BenQ BL3201PT 4K monitor

[Badluck]

lol just made an account to post this....

Hello

I've had this monitor for over 6 months and I've had this issue since the purchase:

Same as some people mentioned, I also get sprit second lines and artifacts. They appear roughly 2-3 times a day. At first I thought the problem is with the cable supplied with the monitor and I bought this one as a replacement:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Accell-B142C-010B-DisplayPort-Latching-Cable/dp/B0098HVXVQ/

Some of the reviews for this cable say it solved the artifacts problem. That is not my case unfortunately, I still get artifacts even though I pay them little mind.

"No signal detected" issue happens sometimes as well but it is rather rare.

The worse part can be seen in photo and video:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2782785/benq.jpg

https://vid.me/DgVo

BQ:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2782785/benq.mov

This happens roughly 2x a month (it happened 3 times in a single day yesterday, first time it happened so many times). I can switch to a different input when this happens (i tried having a macbook connected to the hdmi input. I tried restarting my PC but the problem persists. I have to turn the monitor off and on, only then does the problem disappear.
This bothers me more as I'm unsure if the monitor is failing.

I don't have an opportunity to test the monitor on a different PC under the same set of conditions - 4k resolution at 60Hz. Any ideas/recommendations? Has anyone encountered a similar issue?

The monitor is brilliant outside of these problems but I'm getting nervous when it acts this way.

BenQ BL3201PT - i7 3770k, GTX 680 (GV-N680D5-2GD-B), GA-Z77X-UD5H, Windows 10

Geez, you're issue is significantly worse than mine! hahaha

I also have this monitor and have had cold hard evidence of my split-second glitch artifacting too, at first I thought it was to do with my graphics card, but if that was the case, why would it affect it when I connect to my laptop as well? So that's rule out, then I thought, maybe it's the shitty cables they've given, so I tried another cable that I know also works on another monitor and still same issue.....so not a cable problem.....so I thought...okay.....maybe it's the connection interface that's fucked up....so I changed from HDMI to DP, and from that to DVI and tried all the other duplicate ports too.....they all seem to show the same symptom...so I thought...ok, maybe the interface connections busted up somehow....or my computer's interface is busted up....but if that was the case, wouldn't the same issue be present on the other monitors I have connected up? Nope.....so that's ruled out.....and so I start my RMA process........first sent and the received back with a comment stating that the electrical board interface was replaced and "tests OK"....quote...heh....so I boot it up and within half an hour, the same artifacting comes back and I'm like "WHAT?!"...so I send it back stating, did you even fix this?? and I send them this link as evidence.....and they were like alright alright, I'll send it off, expect two to three weeks wait for it..and I said ok......a month later....got the second return and it commented "panel replaced"...so I guess the entire panel is replaced....so effectively I have a brand new monitor by now? Besides the case of it, which is still the same old one and that the interface board is replaced....and now I think I just saw a flash of white light and then back to normal in a split-second.........I will be on alert and attempting to take more evidence to see if this is the case....

If it turns out this is the case, what should I resort to? RMA a third time and hope I get *goodluck* in contrast to my username and received an non-defected unit? Heheehe...perhaps request for a completely brand new unit? or just a refund and get something else that DOES NOT have this defect?

Yes I've read all 12 pages of this thread and it appears that it is a ongoing defect that (no one?) is going to fixed...... If that is so, what other equivalent UHD monitor should I get in comparable quality, and price I suppose too, or less $$$ for better quality would be nice as well but I'm dreaming! that are currently out there for consumers?

 

[XcPNehVYlE4A3C]

just thought i'd post a reply here since i just bought my 2nd BL3201PT/H

1st monitor was build date mid 2014. the monitor i just got was mid 2016 build date.

both have the split-second glitch w/artifacting 1-3 times a day. The older monitor had occasional issues where it wouldnt recognize inputs and had to be reset. So far havent seen that on the new one, but its only been a couple weeks so far.

other than that, these are great monitors, and imo still the best option right now - colors are great, the size is perfect (well, would prefer 5k, but...), the OSD is one of the best and most logically laid out i've ever used, the remote puck is incredibly handy to have, stand is good, aesthetics are basic (no dragons or shiny silver strips), and so on...

so yeah, glitch issue is annoying, but so far after 2 years its still only a minor annoyance, and i still think this is the best choice in this category (non-gaming, 30"+ 4k)

 

[Panmaster]

I'd estimate "the glitch" to be closer to once per half-hour than 1-3 times a day. The touch sensitive buttons randomly going on & off is far more annoying. Light from the screen itself is activating them.

 

[Badluck]

I'd estimate "the glitch" to be closer to once per half-hour than 1-3 times a day. The touch sensitive buttons randomly going on & off is far more annoying. Light from the screen itself is activating them.

I beg to differ; in my case it would happen once every three hours, others none at all even for the entire day! Then I would have some days where it would flicker like you mentioned "once per half-hour" so the issue is actually random and intermittent.

 

[Dahkoht]

Still haven't found anything to replaced these two monitors for myself. I can't go back to anything less than 4k , and 60hz is fine with me over too small. 32" is about as small as I want for a monitor for gaming especially. Hoping for a 40-43" ish OLED 4k in the future.

My "flashes/lines" have done it from the beginning on both , but whether it's work on one , gaming on other , I'd say it 2-3 an entire day of use , definitely not every half hour.

Going on year 2 almost of using both of them (display port each to their own rig) and hasn't change behavior yet to more frequent.

 

[Badluck]

Hmmm, what about this one, you guys? Identical size, identical resolution, identical response time, less input connections (so only DP and HDMI, compared to the Benq which has Dual-Link DVI + DP + miniDP + two HDMI input connections) just 3% less sRGB coverage and I think the Adobe coverage is different too....though didn't really look into that....not sure if this Samsung *also* uses the same panel - I hope not or I will find out once I get my exchange done......hopefully! Or even if it doesn't, it could still pose the same issue...but I'll find out after having it for a day or two or longer for a more consistent test.

 

[RidingTheFlow]

Hmmm, what about this one, you guys? Identical size, identical resolution, identical response time, less input connections (so only DP and HDMI, compared to the Benq which has Dual-Link DVI + DP + miniDP + two HDMI input connections) just 3% less sRGB coverage and I think the Adobe coverage is different too....though didn't really look into that....not sure if this Samsung *also* uses the same panel - I hope not or I will find out once I get my exchange done......hopefully! Or even if it doesn't, it could still pose the same issue...but I'll find out after having it for a day or two or longer for a more consistent test.

This Samsung uses completely different panel so it should not have same issue. But its PLS panel, and some people (me included) not very fond of it - it has VA-like gamma-shift if you move around and somewhat visible black-blue trailing due to slower response times. Contrast is much better than IPS though, so depends on what you prefer.

 

[Badluck]

This Samsung uses completely different panel so it should not have same issue. But its PLS panel, and some people (me included) not very fond of it - it has VA-like gamma-shift if you move around and somewhat visible black-blue trailing due to slower response times. Contrast is much better than IPS though, so depends on what you prefer.

Oooh....can ...can you give me an example of this somewhat visible black-blue trailing and VA gamma shift? Well the response time is practically the same unless you wished these PLS panels had a much faster response time like 1ms? Or even 0.5ms? For this problem to be fixed?

I've never experienced such issue, probably because I've never owned a PLS panel'd monitor before but still......

I like contrast - it will do better with the nice dark in dark games and watching dark movies rather than me seeing grey....hahaha The 3% less sRGB coverage, shouldn't be *that* significant, will it? And I most likely won't be doing any Adobe workshop stuff so that Adobe coverage thing is useless to me.....all I care able is sRGB as that's the colours space that the desktop, web browser, movies, animations and games are shown in until they change it....

Or ...oh I suppose I could find all this out when I get my exchange done.....heh..

 

[RidingTheFlow]

Oooh....can ...can you give me an example of this somewhat visible black-blue trailing and VA gamma shift? Well the response time is practically the same unless you wished these PLS panels had a much faster response time like 1ms? Or even 0.5ms? For this problem to be fixed?

Single-number (average) response time is useless number, because monitor can have average (e.g. gray-to-gray) response time of 5 ms, but some transitions (e.g. from-black) like 30ms. This will cause some colors respond slower and "smear/trail".
It would be much better if manufacturers also stated *worst* transition time in the specs, but they don't (for obvious reasons, to help sell not-so-fast panels)...

Some people don't mind it, so you really want to see it with your own eyes to judge.

 

[Badluck]

Single-number (average) response time is useless number, because monitor can have average (e.g. gray-to-gray) response time of 5 ms, but some transitions (e.g. from-black) like 30ms. This will cause some colors respond slower and "smear/trail".
It would be much better if manufacturers also stated *worst* transition time in the specs, but they don't (for obvious reasons, to help sell not-so-fast panels)...

Some people don't mind it, so you really want to see it with your own eyes to judge.

Ahh okay..... so you would rather monitor manufacturer state the Black to Black an White to White response times alongside grey to grey? So if a Black to Black or White to White response time was like 1ms - would that be enough to fix the "smear/trail" effect? Or would you need something faster than that? Like maybe 0.5ms as mentioned?

Well typically, the faster the GtG time is, teh faster the BtB or WtW time, in theory.....so Say a monitor with 1ms GtG and unknown BtB would(or should be at least) be faster than say another monitor's (also unknown) BtB value whose GtG is 5ms?

 

[RidingTheFlow]

Ahh okay..... so you would rather monitor manufacturer state the Black to Black an White to White response times alongside grey to grey? So if a Black to Black or White to White response time was like 1ms - would that be enough to fix the "smear/trail" effect? Or would you need something faster than that? Like maybe 0.5ms as mentioned?

As I said, at minimum they should list the *slowest* transition response time, whatever that is - black to white, black to grey, etc.
Ideally response times for different transitions are listed as a table or a diagram (like most of pro monitors reviewers do).

so Say a monitor with 1ms GtG and unknown BtB would(or should be at least) be faster than say another monitor's (also unknown) BtB value whose GtG is 5ms?

Not really... GtG/average could be faster, but worst one slower. I had Acer Z35 once which had average 6ms, but "from black" of 50ms (no kidding).
"Ideal" response time fairly easy to approximate from max refresh rate - e.g. to display 144hz without much smearing you will need at least 1000/144=~7ms. For 60Hz you will need at least 1000/60=16ms

 

[Badluck]

Not really... GtG/average could be faster, but worst one slower. I had Acer Z35 once which had average 6ms, but "from black" of 50ms (no kidding).

This one? If so it's actually 4ms, not 6ms...unless you had hardware to measure this all yourself and this is what you received for GtG? And I'm guessing you also measure for from Black to Grey as 50ms?! Wow.... I would take a guess that going from pure Black to pure Black should result the slowest of all the tests because it has to go to grey and then white and then back to grey and then black. Same with white to white, has to go to grey, then black then back to grey and then white. Grey to Grey is usually the fastest because they have less to cover, so grey to white to grey, or grey to black to grey.

"Ideal" response time fairly easy to approximate from max refresh rate - e.g. to display 144hz without much smearing you will need at least 1000/144=~7ms. For 60Hz you will need at least 1000/60=16ms

Ahh, so all those manufactures touting 1ms on their 144Hz monitors is kinda overkill then?! Hahahaha I think I saw a 165Hz one, so it's ideal response time would be 1000/165=~6ms. But all they're showing GtG, where you would want to know what BtB or WtW which would represent the slowest value and that would determine if it would show the affect if the response time isn't fast enough.... Because sure, the GtG would fit(so there'll be no blur effect viewing only a colours between grey and white), but without knowing BtB or WtW and hoping it's at least under 16.6 recurring ms for a 60Hz panel.......actually is there such monitor that exists that has been professionally reviewed where BtB or and WtW does meet the ideal response time for no blur or smear or any of that trailing effect, for whatever refresh rate they can achieve in their target resolution? Or so far no such monitor exists?

 

[RidingTheFlow]

This one? If so it's actually 4ms, not 6ms...unless you had hardware to measure this all yourself and this is what you received for GtG? And I'm guessing you also measure for from Black to Grey as 50ms?! Wow.... I would take a guess that going from pure Black to pure Black should result the slowest of all the tests because it has to go to grey and then white and then back to grey and then black. Same with white to white, has to go to grey, then black then back to grey and then white. Grey to Grey is usually the fastest because they have less to cover, so grey to white to grey, or grey to black to grey.

Sorry, I maybe mistaken what Acer (bull)advertised, sure, 4ms lol, not even best are these fast I didn't measure myself, but lot of good reviewers do nowadays, here is one example (look red numbers for 0-50 transition).

Ahh, so all those manufactures touting 1ms on their 144Hz monitors is kinda overkill then?!

Maybe not, because
a) most likely its not 1ms even on best transitions and this just typical bullsh$t marketing. Its claimed 1ms just to gain edge over competitor because many people just choose "what number is smaller"
b) even if average 1ms (doubt it), most likely quite some transitions are slower - hence need to be at least <7ms to show 144hz well in all situations

 

[Badluck]

Sorry, I maybe mistaken what Acer (bull)advertised, sure, 4ms lol, not even best are these fast I didn't measure myself, but lot of good reviewers do nowadays, here is one example (look red numbers for 0-50 transition).

If that's all truthful, you can take Acer to court for false advertisement, and misleading claims; you know! But of course those readings have to be 100% correct or else don't bother.....

Maybe not, because
a) most likely its not 1ms even on best transitions and this just typical bullsh$t marketing. Its claimed 1ms just to gain edge over competitor because many people just choose "what number is smaller"
b) even if average 1ms (doubt it), most likely quite some transitions are slower - hence need to be at least <7ms to show 144hz well in all situations

Yeah I understand; have there actually been any 144Hz monitors with an average of less than 7ms response time for GtG at least?

 

[RidingTheFlow]

If that's all truthful, you can take Acer to court for false advertisement, and misleading claims; you know!

You can't since there is no binding contract or universally accepted definition on what "response time" means and each manufacturer can set own rules really. They can just say "by response time number in our ad we meant pixel reaching 75% of set point", or "we meant best response time with maximum overdrive (with horrible overshoot, but hey, at least response is fast)".

Also there is always clause "specs on this website are subject to change". I've just recently seen person on Acers forums who actually found that they sold him 8-bit monitor as 10-bit - and what do you think, they just said "oh, sorry, our mistake, we have fixed the website now".

 

[Badluck]

You can't since there is no binding contract or universally accepted definition on what "response time" means and each manufacturer can set own rules really. They can just say "by response time number in our ad we meant pixel reaching 75% of set point", or "we meant best response time with maximum overdrive (with horrible overshoot, but hey, at least response is fast)".

Also there is always clause "specs on this website are subject to change". I've just recently seen person on Acers forums who actually found that they sold him 8-bit monitor as 10-bit - and what do you think, they just said "oh, sorry, our mistake, we have fixed the website now".

Well, there is a contract if you bought from Acer.....and they failed to deliver on advertised specifications....

Hmmm, you might be right about the response time definition.....

Are you a lawyer by any chance?

 

[RidingTheFlow]

Are you a lawyer by any chance?

Nah, I am not a layer, but I have some experience interacting with hardware engineers and know tricks they use to wiggle out

 

[Kartik Subbarao]

What do you guys think about the newer BenQ PD3200U model, which according to pcmonitors.info is an updated version of the BL3201PT/PH? I can't find many reviews on it yet. For instance, does it use the same panel that seems to be susceptible to glitches as reported in this thread, or does it use a different panel?

It costs about $100 more than the BL3201, but given that it's much more recent (amazon.com reports its first available date as December 23, 2016), it's possible they might have fixed previous problems. Would be curious to hear any thoughts.

 

[Panmaster]

What do you guys think about the newer BenQ PD3200U model, which according to pcmonitors.info is an updated version of the BL3201PT/PH? I can't find many reviews on it yet. For instance, does it use the same panel that seems to be susceptible to glitches as reported in this thread, or does it use a different panel?

It costs about $100 more than the BL3201, but given that it's much more recent (amazon.com reports its first available date as December 23, 2016), it's possible they might have fixed previous problems. Would be curious to hear any thoughts.

It appears to just have dithering support. Nothing special there.
Why is this textbox lagging so much?

 

[Kartik Subbarao]

It appears to just have dithering support. Nothing special there.
Why is this textbox lagging so much?

Well in particular, I'd be curious to know if it uses a different panel or not. displayspecifications.com doesn't list the specific model of the panel, just the manufacturer (AU Optronics). Whereas for the BL3201PT, the specific model of the AU Optronics panel is listed as M320QAN01.0.

Can't help you on the textbox question, sorry

 

[undertaker2k8]

Got a PD3200U to test, had the dark banding issue mentioned earlier. Sad.

 

[Vandan]

Has the split-second glitch been fixed in the recent months by any chance? Is there really no good 32"+ 4K monitor on the market?

 

[Badluck]

Has the split-second glitch been fixed in the recent months by any chance? Is there really no good 32"+ 4K monitor on the market?

You could try the Samsung one I linked earlier......uses a different panel according to that other guy....so it won't or *shouldn't*, unless it's got the same issue, have this glitch....however that one uses PLS panel type which is different from IPS and thus will have its own advantages and disadvantages......

 

[Chris_B]

So im waiting on yet another monitor replacement for my dodgy one with the vertical glitching (this will be replacement 3), jumping through the usual hoops as follows:

"What resolution and refresh rate are you running it at." Well its a 4k 60hz monitor so the obvious answer is 640x480 at 30hz.

It really does baffle me with such a widespread issue with this screen Benq seem adamant to go down the tech support script like any of their suggestions are going to make a difference. So far my 2 replacements do the same glitching routine while also coming with dead pixels, my current screen has like a grey area as if the screen has been damaged in some way.

Anyway been in touch with them since August 31st and every other day seems to be another redundant question in my email about drivers, or cables or some other shit that I've already mentioned, apparently accepting the fact they have a dodgy product is something they find hard to do.

 

[XcPNehVYlE4A3C]

What do you guys think about the newer BenQ PD3200U model, which according to pcmonitors.info is an updated version of the BL3201PT/PH? I can't find many reviews on it yet. For instance, does it use the same panel that seems to be susceptible to glitches as reported in this thread, or does it use a different panel?

It costs about $100 more than the BL3201, but given that it's much more recent (amazon.com reports its first available date as December 23, 2016), it's possible they might have fixed previous problems. Would be curious to hear any thoughts.

Has the split-second glitch been fixed in the recent months by any chance? Is there really no good 32"+ 4K monitor on the market?

I just got a PD3200U and as far as i can tell its the same as my BL3201PT/PH's. only difference i can see is it has a KVM switch and different color stand. So far ive owned 2 x BL3201PT/PH (one older and one more recent) and this PD3200U. They all have the same issues. Of course its not ideal but overall i'm happy with them even with the glitching and needing occasional power cycling. AFAIK there is no better large (>28") 4K on the market.

There are some new LG 30" 4ks coming out but i doubt those will be perfect in every way either.

 

[MagnaMagicBtu]

The HP Spectre 32 uses the exact same panel as this display and It's glossy so it looks much more true to life, hence why eye glasses are glossy and not matte. Reflections can be an issue though.

 

[Seinfeld]

Reviving this thread to report that I am seeing image retention since a few months ago.
The below photos were taken tonight with less than one hour between and as you can see it's retention of two different pages, first one is YouTube the other is a page with image galleries.
It's noticeable on light gray background mostly and it doesn't bother me so much.

Spoiler

Spoiler

This monitor [BL3201PT] is the best I have owned even tho there is artifacts (flashing line(s) that appear for half a second one or more times per day) and image retention, I have had it since release day and it's still pleasing me.

Also had an issue with monitor losing signal during PC restart but it was solved by buying Amazon basic DP cable. Some DP cables are not made according to the DP standard and are sending voltage to the GPU which is causing issues.