2560x1600 on 30", wait and regret?

If the S27A850 turns out to be a let-down, I'll go with the HZ30Wi for sure.
 
Ideally, you get an L-shaped desk and set up 3 x 23" 120hz/3D gaming setup on one end, and PLP 22+30+22 on the other end.

I have all those monitors and more lying around my apartment right now, but alas I can only afford to keep one of those configurations, space and money wise. For me, 120hz won out. 3D is nice in some games but it's the 120hz that I'm not willing to give up; the fluidity is amazing.
 
A bit off topic but yes matrices I might agree - considering doing something similar someday but I'd like to mod my existing desk or build a custom one so that I could put the PLP array below a three 120hz 27" TN eyefinity array..
...
The PLP monitors would be at least halfway beneath the regular desk surface height... angled up to my eyeballs.. on a lower "shelf" / lcd arm mount area. In my case it would be my 27" ACD flanked by my two 19" 900x1440h (portrait) monitors that I set back on arms so that they align perfectly with the 27" acd, (with shared bezels tucked behind the main monitor's to my perspective).
...
... That is if after trying a 27" 120hz TN someday I am impressed with the fluidity vs the downsides of TN enough to keep it longer than my return period. Otherwise I'd just go with adding two more ACD's I think (which would cost about the same as three 27" 120hz more or less)- even if the FoV blurs more on fastest mouselooking compared to 120hz. I really do not want to give up the glorious image quality and rez of the IPS panel, I enjoy it far too much.
...
From another thread I read that you really won't notice the 120hz difference unless you get your games running at 120fps or higher too.. so thats something to consider. It also reduces some blur types by half, but is unable to actually eliminate blur on fast motion. More screen updates vs target positions/aim and half of one type of blur I suppose. I'm still not convinced its worth it vs the IPS image quality and the fact that you might be able to run a lot more eyecandy settings at 60hz than struggling on some games to hit 120fps on a 120hz, especially in a triple monitor gaming setup on the most intense graphic games. In desktop usage your mouse and window dragging would look more fluid but I don't think that is worth the added cost or vs IPS either.
 
Just to give you a heads up, I was in the EXACT SAME SITUATION, I have a 2405fpw and decided to upgrade to the 30" Dell, ended up selling it because I was craning my neck a lot more to see what was on screen. IMHO 24" seems to be the sweet spot. Perhaps the people whom have it in landscape mode had the right idea, who knows. Maybe once I get to try a 30" out again I'll find out.
 
GodSpeed said:
Just to give you a heads up, I was in the EXACT SAME SITUATION, I have a 2405fpw and decided to upgrade to the 30" Dell, ended up selling it because I was craning my neck a lot more to see what was on screen. IMHO 24" seems to be the sweet spot. Perhaps the people whom have it in landscape mode had the right idea, who knows. Maybe once I get to try a 30" out again I'll find out.
Click to expand...

Curious. You had your 30" in portrait?
 
Yeah I agree somewhat. I've used smaller and very large monitors at desks over the years. I think 22" to 27" are perfect size. 30" and even 32" are doable but would have to be set back a bit farther to fit the perimeter outside of your periphery enough (within your gaze so you don't have to wrench eyes and even angle neck slightly perhaps ). 37" was way out of bounds when I had one of those.
 
I agree also. My 30" is amazing for simulations and games, not so great for... well.. typing this post for exampe :). I think a 27" 16x10 would be the best for non-gaming, and pretty damn good for gaming also.
 
gmohr said:
I agree also. My 30" is amazing for simulations and games, not so great for... well.. typing this post for exampe :). I think a 27" 16x10 would be the best for non-gaming, and pretty damn good for gaming also.
Click to expand...

The only thing I can think of that fits that is a dell 2709w or 2707w.
 
16:9 monitors made sense in the 1920x1080 range because HD video runs at that resolution, I honestly don't see the point of a 16:9 variant of 2560x1600, I'm a traditional PC user and it's personal preference that I stick to 16:10

I bought my 2560x1600 Dell 30" 3007WFP-HC many years ago now and it's still the best piece of kit I own, the only thing that comes close is my new 1080p projector, better for movies, but for games and work the 30" is king.
 
daveswantek said:
Next month
Click to expand...

Serious, hell i am going to wait i guess then. Mid next month? and you think its going to be cheaper then the dell? Also are the specs going to be better then dells? any pluses for waiting on this new samsung monitor?
 
Last edited:
gmohr said:
I agree also. My 30" is amazing for simulations and games, not so great for... well.. typing this post for exampe :). I think a 27" 16x10 would be the best for non-gaming, and pretty damn good for gaming also.
Click to expand...

How so? My eyes suck and I can sit far enough back to make it work just fine. The 30" doesn't fill all of my peripheral vision and the text is completely readable and clear.
 
FYI: You can scale any browser window using control + and -.

My 70 year old mother was visiting for a couple weeks and she loved the U3011 because I scaled the browser windows up nice and big for her on hotmail. Big crisp letters + big space is a big win for individuals with less then ideal eyesight.
 
yep. I pinch and push my 10.1" 1280x800 ips tablet just fine too. The point was that once you get much past 26" , the edges of a monitor go into your periphery more and cause you to dart your gaze (eyes and in some cases even a slight head tilt) more than "normal". 30" and even 32" are pushing that limit and prob should be set back a bit further from your eyeballs... which in effect is making it a smaller monitor (shrinking it) perspective wise.. closer to a slightly smaller monitor's 'zone'.
..
....... 22" and 23" lcd's are good at a desk too imo, but I'd prefer dual (or triple) when possible. I still think 23" - 27" are perfect size at normal desk distances.. 20"-22" are ok if closer and esp in multi monitor setups, 30 - 32" maybe ok a bit further.. but that is the same perspective wise as a different sized monitor ("growing: closer" , or "shrinking :a bit farther" respectively).
 
idk, im no more than 2' from my center 30" at any given time. I have yet to experience this eye strain / neck pain.
 
I wasn't the one that said anything about pain.. I said it was annoying to have to divert your gaze more than normal when you actually have data you want to read on the perimeter and coners of a monitor that are getitng pushed farther into your periphery.. it was very bad on a 37" screen at anywhere near desk distance but that was an extreme admittedly. I said I found 27" perfect on the big end filling my gaze perspective wise.. and that 30" is prob pushing the limit.. Personally I'd probably move it back slightly compared to my 27".
..
..
23in-vs-27in-vs-30in_sizes.jpg
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
I wasn't the one that said anything about pain.. I said it was annoying to have to divert your gaze more than normal when you actually have data you want to read on the perimeter and coners of a monitor that are getitng pushed further into your periphery.. it was very bad on a 37" screen at anywhere near desk distance but that was an extreme admittedly. I said I found 27" perfect on the big end filling my gaze perspective wise.. and that 30" is prob pushing the limit.. Personally I'd probably move it back slightly compared to my 27".
Click to expand...

Well the whole point of getting a 30" is to have the size with the resolution. With the dot pitch of a 30" you can get a lot of screen, even if you make the text bigger. I find my monitors extremely crisp. The only monitor that has trumped it in clarity (that i've used) is the 2007fp I have next to my setup.
 
Yeah its fine... but again, its not about the clarity or the pixel density (though the 27" 2560x has a higher pixel density) .. the point was filling your normal gaze at normal desk distances without pushing the perimeter of the monitor (incl. corners) further into your periphery, which would cause you to dart your eyes and perhaps even tilt your head slightly more than the "normal" amount that you would experience on a monitor whose perimeter is less "out of bounds"..
.... I'd just push a 30" back slightly since its pixel pitch is larger than my 27" anyway (which would essentially "shrink" more of it into my view, and shrink its text size slightly - closer to what my 27" text size is).. And I said it was pushing the limit size wise.. not that it was crazily outside of it like a 37". Thats my opinion from using various size and rez monitors and tvs. I have a feeling where the sweet-spot is size vs distance wise now and feel 30" would be pushing it without being slid back a bit. I'd prob put one on a nice ergotron or similar highly adjustable lcd arm if I had one.
..
...
 
I actually like parking my 30" close to my face... I like my entire field of vision covered, for greater immersion into the game world. Granted I need to be using 4x AA most of the time, but it's not a problem at all using tri-fire. I'm even considering selling my 6950, as I think the 6990 alone would be more than enough. Eyefinity is another story though.
 
thats why i'd keep one on an easily adjustable ergo arm... racing games and some others are great to have the edges in your periphery for immersion, and thats the whole idea of eyefinity/surround gaming with three monitors... but if you are using fullscreen apps and readouts, text and chat... or games with a lot of onscreen data - WoW comes to mind, especially with addons, and raid/healing windows,etc.. but there are other games with a lot of onscreen info too ... I wouldn't want the edges of the monitor farther than "normal" into my periphery. Moving a 30" or even a 32" tv-as-pc-monitor slightly back would put it back into the focal zone for me so it wouldn't be that big of a deal, though it would essentially be shrinking the monitor and pixels slightly from my viewpoint.
..
... I'm hoping to dive into eyefinity triple lcd gaming next year - either adding three 27" 120hz TNs , or two more 27" 2560x 60hz IPS screens. I'll have to try out 120hz with a return period to see if its worth it... and consider what eyecandy I might have to turn off to maintain 120fps vs 120hz across three 1080p monitors in order to get the real benefit of 120hz screen info update wise. I've also heard even if you do that, as far as blur goes 120hz only cuts it by half. Considering that I may just add two more cinema displays but I still haven't decided. Even with eyefinity I'd have to keep all the HUD, chat, map, notification interfaces etc all on the main/central monitor within my focal zone or it would be very annoying and I'd miss things or have to dart my eyes up to the corners or edges more drastically than normal all the time.
 
Last edited:
desh said:
What does the active adapter do?
Click to expand...

Allows you to run Dual-link DVI resolutions from displayport to Dual-link DVI. There are cheaper ones that are single link that allow for up to 1200p. These adapters are only needed if you need more that 2 single-link dvi monitors or if you need a dual-link connection and don't have any available dual-link dvi ports on the card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top