4K monitor in the 48-50 inch size range

W

wyem

Weaksauce
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
100
As someone who works with a lot of textbased applications, I much prefer a 1080P resolution on a 23 or 24 inch screen compared to a 20/21 incher.

This level of scaling means a 48 inch monitor would be required to achieve the same PPI in 4K.

To my knowledge only 40 inchers have come out thus far. Does anyone know if there are bigger sizes in the works, specifically for monitors?
 
Currently there is the UHD550 55" IPS monitor imported from Korea, and the soon to be released Crossover 494K 49" IPS monitor, also imported from Korea. There's nothing in the domestic U.S. market larger than 40", so these monitors are your only choice for the moment.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Hmm, that would effectively shrink the screen space wouldn't it?
 
If you have Maxwell GPUs with HDMI2.0 you can buy one of the Samsung 48" 4k TVs.
 
Well the Samsungs 2015 4k TVs are fantastic computer monitors. You need HDMI2 card (any NVIDIA GTX900 series) to get the 4k60p 4-4-4. With regular HDMI1.4 you will only get 4k30p 4-4-4 (30Hz is not that bad for desktop applications but is definitely crap for gaming).

I would look into these in order of increasing price and quality:

48JU6700 ($1000)
48JU7500 ($1500)
48JS9000 ($2000).

All 3 above are slightly curved. Having owned one for 3 months now I would never use a flat monitor of that size (the curve helps with reflections and improves contrast at the edges)

If all you want is desktop applications I would get the 48JU6700 plus the cheapest GTX960 ($200) card you can find. You can also wait a week or two for upcoming GTX950 card and save $50. So that is about $1200.

For gaming I would go for the 48JS9000 + 2xGTX980 Ti (SLI). That is unfortunately about $3200 total for cards and and monitor but it is worth it. For light gaming a single GTX980Ti will work just fine (only the newest heavy 3D games really need the SLI to push 4k pixels at acceptable fps)

You can read more about them in this thread on this forum:

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1853884&page=219

This post is probably the most relevant as it is from a developer that uses this monitor for coding (he runs HDMI 1.4 so only 30hz refresh but apparently it is fine for coding):

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041684413&postcount=3968

48js9000 + 2 PB278Q running off a pair of 290x's until i either the hdmi 2.0 active adapter come to market (doubtful) or a pair of 980ti's get back in stock at my usual etailers.

omg this monitor is coding heaven!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I'm gonna go for the crossover 494k. It's 49" 4k ah-ips panel.
 
Keen to hear what you think of the crossover. It's on my short list just QC is my main worry.

Just want curved and it'd be perfect /1st world whinging
 
Another question for [Hard] members who have transitioned to a bigger monitor at a higher PPI…

I have a 24 inch 1080P monitor with a PPI of about 95, something probably many of us have grown accustomed to over the years.

I do also have a 17 inch laptop screen with a PPI of 106 which is about what I would expect from a 40 inch display at 4K resolution.

The majority of my time is spent looking at the bigger monitor with the lower PPI. It's comfortable and I can do it all day, with breaks.

I'm trying to figure out if I can handle going back to a higher PPI for long periods of time. If so, then I could buy a 40 inch instead of the 48 inch and be happy with the purchase.

It's hard to tell. I'm looking at my laptop monitor from about 2 feet away and it looks good. But when I move about 3 feet away at a more awkward angle, it's not so good.

Hopefully others making the same 24 inch 1080P transition to 4K 40 inches can comment on their experience, thanks.
 
PS: I know that text scaling is an option. It's not something I have a lot of experience with, but I do know that it effectively shrinks screen size which is at a premium for me.

What I'm trying to avoid with text scaling is turning a a 4K into a 3K equivalent, if I could just get a bigger monitor instead.

On the other hand if it barely makes a difference than maybe it's the way to go.
 
wyem said:
PS: I know that text scaling is an option. It's not something I have a lot of experience with, but I do know that it effectively shrinks screen size which is at a premium for me.

What I'm trying to avoid with text scaling is turning a a 4K into a 3K equivalent, if I could just get a bigger monitor instead.

On the other hand if it barely makes a difference than maybe it's the way to go.
Click to expand...

thinking about this, in your scenario you should probably go with 48"

the thing with 48" is your going to push it to the back of the desk or wall mount .. your effective PPI to your eye (much like your laptop analogy ) is going to be increased as a result, more akin to looking at a 23"-22" 1080p screen from closer up which to be fair is at the point where you cant really see pixels.

(okay there are people who still see pixels on 24" 4k monitors but im guessing your normal )

Then again, there is nothing wrong with 40" (39.5") you can scale just 115% -125% perhaps have the screen closer as a result and settle the difference between the 48" .. you still getting 3.75x the screen space of a 1080p monitor.. its still TV sized and great for gaming.

it all depends on how close you want to sit and how the gate of your eye falls onto the screen sure it wont be 1440p ppi but it will be ( being pushed back further ) 23" -22" 1080p PPI which seems to be what you are aiming at.

so yea.. 48" for easy on the eye , 40" for great detail , 32" for that '4k' crispness and 28" for those people who like to sellotape the screen to their faces
 
Last edited:
Thanks, I actually prefer not to wall mount. So now I'm leaning towards the 40 inch and bringing it up closer to the eye. I'll also be saving a good $500 by doing that (Crossover 404K seems to be selling for about $650 on eBay compared to almost $1100 for the 494K)
 
What video card do you have?
I would buy a GTX 960 and pair it with a Samsung 48" 6500/6700/7100/7500 TV.

I wouldn't consider any sub-level Korean brand like Crossover, Wasbi or even Phillps. All of their panels are rejects from the big manufactures.
It's like buying a salvage title car because it's cheaper.
 
I have an integrated video card that has been manufacturer confirms not to support 4k, so I need a USB to 4K adapter. Plugable has a few options.

Ironic that you would use the salvaged car example because I actually used to drive a salvaged car :) It worked just fine.
 
I assume that 55" Korean monitor does support 4:4:4 at 60Hz since it's an actual monitor right? Price looks pretty nice and includes all the PC display ports which seems nice.
 
I believe so. I'm tempted to jump on a 40 inch myself. Thing is prices are dropping so fast that I don't want to pick one up at $680 if I can buy one in six months for $400.
 
Last edited:
ChronoDetector said:
I assume that 55" Korean monitor does support 4:4:4 at 60Hz since it's an actual monitor right?
Click to expand...

Yes. The Crossover 40/49" and the Wasabi Mango 42/55" all support 4k 4:4:4 @ 60Hz on both displayport and HDMI 2.0, though I'm not sure if any will do HDR w/10 bit color.
 
wyem said:
I have an integrated video card that has been manufacturer confirms not to support 4k, so I need a USB to 4K adapter. Plugable has a few options.

Ironic that you would use the salvaged car example because I actually used to drive a salvaged car :) It worked just fine.
Click to expand...

If you're concerned about text clarity, you might be disappointed by the USB video adapter. It compresses the video stream, so high-frequency details (like text) may not be as clear as they should be when using a real video card with 4k support.

These adapters do a fantastic job when outputting 1080p 30Hz, but 4k video = four times the pixels. Compressing an 8Gbps signal to 4Gbps is pretty time-consuming.

Also, CPU usage will be high, because you have to use your CPU to encode the video stream in real-time. Most reviews complain about lag, and that's probably (1) the processing time for a frame combined with (2) the 30 Hz max refresh rate.
 
Last edited:
I tried the Samsung UN40JU7500, loved the 4k, didn't love the pinkish whites around the edges of the screen. And for that matter almost any solid color other than black showed a color shift from the center to the top/bottom and from the center to the left/right. It's possible I had a defective one.

So I ordered an LG 43UF7600, which I believe has the same panel as the Wasabi Mango UHD420, and so far, I like it a lot more than the Samsung. My IPS viewing angles are back. And I haven't noticed any significant input lag at 4k resolution. Though it's not perfect.


Biggest issue is that it's glossy like the Samsung, but without the curve, so it is a bit more mirror like. In a perfect world, it would have the same semi-matte coating as the 2nd gen HP ZR2740w. But to have 4k now, I'll live with the gloss.

A smaller issue, 5-10 pixels on the left and right of the screen are not visible without moving your head, when viewed from about 2 feet. I think I saw mention of this in the Wasabi Mango thread over on overclock.net. I find it pretty easy to ignore.


Another plus over the Samsung, it remains "connected" to all inputs when switching inputs, while on. The Samsung would disconnect and reconnect when switched back to an input, which caused all the windows to reshuffle. Both displays disconnect and cause a window reshuffle when powered off.

And an issue they both share is that they require HDMI 2.0 for 4k@60Hz. No Displayport. So the only video cards that can take full advantage of them are Nvidia 9xx series. The Samsung 6xxx series have 1 HDMI 2.0 input, the Samsung 7xxx and above have 4 HDMI 2.0 inputs. The LG UF7600 series has 2 HDMI 2.0 inputs.

And to be more on topic, there is an LG 49UF7600, which should have the same capabilities as the 43UF7600, with a larger screen size. If you like glossy IPS displays, you'd probably like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top