Picking a SINGLE large monitor?

[ranakor]

I currently have a 27 inch display at 1920x1080 max resolution.

I'm having trouble finding reviews that aren't gaming or professional graphic work related, i'm looking for a larger monitor to improve my productivity. I don't care about gamer related specs (i do some gaming but i'm your type of gamer that is fine even if a game runs at 20fps and i don't play any FPS or similar fast reaction type games, so obviously i don't care about a few more ms of input lag).

What i'm looking for is :
- More actual physical space screen
- Same or better resolution per physical space (i won't put the screen further away, i'm currently satisfied with the resolution at the distance i have it at, i just want more screen physical space).
- I don't care about angle of view at all, i'm watching it straight facing the center
- I'd rather not pay an arm to get the useless (for me) features like 120hz / full adobe color space / low input lag etc, i'm just looking for decent quality for non gaming purposes with high resolution and lots of physical screen space.
- No weird screen formats, i'm fine with the wide stuff we have but i was happier back in the CTR days in screen format, so as wide as the usual 1080p is fine but ideally no "wider" format, i want more height just as much (if not more) as i want more width.

Edit: looking for a substantial upgrade too, not Worth it to go from 27 to 29 so ideally 34+ if anything in that range is still decent up close as a monitor and not just as a far away tv with huge pixels.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Monitors are so subjective that I'm sure you will be flooded with a plethora of suggestions. Do you want flat or curved? Newegg and amazon both have monitors on sale right now so it really boils down to some specifics. What resolution do you want on a 34" screen? Are you considering a 4k tv for use as a monitor? They have a lot of vertical real estate that wide screen monitors do not possess.

 

[moonbogg]

I'd look at something in 3440x1440, 34" wide, IPS. If not, you have countless 4K options to choose from both in monitor form and TV form. I bet if you got a 4K TV and sat as close to it as you did your monitor, you'd have tons of work space. Maybe something around 40 inches or so?

 

[4K_shmoorK]

32" BenQ BL3200PT 2560x1440 VA panel?
3000:1 contrast ratio, not too big not too small, similar ppi to 27" 1080p.

$550 on newegg

Review:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_bl3200pt.htm

 

[Gryz]

In my country we have a nice online price-database that holds prices (and products) of most webshops. It has a nice search interface.

This is the search result for:
monitor, 34 inch or larger, aspect ratios 16:9, 16:10 or 4:3:
http://tweakers.net/categorie/344/m...qu9fyb3IfgbMWyAr2pOuivN0IusFSJYo50mULo3HPOf8A

That's 66 monitors. Prices start at 600 euros, and go up fast.
Most have 1920x1080 resolution.

If you want higher resolution, there are 2 monitors left:
http://tweakers.net/categorie/344/m...oLKGoSs1Qlv-NMgWhQjRwowW0svxbQMeuMq4-oCRZ-_4F

Those are:
1) Iiyama ProLite X4071UHSU-B1 Black 40" (3840x2160), speakers and usb-hub. 600 Euros.
2) Philips BDM4065UC Black 40" (3840x2160), speakers and usb-hub. 700 Euros.

It seems those are the only 2 monitors available at 34" or higher, and with a resolution higher than 1920x1080. At least in my country. Prices in the US are probably a bit lower (I expect $600 and $700). The other monitors at 34" or larger do not only seem to have 1920x1080 resolution, they seem to be a lot more pricey too ! (Only 8 models under 1000 euros. The remaining 58 models are over 1000 euros, up to a few thousand).

Hope this helps.

 

[ranakor]

Monitors are so subjective that I'm sure you will be flooded with a plethora of suggestions. Do you want flat or curved? Newegg and amazon both have monitors on sale right now so it really boils down to some specifics. What resolution do you want on a 34" screen? Are you considering a 4k tv for use as a monitor? They have a lot of vertical real estate that wide screen monitors do not possess.

- I'd rather have it flat, but if it's slightly curved it's ok too

- Sales don't matter, i'm not in the US and i don't really care for the price (i just don't want to pay for "gamer" extras if there are non gamer alternatives so things like ActiveSync, low input lag etc don't matter to me, but cost in itself isn't a big deal at all, just looking at buying the best i can)

- For resolution as i say anything that doesn't have me go lower in pixels per physical surface than my current monitor (1080p @ 27 inches) is fine

- I didn't consider a 4K tv, i'm not sure what even séparâtes a tv from a monitor nowadays, back in the crt days it was that they had massive pixels and they weren't meant for being close so if it's still the case (big resolution for huge size) then it doesn't fit my need, i want to stay at least at the same pixel per physical screen space ratio as i'm currently at. I'm sitting about 60 to 80 centimenters from my screen atm depending on how i'm sitting

- I'm happy with what i have in terms of quality (i don't even need that) i just need the same thing "bigger" (i currently use the screen from my asus all in one 27)

 

[ranakor]

Those are:
1) Iiyama ProLite X4071UHSU-B1 Black 40" (3840x2160), speakers and usb-hub. 600 Euros.
2) Philips BDM4065UC Black 40" (3840x2160), speakers and usb-hub. 700 Euros.

It seems those are the only 2 monitors available at 34" or higher, and with a resolution higher than 1920x1080. At least in my country. Prices in the US are probably a bit lower (I expect $600 and $700). The other monitors at 34" or larger do not only seem to have 1920x1080 resolution, they seem to be a lot more pricey too ! (Only 8 models under 1000 euros. The remaining 58 models are over 1000 euros, up to a few thousand).

Hope this helps.

Wait what's the catch, only a couple years ago when i didn't have as much cash i went for a 27 instead of a 30 because a 30 costed around 1000-1500$, did price really go down so fast that a 40 today costs half what a 30 did 2 years ago or am i missing something?

Edit : looking at the philips it sports a MTBF of 30 000 hours, that sounds very low (3.5 years @ 24H/day) for a MTBF and i assume quite a few are dieing the first year? Anyone has had experience with it? Reading the rest of the specs it feels exactly like what i need.

 

[Headfoot]

If you go bigger you will get zero extra work space unless you also increase resolution. Otherwise the pixels just get bigger which does nothing for what you want.

You need to be looking at 2560x1440 or preferably 4k.

Get a 1440p monitor if you're looking to increase your screen size by 50% or less. If you're doubling your screen size then go 4k.

The other option is ultrawide or multi-monitor. Honestly, multi monitor is probably the easiest way to get more screen real estate. Tried and true. I use 3 monitors and I like it a lot more than a single large one for multi tasking because I can maximize the window to each monitor or do half screen splits per monitor, and I've never needed more than the 3 I've got.

 

[ranakor]

If you go bigger you will get zero extra work space unless you also increase resolution. Otherwise the pixels just get bigger which does nothing for what you want.

You need to be looking at 2560x1440 or preferably 4k.

Get a 1440p monitor if you're looking to increase your screen size by 50% or less. If you're doubling your screen size then go 4k.

The other option is ultrawide or multi-monitor. Honestly, multi monitor is probably the easiest way to get more screen real estate. Tried and true. I use 3 monitors and I like it a lot more than a single large one for multi tasking because I can maximize the window to each monitor or do half screen splits per monitor, and I've never needed more than the 3 I've got.

I don't think you've really read the thread as the first post makes it clear i already know all that

No extra space at same resolution : as i said i want at least the same resolution "per" physical space, so obviously i want bigger resolution total, i just don't want bigger resolution in a same sized screen, i'm happy with my current resolution per inch, and i want more inches, that means higher resolution.

Multi monitor : the thread title specifically says single in all caps I don't want multi monitor, it doesn't fit my workflow, i hate it with a passion, i picked a single 27 over 2 24 and even before that i picked a single 24 over 3! 19 screens. I need the flexibility of a single screen, sometimes i'll split it, but a nice chunk of the time i end up with 1 big window that can't be split and that i certainly don't want with a huge bezel in the middle

Ultrawide : also in the OP i state i don't want wider formats

I appreciate that you're trying to help but all of your tips are either there in my OP or stated as no go in my OP.

The 40" (3840x2160) monitors suggested by others above looks like true winners however so i'd love some feedback on those or similar ones as a 40 inch at that resolution would actually fit my need

 

[Headfoot]

Just laying out the facts. Calm down. All your "hating it with a passion" don't change the fact that multi monitor is the most common way of addressing the problem you have, and for a reason.

Otherwise, I literally just explained to you how you can achieve the similar resolution per physical space since that isn't an actual spec you can find on a product sheet. Unless you're finding monitors for sale with resolutions other than 1440p or 4k, that aren't ultrawides

Let me make it really easy:
Under 30" = 1440p.
30"+ = 4k.

Choose an IPS or *VA type panel for the better viewing angles due to monitor size. If you go 4k your video card will need to have an appropriate port to support it at 60hz in full color. DisplayPort 1.2 and HDMI 2.0 will do that.

 

[ranakor]

Just laying out the facts. Calm down. All your "hating it with a passion" don't change the fact that multi monitor is the most common way of addressing the problem you have, and for a reason.

Otherwise, I literally just explained to you how you can achieve the similar resolution per physical space since that isn't an actual spec you can find on a product sheet. Unless you're finding monitors for sale with resolutions other than 1440p or 4k, that aren't ultrawides

Let me make it really easy:
Under 30" = 1440p.
30"+ = 4k.

Choose an IPS or *VA type panel for the better viewing angles due to monitor size. If you go 4k your video card will need to have an appropriate port to support it at 60hz in full color. DisplayPort 1.2 and HDMI 2.0 will do that.

I'm very calm was just saying you're a bit off topic, i know many people like multi screen but that's not what i'm looking for as the topic title states it, the why isn't up for debate, it's my requirement really. And it's definately not the most common way to address the problem "I" have as the problem i have is more unsplit continuous single window space that i can also rearange as a multi windows workspace. I tried multiple screens, my productivity went down, drastically.

I know i need 4K for a large screen, as i said i know what to look "for" i need actual screen suggestions since there hardly are reviews on those (pretty much all screen reviews are for gamers or for high quality color calibrated screen for designers, i guess high resolution big screen without much regard for quality is a bit of a niche).

Viewing angle isn't much of an issue unless it's "really really bad", as i said i'm sitting right in front of it but if the viewing angle is horrible i guess being in front of the center i could have trouble looking at the sides, however even on a 40 screen that should only be what, 20 degrees ish? Are there panels that are bad at such low angles or should i be ok there?

Video card is no problem, i'll buy whatever is needed to drive the screen (currently using a all in one 27, going to replace it for a bigger screen so this means building a new computer to go with it, but the monitor is the most important part for me so i'm fine with building the rest to make it work).

 

[postmortemIA]

For comfort either of
1. 32" 2560x1440 MVA, you have 4 choices, all come with same AUO panel: Benq BL3200PT, Samsung S32D850T, HP Envy 32, Acer B326HUL. The pixel size is very close to 24" 1920x1080 monitors, so they will be bit smaller than what you are used to on 27" and same resolution
2. Since you don't want ultra-wide, other alternative is 30" 2560x1600 monitors.. most of them are LG IPS like Dell U3014. Monoprice and Nixeus have cheaper models based on the same panel. They would be bit harder to read. You get insane vertical space, and nice 16:10 ratio that is probably the best ratio for productive work.

Alternative is you go 4K and make text larger with DPI scaling to make it readable - so you'd essentially use them like one of these 2K panels.

Now if Windows scaling was perfect (like OSX is) I'd pick 4K in a heartbeat.

 

[guskline]

I own the BenQ BL3200PT monitor (see sig rig1). Every time I use it my eyes say "thank you".

 

[ranakor]

All those sound good but the 40 sounds better, is there something wrong i'm missing about them? I'm really not getting why they're so cheap (All i could find was an explanation that at 40 they share the same size panels as TVs and thus are more mass produced but i'm not sure how convinced i am, everyone i know who has a TV also has a monitor so these are pretty mass produced too no?)

They look really tempting but i wouldn't want to grab one, notice something is horribly wrong and think i should've gone with a 32 or 34 afterwards.

 

[4K_shmoorK]

All those sound good but the 40 sounds better, is there something wrong i'm missing about them? I'm really not getting why they're so cheap (All i could find was an explanation that at 40 they share the same size panels as TVs and thus are more mass produced but i'm not sure how convinced i am, everyone i know who has a TV also has a monitor so these are pretty mass produced too no?)

They look really tempting but i wouldn't want to grab one, notice something is horribly wrong and think i should've gone with a 32 or 34 afterwards.

I also own a 32" variant (Samsung S32D850T) and like the others am very satisfied with the panel overall.

As far as the 40", thats pretty massive for a primary screen. I have to move my head from time to time on the 32", I imagine you'd have to be at least 3' away to use confortably

 

[ranakor]

I also own a 32" variant (Samsung S32D850T) and like the others am very satisfied with the panel overall.

As far as the 40", thats pretty massive for a primary screen. I have to move my head from time to time on the 32", I imagine you'd have to be at least 3' away to use confortably

Currently (based on the space my 27 takes in my field of view) i'd be fine with 2X it's width and 3X it's height no problem without moving.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I keep seeing this tv at tigerdirect http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8430969&CatId=8893 being used as a monitor and can't help but wonder why dedicated monitors are so expensive when it costs more to include a tv tuner.

 

[postmortemIA]

I keep seeing this tv at tigerdirect http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8430969&CatId=8893 being used as a monitor and can't help but wonder why dedicated monitors are so expensive when it costs more to include a tv tuner.

Maybe due to smaller market? You can find 1080P monitors today for few bucks above $100... that's pretty cheap. What enthusiasts use is all pretty much niche market... mass market stuff is always cheaper.
We're lucky that TV market is so strong, that's why we get IPS/MVA panels cheaper on the monitors as well.

 

[ranakor]

I keep seeing this tv at tigerdirect http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8430969&CatId=8893 being used as a monitor and can't help but wonder why dedicated monitors are so expensive when it costs more to include a tv tuner.

I'm curious too, i was already surprised at the 600 - 700 price tag on monitors of TV size earlier in the thread but is there any downside in simply using that 250$ tv for productivity work? I can live without the perks (perfect color / fast response time etc) but i definately don't want the big downsides that are annoying even in productivity work (noticeable ghosting etc).

 

[Gryz]

I'm not an expert on the subject of TVs versus monitors. But I believe there is a difference in the electronics that processes the incoming image.

TVs are made for moving pictures.
Monitors are made for static pictures (too).

If I understood correctly, TVs try to make moving pictures look as smooth as possible. They take a 30Hz input signal, do some hocus-pocus, and show it as a 120Hz signal. They do a lot of extrapolating, I think. The result is that a moving picture looks more fluid (but fuzzy). And static images look less sharp. Not good when you want to read text, or look at small icons on your desktop. The most heard complaint from people using televisions as (gaming) monitors, is that they can't read the text in the UIs and HUDs. Too blurry. I suspect that reading desktop/applications/browsers will be just as bad. Also, all that extra processing to try to make moving pictures look more smooth takes time. And the picture you actually see on the screen is lagging behind noticably, compared to the picture on a real computer-monitor.

Of course, this is just from what I read on the web, heard from a few fellow gamers, and my own conclusions. Maybe I'm completely wrong. Please someone enlighten us.

 

[kami]

The BenQ BL3200pt is a great monitor. Used it for over a year, but eventually I wanted bigger Now using the 40" Philips BDM4065UC.

The BenQ has better brightness uniformity, and also doesn't have PWM backlight dimming. In rare cases people can be sensitive to that (I'm not thankfully). The BenQ was also a more impressive package with both USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 hubs, a SD card reader, a quality adjustable stand, and this little puck doohickey to adjust settings. The Philips has a USB 3.0 hub but it's poorly located so you can forget about hot swapping stuff (good for permanent stuff though). The Philips stand is very sturdy and all metal, but not adjustable.

The Philips is truly massive...it's a joy to play games or watch movies/shows on. The first time I fired up WoW in 4k @ 40 inches my jaw dropped. My favorite part is the contrast ratio and blacks. I have never witnessed an LCD with this kind of contrast, and I thought the BenQ was good in this department (it is, but Philips takes it to another level). Both monitors have similar response times and input lag.

As for the jump to 4k, even at 40 inches I find myself needing some DPI scaling in Windows to view text comfortably. The majority of the time this works fine, but some apps don't support it well (you can disable scaling for individual apps). I don't even know what the hell 4k at 27 inches would look like. Magnifying glass required, I guess?

Monitors are a series of tradeoffs as there's not one that will do everything perfectly (even with unlimited budget). You have to pick what's most important to you and go for that. For me personally, I will never go back to IPS until the technology improves in some areas. It looks completely washed out compared to what I'm used to now. Even though I can appreciate its other benefits, I would rather have the picture with "pop."

Edit : looking at the philips it sports a MTBF of 30 000 hours, that sounds very low (3.5 years @ 24H/day) for a MTBF and i assume quite a few are dieing the first year? Anyone has had experience with it? Reading the rest of the specs it feels exactly like what i need.

Well, that's quite a bit of usage... also it has a 4 year parts warranty (at least in Canada). I checked the BL3200pt MTBF to compare and its "lamp life" is also 30k hours, but the rest of the monitor is 60k hours. So maybe that's what Philips is referring to?

 

[ranakor]

The BenQ BL3200pt is a great monitor. Used it for over a year, but eventually I wanted bigger Now using the 40" Philips BDM4065UC.

The BenQ has better brightness uniformity, and also doesn't have PWM backlight dimming. In rare cases people can be sensitive to that (I'm not thankfully). The BenQ was also a more impressive package with both USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 hubs, a SD card reader, a quality adjustable stand, and this little puck doohickey to adjust settings. The Philips has a USB 3.0 hub but it's poorly located so you can forget about hot swapping stuff (good for permanent stuff though). The Philips stand is very sturdy and all metal, but not adjustable.

The Philips is truly massive...it's a joy to play games or watch movies/shows on. The first time I fired up WoW in 4k @ 40 inches my jaw dropped. My favorite part is the contrast ratio and blacks. I have never witnessed an LCD with this kind of contrast, and I thought the BenQ was good in this department (it is, but Philips takes it to another level). Both monitors have similar response times and input lag.

As for the jump to 4k, even at 40 inches I find myself needing some DPI scaling in Windows to view text comfortably. The majority of the time this works fine, but some apps don't support it well (you can disable scaling for individual apps). I don't even know what the hell 4k at 27 inches would look like. Magnifying glass required, I guess?

Monitors are a series of tradeoffs as there's not one that will do everything perfectly (even with unlimited budget). You have to pick what's most important to you and go for that. For me personally, I will never go back to IPS until the technology improves in some areas. It looks completely washed out compared to what I'm used to now. Even though I can appreciate its other benefits, I would rather have the picture with "pop."



Well, that's quite a bit of usage... also it has a 4 year parts warranty (at least in Canada). I checked the BL3200pt MTBF to compare and its "lamp life" is also 30k hours, but the rest of the monitor is 60k hours. So maybe that's what Philips is referring to?

I'm having my screen on anywhere from 14 to 18H a day, but at those prices i guess it's ok if i have to replace it sometime down the road, i was expecting "much" higher price for high resolution big screens so 40@4K for 3-4 years sounds very fair at a 600 price point i guess.

 

[marcplante]

32" BenQ BL3200PT 2560x1440 VA panel?
3000:1 contrast ratio, not too big not too small, similar ppi to 27" 1080p.

$550 on newegg

Review:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_bl3200pt.htm

Sounds like Money isn't quite the issue, but Rakuten has this model in refurbished for $399. Seems like the right solution. pixel density of a 24" 1080 monitor and about 50% more real estate.

I'm toying with upgrading my Samsung 245B 1900x1200 24" monitor. I use a 27" 1080 HP monitor at work and consider it comparable if not inferior to my 24". The BenQ seems like a nice step up that I can still drive with my graphics card. Think i'll put the Samsung up on Craigslist and upgrade if it moves for an appropriate price.

 

[ranakor]

Sounds like Money isn't quite the issue, but Rakuten has this model in refurbished for $399. Seems like the right solution. pixel density of a 24" 1080 monitor and about 50% more real estate.

Still feels too small, definately going for those 40" that were mentioned above unless someone can show me a pitfall

 

[dualsmp]

OP go here and start to play with the numbers:

http://tvcalculator.com/

To achieve similar 27" 1080p pixel density if you upgraded to 4K you're going to need a 55" screen.

A compromise might be 2560x1440 via 32" screen which is same pixel density as 24" 1080p.