4K display 27 - 40" suggestions, Holiday 2016?

R

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,623
Hello everyone. As it seems that 4K monitors have finally crept down into pretty realistic pricing points even when combined with higher specs and my secondary monitor has recently died on me, I figure a new upgrade may be worthwhile to take the prime spot while my current 1440P 27" IPS becomes the secondary. Thus, some advice on particular models to seek out would be appreciated.

In terms of size I'd prefer to go from 27" to around 40" - my workspace may not comfortably fit anything larger. In terms of "monitors" vs "TVs", I'm open to both, but my cursory inspection of TVs reveal some neat elements (though often pricey) like OLED, but the well reviewed higher quality models (ie Samsung 8 or 9 series, LG Signature or the one right below it etc) don't seem to come any smaller than 55"!

In terms of features, I'd prefer a 4K resolution panel of course. While I'll be using the panel for gaming and other general usage, I'm thinking I'd prefer a non-TN panel type in favor of IPS or IGZO (or similar panel types - Samsung AH-VA, AH-IPS etc), with good brightness and contrast capabilities. High quality backlighting is appreciated (and lack of PWM and/or minimal/flicker-free etc..); OLED seems interesting too but I don't see much about it at these sizes. Refresh rates of at least 60hz are necessary and higher is nice, but not required. 10-bit color / wide color gamut is a nice feature, along with being flicker free, and FreeSync (or Gsync, but I don't see a reason to go out of the way for G-Sync) with good quality adaptive sync. Latest versions of connections like Display Port, USB, HDMI etc.. are appreciated. HDR would be a neat feature but doesn't seem present at all in monitors in these sizes.

Overall, I'm looking for an assortment of the best 4K monitor suggestions. So many articles and review show "older" models and are outdated compared to more recent releases, so I'd be curious to see what the forum thinks! Thanks!

Edit: I've been considering the LG 27UD68 / 27UD88 models as my a starting point and a baseline for comparison. I've also been looking at Asus ROG and BenQ models that seems to be promising, at least on paper.
 
Last edited:
Depends if you want to use scaling or not. I have the LG 27UD68 and use 150% scaling so it's equivalent to 2560x1440 desktop space, just sharper. I'm very happy with my purchase.

If you want to leave it at 100%, then 40 to 46" is the sweet spot. Samsung 40KU6300 or Sony XBR43X800D would be my choice. Make sure you have HDMI 2.0 since TVs don't have DisplayPort.
 
I don't mind desktop scaling, if necessary. I guess the issue is just picking one of those 4K monitors? LG, Asus, BenQ etc..? So far it seems that the LG models seem to be the best quality/specs/performance for the price?

As far as TVs are concerned, it seems those size are pretty reasonable. Its just too bad that the "latest tech" 4K + HDR TVs don't seem to be available sub 50". For Samsung, would it be better to get the KU7000/7500 models instead? They seem to come in 40 or 43? However, it seems that the Samsung web page doesn't list those as "SUHD 4K" TVs? Are they lacking the better color/HDR features it seems? I have read some good things about the Sony X800 series though, that it pretty much has more features/a better panel than everything else in its price/size class?
 
I bought the 40" crossover from eBay earlier this year and love it. The newer models offer curved screen and freesync on some models. They run around $600 or so.
 
Thanks for the info on the 6300. It seems that Rtings and others seem to suggest that overall and as a monitor, the Sony X800 is a better choice, despite the Samsung having some slightly better black levels and whatnot. Is there any other reason to consider the Samsung over the X800? No matter what its really too bad that best of breed technologies aren't present on sub 55" displays, but it seems that the Samsung and Sony seem to be high quality for the price.


How do the Korean 4K monitors/TVs (Crossover, Wasabi, Qnix etc..) stack up to each other and versus the Samsung and Sony discussed above? I know that many Korean monitors/TVs often have a ton of variants in specs with very similar names and whatnot?

Finally, any other info on picking up one of the 27"-35" 4K monitors? Is everyone going for 40"+ TVs instead?
 
Xaeos said:
Thanks for the info on the 6300. It seems that Rtings and others seem to suggest that overall and as a monitor, the Sony X800 is a better choice, despite the Samsung having some slightly better black levels and whatnot. Is there any other reason to consider the Samsung over the X800? No matter what its really too bad that best of breed technologies aren't present on sub 55" displays, but it seems that the Samsung and Sony seem to be high quality for the price.


How do the Korean 4K monitors/TVs (Crossover, Wasabi, Qnix etc..) stack up to each other and versus the Samsung and Sony discussed above? I know that many Korean monitors/TVs often have a ton of variants in specs with very similar names and whatnot?

Finally, any other info on picking up one of the 27"-35" 4K monitors? Is everyone going for 40"+ TVs instead?
Click to expand...


You won't get Netflix and Amazon 4K streaming on any of the Korean set. The whole 4K stream thing is still growing, you want a manufacturer that does frequent firmware and software updates. The Samsung is better in pretty much every category in picture quality. It does not do as good for Blur and Motion Interpolation so it's a give and take. Actually. the 2015 JU7100 is probably better a better choice as it's a true 120hz panel but even if you can find one it's much morer expensive. I paid $1200 for my 40JU7500.
 
Some Korean panels are working with 4k Netflix (post 281), but it's best to really make sure any individual Korean monitor/TV will meet your needs. There are too many to list, but you can check the basics out: Qnix, Wasabi Mango, & Crossover. I've been considering one; I'm having a hard time deciding whether to upgrade from a Qnix qx2770 now, or wait until next gen/revision. A lot of Korean/non-Korean 4k panels seem to have minor random glitching. Good luck with your search, the 2 cheapest Korean panels are the Crossover 324k variants, & the Qnix UHD3216R (~$375-400+), there are a lot of options.
 
I'm in a similar position in that I desperately need a new monitor, but all of the displays currently on the market just seem like too much of a compromise. The recently announced LG 32UD99 32-inch 4k HDR monitor looks interesting. Alas, it's not available at preset, and I'm afraid it might be asking too much of my GTX-1070 when it comes to gaming.
 
^^ One of the benefits of 4K is you can game at 1080p without any loss of clarity and really crank up the GPU settings.

I had a 40JU7500 but found myself squinting quite a bit whenever working on documents in 4K. Switched to a 49KS8500 and it's much easier on my eyes.
 
Regarding the LG 32UD99, how the hell can an IPS LCD with a 1000:1 contrast ratio be qualified as an HDR display? Obviously standard 1 is the only option because LCD can't touch a 0.0005 nit black level. Has there ever been an IPS LCD than can do more than 1000 nits OR a 0.05 black level? CES is going to be very interesting this year.

STANDARD 1: More than 1,000 nits peak brightness and less than 0.05nits black level.
STANDARD 2: More than 540 nits brightness and less than 0.0005 nits black level.

I just returned the 55 inch LG B series OLED, it was just too big for computer use, but my god the display was legendary. Turn the lights off during a loading screen and I can't see the panel at all. 100% flawless panel uniformity which blew my mind. Gaming was sublime. I don't even really care about 4k, I would buy a 32 inch 1440p OLED with HDR right now if I could. OLED is the future. LG needs to make smaller panels!
 
Pastuch said:
Regarding the LG 32UD99, how the hell can an IPS LCD with a 1000:1 contrast ratio be qualified as an HDR display? Obviously standard 1 is the only option because LCD can't touch a 0.0005 nit black level. Has there ever been an IPS LCD than can do more than 1000 nits OR a 0.05 black level? CES is going to be very interesting this year.

STANDARD 1: More than 1,000 nits peak brightness and less than 0.05nits black level.
STANDARD 2: More than 540 nits brightness and less than 0.0005 nits black level.

I just returned the 55 inch LG B series OLED, it was just too big for computer use, but my god the display was legendary. Turn the lights off during a loading screen and I can't see the panel at all. 100% flawless panel uniformity which blew my mind. Gaming was sublime. I don't even really care about 4k, I would buy a 32 inch 1440p OLED with HDR right now if I could. OLED is the future. LG needs to make smaller panels!
Click to expand...

Standard 2 is a negotiated deal between LG and the HDR committee otherwise no OLED can claim HDR spec. In reality, 540 nits will never be able to compete against close to 1500 nits. The brights on my KS9500 is so bright that I have to avert my eyes. As to Black level, you won't be able to see the difference between .016 black and 0 black unless you're in a totally dark room. The only weak link on LCD is the bloom which can't be totally offset even with local dimming but Sony's new Z9D is going to come very close with over 2200 independent zone/LED, then off inthe not too distance future, we'll hopefully see Panasonic's pixel/pixel backlight solution.
 
Wiz33 said:
You won't get Netflix and Amazon 4K streaming on any of the Korean set. The whole 4K stream thing is still growing, you want a manufacturer that does frequent firmware and software updates. The Samsung is better in pretty much every category in picture quality. It does not do as good for Blur and Motion Interpolation so it's a give and take. Actually. the 2015 JU7100 is probably better a better choice as it's a true 120hz panel but even if you can find one it's much morer expensive. I paid $1200 for my 40JU7500.
Click to expand...
Wait...what is this about the JU7100 being true 120Hz where did you hear that? I dont see it showing in Rtings and my un40JU7100 I am pretty sure was never able to do true 120Hz. Now I am going to have to plug it back in to test lol
 
Wiz33 said:
Standard 2 is a negotiated deal between LG and the HDR committee otherwise no OLED can claim HDR spec. In reality, 540 nits will never be able to compete against close to 1500 nits. The brights on my KS9500 is so bright that I have to avert my eyes. As to Black level, you won't be able to see the difference between .016 black and 0 black unless you're in a totally dark room. The only weak link on LCD is the bloom which can't be totally offset even with local dimming but Sony's new Z9D is going to come very close with over 2200 independent zone/LED, then off inthe not too distance future, we'll hopefully see Panasonic's pixel/pixel backlight solution.
Click to expand...

I totally disagree. I would actually argue that standard 1 is the problem. I've seen the entire Samsung line, the input lag is impressive but the black levels and contrast ratio are shit compared to any OLED. I don't understand how anyone can claim that blinding brightness is a good thing. The Samsungs have shitty panel uniformity and poor contrast ratios not to mention the black level is noticable. I'm not saying its impossible for LCDs to evolve but right now OLED is blowing the doors off every LCD I've ever seen in overall PQ (Despite LGs upscaling). I've heard really terrific things about the Z9D but haven't seen it in action yet.
 
He did say "unless you're in a totally dark room"...if you understand how contrast/black levels work and interact with your room ambient light, then you will get this.
 
shaolin95 said:
Wait...what is this about the JU7100 being true 120Hz where did you hear that? I dont see it showing in Rtings and my un40JU7100 I am pretty sure was never able to do true 120Hz. Now I am going to have to plug it back in to test lol
Click to expand...


It's a 120Hz panel but it only accepts 60hz input so you won't be able to drive it at 120Hz.but it does reduce the Blur and Motion Interpolation. That's why the those ratings are much higher/better in the rting's review and the reason why I returned the 6500 and got the 7500 despite the fairly large price gap.
 
Pastuch said:
I totally disagree. I would actually argue that standard 1 is the problem. I've seen the entire Samsung line, the input lag is impressive but the black levels and contrast ratio are shit compared to any OLED. I don't understand how anyone can claim that blinding brightness is a good thing. The Samsungs have shitty panel uniformity and poor contrast ratios not to mention the black level is noticable. I'm not saying its impossible for LCDs to evolve but right now OLED is blowing the doors off every LCD I've ever seen in overall PQ (Despite LGs upscaling). I've heard really terrific things about the Z9D but haven't seen it in action yet.
Click to expand...


Everything you said is true and does look good on paper. But in practical use. The KS9500 wins in every way unless you're doing professional photo/video work (you shouldn't be using a TV in that case). I spent about 20 hours over a weekend at a friends house playing with his E6 from bright afternoon daylight to evening. You pretty much need to use theatre curtains for the E6 to look good during daylight hours. In the evening it looks beautiful. Unless you have a theater room or only watch TV in the evening. The KS9500 looks alot better most of the time. As to the peak brightness. You might not see much difference on a streaming HDr source but playing back a UHD disc will show a big difference. I used Pacific Rim (it's one of the best demo/reference UHD disc despite being from a 2K DI). The range between the bright and dark is so much larger. In the Hong Kong battle scenes. The Spotlight on the Jeager and the circling heli and light reflection off the metal really stands out. Basically The B6 will looks better under ideal conditions but the KS9500 looks better under almost every other condition.
 
Wiz33 said:
unless you're doing professional photo/video work (you shouldn't be using a TV in that case)
Click to expand...
I'm curious: what should you be using for that? Nowadays I've heard a new argument, that displays with insanely high color accuracy shouldn't be used because they're radically different from what most of one's clients will use. I don't do professional work, but I'm curious for an answer nonetheless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top