4K computer monitor-what's the catch?

L

Llathos

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
151
There are two other threads on this brand 4k tv from tiger direct. One started like 3 months ago, the other a month ago. I started the newest one without realizing people have been talking about it for a while.
As far as I know, when used as a computer monitor, that TV can only provide a 30Hz refresh rate.
 
Check the ASUS 4k and Seiki 4K threads as well.

To summarize the negatives:
- Only 30 hz at native resolution
- 120 hz doesn't work properly and skips frames, confirmed by numerous [H] users (buggy firmware?)
- 24 hz also doesn't work properly (judder)
- Does not support 4:4:4 subsampling, even in RGB mode (blurry colored text)
- Bad input lag (over 50ms on the Bodnar lag tester)
- It's a TV and not a monitor so it is hard to calibrate to correct colors and gamma
- No DPMI power on-wake support (must manually turn on)
- Bug in firmware resets the backlight setting on power-on if you adjust it

The positives are large screen real estate and cheap price.
Also, I haven't seen many reports of dead pixels.
 
The catch is really the fact its only 30Hz at full resolution which honestly for video/desktop is fine IMHO. The other problem is the 39 inch cant do 120Hz @ 1080p (the 50 inch can) I am waiting to hear back from seiki on that one as its possible a firmware update could fix that issue.

I actually got mine off amazon when for a very short while they were selling them at $496.
 
The last catch is even if it did do 60Hz at 4K, you need 3 or 4 of the more powerful graphics cards to keep framerate up.
4K gaming wont be mainstream for a looong time.
 
All really good info and my bad for making a new thread b/f searching.

So, the big one is that sucks for gaming b/c of the 30hz refresh. The reality is the resolution would likely be dropped down anyway since the list of cards than can push 8 MP at >30fps in any recent game is probably small?

I wonder if it could produce a higher refresh at a lower resolution like 2560x1440? That could be a good compromise of large size, "perceived" DPI, refresh rate, and load on a gaming video card...

Thoughts?
 
Nenu said:
The last catch is even if it did do 60Hz at 4K, you need 3 or 4 of the more powerful graphics cards to keep framerate up.
4K gaming wont be mainstream for a looong time.
Click to expand...

I think you are mistaken. I am gaming at 100 fps with medium to low graphics settings using a sandy bridge cpu and 2 gtx680's pushing more pixels than that 4K, using 3 1440p monitors. If I was ok with 50-60fps at 60Hz, then I could push my graphics to medium to high.
I think a dual gtx680 setup which will be about $500 within 3 months or so, and the 4th gen intel cpus can easly game on a 4k system at 60fps. A gaming computer like that could be easily built for $1200 or less without the monitor which is extremely reasonable for 4k gaming.
If you want to turn on 16x anti aliasing on a 4k monitor, then you ( not you personally) are an idiot who is just trying show off fps at max settings but don't really care how the settings actually effect quality of the picture.
 
Nenu said:
The last catch is even if it did do 60Hz at 4K, you need 3 or 4 of the more powerful graphics cards to keep framerate up.
4K gaming wont be mainstream for a looong time.
Click to expand...
Today, we have graphics power that can do 1920x1080p 120fps in many games (Source engine games). That's powerful enough for 4K@30fps, which is sufficiently playable for many people.

You might be right if you want Crysis 3 maxed-out with AA at 4K, though.
 
I'd love to see a chart showing this display's scaling refresh rates vs resolution. If at SOME resolution it can do 120Hz (presumably 1920x1080), then perhaps at 2560x1440 it can do 60Hz. That would be a great buy still to get a 3-4MP 39" monitor for $700 that can game at high res at the same natural aspect ratio.
 
Nenu said:
The last catch is even if it did do 60Hz at 4K, you need 3 or 4 of the more powerful graphics cards to keep framerate up.
4K gaming wont be mainstream for a looong time.
Click to expand...

This is wrong. I have an actual Asus PQ321 and a single GTX 780, and there are plenty of games I can play at >60fps without even lowering settings much(Skyrim, for instance). Now, on the other hand, I have to lower graphics quality to High to get 50-60fps in Bioshock Infinite.

The "you need 3 or 4 graphics cards" business comes from benchmarking sites that are explicitly using maximum settings in games like Sleeping Dogs that support super sampling AA. Yes, if you are going to try to use SSAA at 3840x2160 you're going to be rendering at 7680x4320, so of course you are going to need 4 titans to get 60fps. The solution is not to do this because it's not at all necessary :p

That said, I think the sweet spot for 3840x2160 with reasonable settings is still probably SLI 780s. If you really want, add a third one, but triple SLI and Titans are nice-to-haves, not at all required. This goes double if you enjoy RPGs and strategy games more than FPSes. Civ5 at 3840x2160 is an absolutely amazing experience.
 
Last edited:
running 3840x2160 @40Hz mostly getting 40fps with my 1.25GB 570 classified so there really is no problem with the performance as long as you don't touch AA
 
maarten12100 said:
Really?
It sucked so hard for me I couldn't read any of the menus
Click to expand...

If they added an option to increase the menu and text dpi ofcourse. Eve Online has that option which lets you scale the in game UI to %150 for extra high resolution monitors. @ the resolution I play in (4320x2560) it is a welcome feature.
 
Andyk5 said:
I think you are mistaken. I am gaming at 100 fps with medium to low graphics settings using a sandy bridge cpu and 2 gtx680's pushing more pixels than that 4K, using 3 1440p monitors. If I was ok with 50-60fps at 60Hz, then I could push my graphics to medium to high.
I think a dual gtx680 setup which will be about $500 within 3 months or so, and the 4th gen intel cpus can easly game on a 4k system at 60fps. A gaming computer like that could be easily built for $1200 or less without the monitor which is extremely reasonable for 4k gaming.
If you want to turn on 16x anti aliasing on a 4k monitor, then you ( not you personally) are an idiot who is just trying show off fps at max settings but don't really care how the settings actually effect quality of the picture.
Click to expand...

You illustrate the point quite well.
You need 2 of the more powerful cards just to get medium quality settings.
This is with games that arent yet utilising 4K properly, things arent going to get easier on gfx cards.
Anything less than high or highest game quality settings is a waste of a 4K display, you may as well use 1080p and max the game.

To answer the other posts, older games and a few newer games will be ok with a single fast card, but that wont be the norm with 4x the pixel count.
If you want to make good use of it, you need a lot more power.
 
Nenu said:
Anything less than high or highest game quality settings is a waste of a 4K display, you may as well use 1080p and max the game.
Click to expand...

The biggest performance detractor/variable is AA vs no AA, and 4k with 2xMSAA looks FAR FAR better than 1080P with 4xSSAA, so this isn't really true.

2 780s is not 'medium' detail in most games at 4k, it's maximum detail in most games as long as you don't use high levels or expensive types of AA. Even in games like Sleeping Dogs that are known for relatively poor framerates at high resolutions, as long as you turn AA down to reasonable levels, you'll get 60fps with 2x780s without any problems.

maarten12100 said:
Really?
It sucked so hard for me I couldn't read any of the menus
Click to expand...

Maybe you're sitting further away than me? I'm not sure, but this http://sancus.off.net/4k/civ5-4kui.jpg is completely readable for me at roughly ~20-24 inches away from my PQ321.

It does sound like you have one of the Seikis if you're running at 40hz(my mistake if this is not accurate), though, and if that's 39 or 50 inch I can see how it would be a bigger issue since you're probably required to sit much further away from those. One of the two major reasons I bought the Asus over one of the Seikis is because of this(the other is obviously 60hz), to me, 39 or 50 inches is just too ridiculously huge to use as a desktop monitor, I don't want to sit far away from my display. The Asus is, frankly, pushing it at 31.5", I would prefer 30".
 
Last edited:
Sancus said:
The biggest performance detractor/variable is AA
Maybe you're sitting further away than me? I'm not sure, but this http://i.imgur.com/ydRceaw.jpg is completely readable for me at roughly ~20-24 inches away from my PQ321.

It does sound like you have one of the Seikis if you're running at 40hz(my mistake if this is not accurate), though, and if that's 39 or 50 inch I can see how it would be a bigger issue since you're probably required to sit much further away from those. One of the two major reasons I bought the Asus over one of the Seikis is because of this(the other is obviously 60hz), to me, 39 or 50 inches is just too ridiculously huge to use as a desktop monitor, I don't want to sit far away from my display. The Asus is, frankly, pushing it at 31.5", I would prefer 30".
Click to expand...
I sit about 80cm from it it indeed isn't a Seiki it is a Skyworth I inported quite frankly sears doesn't ship the Seiki to NL and the Seiki seems to have a crappy driver board.
I'm trying to have a new timing controller board made so I can use 3 DP streams for 120Hz sadly I've disscused this with 2 capable companies already both said they weren't interested since they had never done it before. (but aslong as they give me follow ups on which companies I can try I will)
With a 1000 euro budget for that driver board a company might actually be willing to program an FPGA for me. (probably not though)
 
Nenu said:
You illustrate the point quite well.
You need 2 of the more powerful cards just to get medium quality settings.
This is with games that arent yet utilising 4K properly, things arent going to get easier on gfx cards.
Anything less than high or highest game quality settings is a waste of a 4K display, you may as well use 1080p and max the game.

To answer the other posts, older games and a few newer games will be ok with a single fast card, but that wont be the norm with 4x the pixel count.
If you want to make good use of it, you need a lot more power.
Click to expand...

I prefer high resolution to AA or over saturated textures any day of the week, but it is a personal opinion.
 
Sancus said:
This is wrong. I have an actual Asus PQ321 and a single GTX 780, and there are plenty of games I can play at >60fps without even lowering settings much(Skyrim, for instance).
Click to expand...

at what resolution? PQ321 only run at 30Hz, human eye can't handle any thing less than 60 frames per sec., so if you can run 60 fps, I like to like what's the resolution you're running it at?
 
Happy Hopping said:
at what resolution? PQ321 only run at 30Hz, human eye can't handle any thing less than 60 frames per sec., so if you can run 60 fps, I like to like what's the resolution you're running it at?
Click to expand...


The PQ321 runs at 60hz 4k. That is, in fact, one of the major features that separates it from the Seikis and Skyworths etc.
 
I can't find the technology of PQ321. Is it LED LCD, or just LCD?

what video card are you using, as Asus or gigabyte simply said their high end card c/w "Display port", but they didn't say if it's DP 1.2 or not
 
Happy Hopping said:
I can't find the technology of PQ321. Is it LED LCD, or just LCD?

what video card are you using, as Asus or gigabyte simply said their high end card c/w "Display port", but they didn't say if it's DP 1.2 or not
Click to expand...


The asus/sharp (and incoming dell) is a LED back-lit IGZO panel I believe. The 39 inch seiki (and 39 inch ASUS that is coming) is a LED back-lit S-MVA panel.

You need a DP 1.2 card (as MST is required) in order to push 60Hz @ 4k on the sharp/asus 31.5 inch display.
 
I'm running a gtx 780 but I believe that all 600 and 700 series cards will do DP 1.2 MST. I haven't tried any other cards myself, though. If you're going to game I would say a 780(and preferably two) is the bare minimum. For generic desktop use though, probably a 760 or whatever is more than plenty. Even the Intel igpus on haswell at least support it too.
 
Last edited:
Sancus said:
I'm running a gtx 780 but I believe that all 600 and 700 series cards will do DP 1.2 MST. I haven't tried any other cards myself, though. If you're going to game I would say a 780(and preferably two) is the bare minimum. For generic desktop use though, probably a 760 or whatever is more than plenty. Even the Intel igpus on haswell at least support it too.
Click to expand...

4k I say 780 sli minimum. I can do 60fps in games if I don't run a crazy amount of AA. Of course this excludes something like Crysis.
 
Sufu said:
4k I say 780 sli minimum. I can do 60fps in games if I don't run a crazy amount of AA. Of course this excludes something like Crysis.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I need to get another 780, unfortunately that will require upgrading my power supply and getting a case that is better suited to SLI, so I've been putting it off... :p
 
Sancus said:
Yeah, I need to get another 780, unfortunately that will require upgrading my power supply and getting a case that is better suited to SLI, so I've been putting it off... :p
Click to expand...

My 780s will hit 80C in games like Hitman Absolution. 780s with the ACX fans it's doable on air @ 4k, but you hit thermal limits pretty quick and fans get loud. I'm going to watercool both GPUs, and hopefully OC them to around ~1200mhz. I tried watercooling a Titan before, but I could only get 30mhz out of it before drivers crashed in game...this was with the voltage at max under Precision.

Hopefully next gen cards have a good bump in power to run at 4k.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top