be worse than TN wrt response times & input lag.

I'll add that if you're gonna spend long hours on this particular monitor then go for an IPS build & see if it has PWM flicker, you can also check out the latest AMVA panels that offer the best of both(IPS/TN) & are relatively cheap as well.

 

[brandonb]

I have no issues with my IPS even with first person shooters. When we talk about lag and response times. Sure, they are higher than TN, but I can't even notice a problem.

The only bad things i've heard about Korean IPS screens is that the QA is bad. For example, you're likely going to have 5-10 dead/broken pixels (pretty regularly) vs something like a dell which may be 1 or 2 at the most which is going to occure rarely.

I've seen plenty of bad reports, when people were returning them 2-3-4 times in a row to get one without 5-10 dead pixels. I'd just be leery, and be prepared to return it (find a store local to you where you can keep returning it if necessary without a restocking fee). I would not do this over the internet where you have to pay shipping costs.