Philips BDM4065UC - 40" 4K 60Hz monitor thread

While not accurate, it should give you an impression on which display is faster. But I'm not quite sure that applies to a laptop screen vs. external display.
 
Great news, one monitor is sent to me from Norway today. Another monitor is maybe sent today or will be sent tomorrow. So I should have one until the weekend I hope :D

Btw, someone on another forum asked if this VESA arm would work:

http://www.multibrackets.com/7174.shtml

I wonder the same. What do you think about it?
 
Great news, one monitor is sent to me from Norway today. Another monitor is maybe sent today or will be sent tomorrow. So I should have one until the weekend I hope :D

Btw, someone on another forum asked if this VESA arm would work:

http://www.multibrackets.com/7174.shtml

I wonder the same. What do you think about it?

your one maximum weight support is seem to be quite low at 10kg

this Ergotron MX is better at 13.6kg http://www.ergotron.com/tabid/65/PRDID/56/default.aspx

and same one as MrGrumpie Ergotron Neo Flex is a little more at 16.3kg http://www.ergotron.com/ProductsDetails/tabid/65/PRDID/242/language/en-GB/Default.aspx
 
i know but i would get one that got more room for extra weight. i will get the same one as MrGrumpie when my monitor is dispatch.
 
1. The screen is semi-gloss. It's definitely less matte than other screens, and the Benq 32" panel I've been using for the last few days. No hint of AG problems for sure.

So you own the BenQ 32" 4K monitor as well and this Phillips 40" 4k? The Phillips is more glossy? How much? I'm on the quest to find a 32"+ 4k non-TN monitor that has the most gloss regardless of the size, response time, price ect.

The new Samsung 32" 4k is full matte. It looks like the Acer 32" 4k is a matte as well but need clarification. It seems like the BenQ 32" 4k is a semi-gloss as well as this 40" 4k Phillips. I think the only other monitor in this category on the horizon is the new 32" 4k Asus ProArt monitor but that appears to be a matte as well.

I've been using a glossy 27" Apple Cinema Display for like 5+ years and I can't stand matte but it looks like I'll need to sacrifice to semi-glossy if I ever want a 4K monitor anytime soon. If you can post more photos showing both of their glossyness/reflectiveness I would appreciate it. Thank you.
 
So you own the BenQ 32" 4K monitor as well and this Phillips 40" 4k? The Phillips is more glossy? How much? I'm on the quest to find a 32"+ 4k non-TN monitor that has the most gloss regardless of the size, response time, price ect.

The new Samsung 32" 4k is full matte. It looks like the Acer 32" 4k is a matte as well but need clarification. It seems like the BenQ 32" 4k is a semi-gloss as well as this 40" 4k Phillips. I think the only other monitor in this category on the horizon is the new 32" 4k Asus ProArt monitor but that appears to be a matte as well.

I've been using a glossy 27" Apple Cinema Display for like 5+ years and I can't stand matte but it looks like I'll need to sacrifice to semi-glossy if I ever want a 4K monitor anytime soon. If you can post more photos showing both of their glossyness/reflectiveness I would appreciate it. Thank you.

I have a 27" ACD about 10 feet away from my Philips, let me know what kind of pictures you'd like to see - monitor off or on?
 
I have a 27" ACD about 10 feet away from my Philips, let me know what kind of pictures you'd like to see - monitor off or on?

Both please. Maybe some side by side comparisons as well with same pics on the screen. The more pics the better lol. Can PM me as well if got a lot. You know how white the whites are on the ACD, how much the colors really pop, and how crystal clear everything else. How does the Phillips feel/look compared to it?
 
Just a heads up I preordered the monitor a couple of weeks ago (26 Nov) from Amazon UK, and got an e-mail from them yesterday saying it would be delivered this Friday (12th), so it looks like they'll have some stock coming in then.

Not sure if these will all be reserved for preorders though.
 
I tweeted @Philips to see if I could pry any info about US availability of this set out of them. Will report back if I hear anything.
The reply:
@Rhinohelix hi, let us check with our local colleagues in the US for you and we will get back to you:)
 
Last edited:
another thing i wonder about this monitor as many sites state that this monitor is IPS-AHVA
is this the same thing as normal VA ? as far as i know its different panel ?

you can see in Phillips spec sheet ( page 16 ) of this monitor saying that this is IPS-AHVA

http://pdfs.icecat.biz/pdf/43856759-1496.pdf

also amazon.co.uk page , the monitor spec is IPS-AHVA .
'Product Description
Philips BDM4065UC 100.4824 cm (39.56 ") (100.5 cm) IPS-AHVA, 3840 x 2160, 16:9, 300 cd/m, 1000:1, 3ms, VGA, HDMI x 2, DisplayPort, miniDisplayPort, USB 3.0 x 4'
 
That's not a spec sheet it's a brochure, and it's wrong! It also says 1000:1 contrast, again wrong. Check the manual or other sources for the correct info.
 
I will have the monitor today it seems :D

ohKwOb0.png
 
another thing i wonder about this monitor as many sites state that this monitor is IPS-AHVA
is this the same thing as normal VA ? as far as i know its different panel ?

you can see in Phillips spec sheet ( page 16 ) of this monitor saying that this is IPS-AHVA

http://pdfs.icecat.biz/pdf/43856759-1496.pdf

also amazon.co.uk page , the monitor spec is IPS-AHVA .
'Product Description
Philips BDM4065UC 100.4824 cm (39.56 ") (100.5 cm) IPS-AHVA, 3840 x 2160, 16:9, 300 cd/m, 1000:1, 3ms, VGA, HDMI x 2, DisplayPort, miniDisplayPort, USB 3.0 x 4'

I have seen on many sites that it is AH-IPS, I called a store and informed that it is wrong, but they haven't edited the page, hmm.
 
Damn, stumbled upon this monitor after researching the LG 40UB800T for use as my main monitor. Looks like this could be a winner. Will keep my eyes on this thread and upcoming reviews.
 
I'm not sure if I did this right, but it shows same numbers on both monitors:

I duplicated the displays and started the test, waited a bit, paused.

Philips connected using DP, Dell UP2414Q using HDMI, Dell was in game mode but running at 30Hz cuz of HDMI.

EDIT: I tested wrong.. DO'H.

It is quite high unless you use game mode - I would guess between 60-100 ms!

With that said, if you use the trick to put it in Game mode, then immediately switch to the mode you really want (ie. SRGB or AdobeRGB preset), it appears to retain the speed of Game Mode. At least on my A00 revision monitor.

When I do the moving window test against my Benq XL2411Z monitor (120 hz) - where half a Windows Explorer window is on the Benq and the other half on the Dell, they appear very similar. I believe the Benq is approximately 20 ms of input lag, so this like means the UP2414Q in game mode is likely between 20-40 ms of input lag. This is a guess!

It is good enough for me.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if I did this right, but it shows same numbers on both monitors:

0RbRZYj.jpg


I duplicated the displays and started the test, waited a bit, paused.

Philips connected using DP, Dell UP2414Q using HDMI.

Makes sense. This would mean about 93 ms of total input lag. Too slow for gaming. Thanks for testing!

19-abslag.png
 
Makes sense. This would mean about 93 ms of total input lag. Too slow for gaming. Thanks for testing!

19-abslag.png

Tom's Hardware's method of testing input lag is largely inaccurate and useless as is all flash based timer methods and all timer methods in general especially if not compared against a lag-free CRT. I mentioned this in my earlier post.


There's honestly no point in doing the test as stopwatch based methods of testing input lag are horribly inaccurate unless compared against a delay-free CRT, but still largely inaccurate vs SMTT2 and oscilloscope measurements.

--------------------------------

Wait for reliable review sites with more accurate ways of testing input lag before you make a decision.


For example, Tom's Hardware's review of the BenQ BL3200PT has it's tested input lag @ 76 ms http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/benq-bl3200pt-qhd-monitor,3898-9.html

However, the reality is that the input lag is 25.8 ms as tested by prad with an oscilloscope http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2014/test-benq-bl3200pt-teil10.html
 
Tom's Hardware's method of testing input lag is largely inaccurate and useless as is all flash based timer methods and all timer methods in general especially if not compared against a lag-free CRT. I mentioned this in my earlier post.





For example, Tom's Hardware's review of the BenQ BL3200PT has it's tested input lag @ 76 ms http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/benq-bl3200pt-qhd-monitor,3898-9.html

However, the reality is that the input lag is 25.8 ms as tested by prad with an oscilloscope http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2014/test-benq-bl3200pt-teil10.html

...That is the only review I could find.
 
...That is the only review I could find.

I'm not blaming you in any way, I'm just saying that testing for input lag this way is largely a waste of time.

To put it in a better perspective: In the same review Tom's Hardware had for the BL3200PT, they list the LG 34UM95. The LG34UM95 according to them has higher input lag than the BL3200PT, but in reality it actually has half the input lag at 13.6 ms as confirmed by prad. http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2014/test-lg-34um95-p-teil7.html

Also, testing displays side by side like so won't even present a clear indication as to which is faster.

Example: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041125687&postcount=5

In this post the guy is comparing an LG34UM95, which we knows has 13.6 input lag, versus a Samsung UN78HU9000 (known as the 8500 series in UK) Curved TV. Said TV model was confirmed by HDTVtest to have at least 41 ms of input lag (http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/ue65hu8500-201412093960.htm), but despite this the displays show the exact same value. Also, this picture was taken quite a while before this review, in which Samsung issued a firmware update that lowered the input lag from 73ms to 41ms, so there's a large possibly that the input lag was even higher when this test was done.
 
I'm not blaming you in any way, I'm just saying that testing for input lag this way is largely a waste of time.

To put it in a better perspective: In the same review Tom's Hardware had for the BL3200PT, they list the LG 34UM95. The LG34UM95 according to them has higher input lag than the BL3200PT, but in reality it actually has half the input lag at 13.6 ms as confirmed by prad. http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2014/test-lg-34um95-p-teil7.html

Also, testing displays side by side like so won't even present a clear indication as to which is faster.

Example: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041125687&postcount=5

In this post the guy is comparing an LG34UM95, which we knows has 13.6 input lag, versus a Samsung UN78HU9000 (known as the 8500 series in UK) Curved TV. Said TV model was confirmed by HDTVtest to have at least 41 ms of input lag (http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/ue65hu8500-201412093960.htm), but despite this the displays show the exact same value. Also, this picture was taken quite a while before this review, in which Samsung issued a firmware update that lowered the input lag from 73ms to 41ms, so there's a large possibly that the input lag was even higher when this test was done.

I did not take it in a wrong way and actually appreciate the input (no pun intended) :). Looks like I will be keeping my Rog Swift for a bit longer, as much as I would like to get a bigger display.
 
Happy Bunny =)(= , no broken monitor this time. now you will have another monitor coming . hehehe Thank you for the test. now i let you enjoy the monitor and give us some thought later .

i don't know about how to test input lag but you should just take photo without paused the button on that page? ( when you clicked paused then it will show same number as you set duplicate monitor) ? sorry if i misunderstood how it work
 
Last edited:
Back
Top