Best interim monitor (replacing Dell 3007WFP)

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Hello all! I've been a long time lurker of the displays section of Hardforum, mulling over all the possible options for replacing my current monitor. After months of research, I've come to the conclusion that none of the current options at 4K are really perfect. In fact, they all seem to have major flaws.

Thus, I make this thread here to ask you all of suggestions for an interim setup. I'm especially interested in forming a multi-monitor setup. I use my Dell 3007wfp for gaming, coding, and creative work which requires a large range of colors, an uniformity. My budget is $500 ($700 maximum), and I'm considering the following options:

1. I'm considering purchasing 2 Dell 2007fp (1600x1200) monitors to form a PLP setup with my current 3007wfp. This has the major Pro that it's dirt cheap. The major Con is that the 2007fp is even older than my 3007wfp.

2. I'm considering purchasing a Dell up3017. The major Pro is that it's the only monitor out there that has great color uniformity etc. The Con is that it's essentially the same thing I currently have, just with some better colors.

3. I'm considering the LG 31MU97Z-B. I don't know much about this, but it seems to have no color uniformity issues and is a terrific display.

4. I am considering one of the 32 inch 4Ks, though none of them seem to be able to compete with the colors of the UP3017.

5. Considering purchasing dual 2560x1440 displays, with plans to eventually add a 3rd display. I don't know which ones I would buy, but if I went this route, I'd want the monitors to have terrific color reproduction/uniformity etc, as well as a high refresh, and possibly g-sync. (Think I may make a separate thread about this).

Let me know which one of these option you think is best, if any.
 
Last edited:

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Come on guys... no replies at all? I know it's a holiday weekend, but I'd really like to pick something up before sale days are over.
 

Starbomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
279
Personally, i'd go the single monitor route. I kinda dislike the bezels, and debezelling and voiding warranty is not really my cup of tea (for monitors).

Have you considered 21:9 monitors?
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
CF791

Get the 10% off coupon buying from Samsung direct

Pre-order

wait for release

?

?


?

Profit
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Personally, i'd go the single monitor route. I kinda dislike the bezels, and debezelling and voiding warranty is not really my cup of tea (for monitors).

Have you considered 21:9 monitors?
Yes, I have considered 21:9 monitors. The thing in is, in this long process of trying to consider every option, I got into the habit of essentially disregarding a possible choice if I found even a single major flaw in it. It was just a mental organization thing that helped me keep track of my options. I disregarded 21:9 when I realized that it was just too low-res for my taste. After posting this thread, I've taken a deeper look at 21:9, and have decided that I'll likely go with the Asus ROG 34in or the LG 38in if they go on sale on Cyber Monday. If I really feel like I really need the extra real-estate down the line, I'll just attach 2 curved QHD's on either side

If they don't go on sale, than I was considering option 5 from above with the Dell s2417 (see here: https://hardforum.com/threads/i-want-30-1600p-at-100-hz.1912384/#post-1042573664 )
CF791

Get the 10% off coupon buying from Samsung direct

Pre-order

wait for release
Is there any particular reason this is better than the Asus ROG I intended to buy? It looks good, but I'd want to ensure it's going to be a terrific item if I pre-order it.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
The CF791 has better black & contrast levels and no apparent backlight bleed like the ROG 34 IPS. However, it does not have gsync....but it does have freesync if you use AMD gpus.

I already sold off the triple display setup you linked above and replaced it with a 55" OLED LG. The bezels, even though small, got to me after a while on that surround setup and playing games with surround + SLI was a support nightmare half the time.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
The CF791 has better black & contrast levels and no apparent backlight bleed like the ROG 34 IPS. However, it does not have gsync....but it does have freesync if you use AMD gpus.

I already sold off the triple display setup you linked above and replaced it with a 55" OLED LG. The bezels, even though small, got to me after a while on that surround setup and playing games with surround + SLI was a support nightmare half the time.
lol I didn't even realize I was linking your own post!

About the CF791 though... which feature(s) do you think will be more important to me? G-Sync or better contrast/light-bleed/image quality? I intend to use this monitor primarily for AutoCAD and gaming, with some light color-based web design on the side. I've always used displays with normal refresh/no g-sync, but seeing how I've never actually tried G-sync, I have no way to know whether the color accuracy and image quality I'm used to is more or less impact-full than G-sync. I know that I'm the only one who can really answer the questions above, but I haven't yet had the pleasure of trying out G-sync. I do think that I'd take image-quality over G-sync any-day, but without having tried it, I'm essentially talking out my ass.

Also, you've convinced me to abandon the triple QHD option, but I started considering something else yesterday night: The Philips BDM4037UW. I think it's the only curved 4K monitor out there. If I'm going to abandon G-sync and high refresh with the CF791 anyway, why not go full 4K? I'm not sure, but I think that the Phillips should be on pare with the CF791 in terms of quality, correct?
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
Well if you do CADD, I would highly recommend at least a 100hz display. I do light CADD work and the extra precision from higher refresh rates is awesome.

I had the X34 and it sat on my desk for at least six months which is about three times longer than most setups sit on my desk. Only thing I did not like about it was the IPS contrast / black levels, which irked me when I evaluated 3D assets for the video game I am developing. The LG OLED sitting on my desk now, is like the exact opposite....freaking mindblowing beautiful picture quality but the 60hz drives me crazy in shooters and is not the most ideal for CADD.

With the Samsung, I am sure I will miss Gsync, but then again I am rocking a Titan XP which was pretty decent keeping FPS maxed on the X34 so the lack of Gsync probably won't be much of an issue as I will either cap FPS @99 + Vsync or cap em at 101 + Fastsync to get the desired smoothness.

It is my hope that the CF791 is the best compromise between OLED and high refresh gaming displays, and that it tides me over until we get proper gaming OLED displays.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Well if you do CADD, I would highly recommend at least a 100hz display. I do light CADD work and the extra precision from higher refresh rates is awesome.

I had the X34 and it sat on my desk for at least six months which is about three times longer than most setups sit on my desk. Only thing I did not like about it was the IPS contrast / black levels, which irked me when I evaluated 3D assets for the video game I am developing. The LG OLED sitting on my desk now, is like the exact opposite....freaking mindblowing beautiful picture quality but the 60hz drives me crazy in shooters and is not the most ideal for CADD.

With the Samsung, I am sure I will miss Gsync, but then again I am rocking a Titan XP which was pretty decent keeping FPS maxed on the X34 so the lack of Gsync probably won't be much of an issue as I will either cap FPS @99 + Vsync or cap em at 101 + Fastsync to get the desired smoothness.

It is my hope that the CF791 is the best compromise between OLED and high refresh gaming displays, and that it tides me over until we get proper gaming OLED displays.
I feel that I would prefer the picture quality to sheer speed, like you seem to be enjoying with the LG OLED. In fact, I might have had a a curved TV on my desk right now if it weren't for the ridiculous input lag.

About the Phillips… see I'm used to running CAD on a 60Hz display. While I'm sure a 100Hz panel would improve my experience, it's not something I'm likely to miss, seeing as how I'm used to not having it. With this in mind, how would the Phillips likely compare to the CF791 in terms of image quality? I'm seriously considering it as it seems to be the best 40in 4K around, but that's not saying much seeing as how all the 40+ 4Ks have major issues. Essentially, I don't want to buy the Phillips if it'll have major issues. If like to get a comparable experience to the CF791, only on a larger scale.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
If your going to do 4k 60hz, the only thing I can recommend is the LG OLED55C6P. Its got relatively low input lag 30+/- ms and the picture quality is nothing short of amazing. It makes it very difficult to look at any other screen technology and honestly I don't even know if I will keep the CF791 when I get it as OLED has totally spoiled me. I got mine for $1,599 from an Amazon reseller from PA who had over 9,282 ratings.
 

geok1ng

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,130
You want too much for a single display. great color range comes always with terrible color fidelity in monitors without a hardware LUT.

In your case , a wide color gamut CCFL display has terrible sRGB fidelity. And a hardware table adds input lag, which makes games terrible. To make matters worst, the best display tech for coding and readimng text, VA, has great contrast, but slow response times for gaming and horizontal gamma shift. The 34" Predators are outside your budget, the 32" omen has lower resolution than your current 3007. There are 40" 4k with Va panels that are better than your display in some metrics, but there is a catch: you may be sensitive to PWM and detect the flicker.

remove the "greater than sRGB color range" in your list of requirements and there are many displays under 700 to suggest. Plus, if you are producing content to be seen on sRGB dispalys, the 3007 actually is one of the worst possible displays to work, because what you see is not what your client will get.

I have an apple 30" , another 1600p high gamut ccfl, it was retired for the dell u2515h, a led ips with only 1440p at 25" but 3 times more contrast, better sRGB fidelity and much faster response time. did i mention it runs cooller?
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
If your going to do 4k 60hz, the only thing I can recommend is the LG OLED55C6P. Its got relatively low input lag 30+/- ms and the picture quality is nothing short of amazing. It makes it very difficult to look at any other screen technology and honestly I don't even know if I will keep the CF791 when I get it as OLED has totally spoiled me. I got mine for $1,599 from an Amazon reseller from PA who had over 9,282 ratings.
While I would love to go OLED + HDR, the TV you own has 3 major problems that I can't overlook.

1. The size. My family recently purchased a 60 inch 4K (LG 60UH60) on sale. The size didn't blow me away since I use a projector for film half the time, but I certainly can't imagine owning a monitor only 5 inches smaller than that. Heck, there's a decent chance that'll screw my eyes up even further.
2. Burn in. When it comes to text and UIs, won't burn in become evident relatively fast? That'll reduce this thing's life-span to what, 1 year?
3. That refresh. It does seem acceptable, but I still think it'll be evident. Certainly there must be a noticeable shift going from 8ms to 30ms.

Understand that I'm not trying to beat down your suggestion. I really want an HDR OLED. I just don't see how it could overcome these problems.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
You want too much for a single display. great color range comes always with terrible color fidelity in monitors without a hardware LUT.

In your case , a wide color gamut CCFL display has terrible sRGB fidelity. And a hardware table adds input lag, which makes games terrible. To make matters worst, the best display tech for coding and readimng text, VA, has great contrast, but slow response times for gaming and horizontal gamma shift. The 34" Predators are outside your budget, the 32" omen has lower resolution than your current 3007. There are 40" 4k with Va panels that are better than your display in some metrics, but there is a catch: you may be sensitive to PWM and detect the flicker.

remove the "greater than sRGB color range" in your list of requirements and there are many displays under 700 to suggest. Plus, if you are producing content to be seen on sRGB dispalys, the 3007 actually is one of the worst possible displays to work, because what you see is not what your client will get.

I have an apple 30" , another 1600p high gamut ccfl, it was retired for the dell u2515h, a led ips with only 1440p at 25" but 3 times more contrast, better sRGB fidelity and much faster response time. did i mention it runs cooller?
My budget has been upped to $1200 (but no more!)

I'm really leaning towards the 40 inch Philips BDM4037UW. It's VA, which I think is a good compromise. The size also attracts me. Are there any better options out there? I considered the Asus 34 and the X34, but the IPS bleed and poor contrast put me off. It's really a decision between the Phillips and the CF791 for me, and frankly, it kinda depends on who releases first.

The Dell you mentioned does attract me, but I think I'm ready for a curved setup at this point. That's another good thing about the CF791: It's pixel density and height is pretty much identical to QHD at 27 inches. That being the case, I could plop 1 on either side once curved QHDs start rolling out.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
While I would love to go OLED + HDR, the TV you own has 3 major problems that I can't overlook.

1. The size. My family recently purchased a 60 inch 4K (LG 60UH60) on sale. The size didn't blow me away since I use a projector for film half the time, but I certainly can't imagine owning a monitor only 5 inches smaller than that. Heck, there's a decent chance that'll screw my eyes up even further.
2. Burn in. When it comes to text and UIs, won't burn in become evident relatively fast? That'll reduce this thing's life-span to what, 1 year?
3. That refresh. It does seem acceptable, but I still think it'll be evident. Certainly there must be a noticeable shift going from 8ms to 30ms.

Understand that I'm not trying to beat down your suggestion. I really want an HDR OLED. I just don't see how it could overcome these problems.

MG_5554RetouchedV2-1940x1126.jpg
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
I have two of these OLEDs, the first one for six months now..... use em for work, gaming, movies and have none of the issues you speak of.
That's actually really comforting to hear. Still, I'm quit certain the size would get to me in no time. They really need to make sub-50" version.

I'm currently looking at Samsung's Samsung UN43KU7500 (Curved 43-Inch) and 43” KS7500 (same, but with HDR). I think that if there was a sub-50" oled, ANY sub-50" oled, I'd go for it. But unfortunately there isn't.
 
Last edited:

geok1ng

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,130
My budget has been upped to $1200 (but no more!)

I'm really leaning towards the 40 inch Philips BDM4037UW. It's VA, which I think is a good compromise. The size also attracts me. Are there any better options out there? I considered the Asus 34 and the X34, but the IPS bleed and poor contrast put me off. It's really a decision between the Phillips and the CF791 for me, and frankly, it kinda depends on who releases first.

The Dell you mentioned does attract me, but I think I'm ready for a curved setup at this point. That's another good thing about the CF791: It's pixel density and height is pretty much identical to QHD at 27 inches. That being the case, I could plop 1 on either side once curved QHDs start rolling out.

These are the monitors to look for today. BDM4037UW has higher resolution at the cost of size, will be a major competitor in the work market. The CF791 has the harder task of making VA a viable tech for gaming above 1080p, it is not the kind of monitor one buys without a TFT central review. On the working side of things the CF791 has an ergonomic advantage over the BDM4037UW, whose size i consider a neck pain hazard from personal experience with the 39" Seiki.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
That's actually really comforting to hear. Still, I'm quit certain the size would get to me in no time. They really need to make sub-50" version.

I'm currently looking at Samsung's Samsung UN43KU7500 (Curved 43-Inch) and 43” KS7500 (same, but with HDR). I think that if there was a sub-50" oled, ANY sub-50" oled, I'd go for it. But unfortunately there isn't.

I sit 4-5 feet away = 55" problem solved.

Not tryin to sound snobbish......but after using the glory of OLED, I just can't get into VA, IPS or TN anymore. The picture quality superiority is one of those things that the numbers can't properly quantify. Basically, there is OLED.....and then there is EVERYTHING else.

However, I do like high refresh displays.....its pretty hard for me to take the 60hz in BF1....my holy grail display would be a 30"-36" 144hz 4k OLED....but I would settle for 24" 2560x1440 165hz in a heart beat.
 

suiken_2mieu

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
2,910
I have the slightly newer version of the same monitor. The next upgrade that I'm going for is a Large Format 4K Display around 44" - 50".
For gaming I'm going to run a custom resolution of 3840x1600 and using the whole resolution for desktop work.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
I sit 4-5 feet away = 55" problem solved.

Not tryin to sound snobbish......but after using the glory of OLED, I just can't get into VA, IPS or TN anymore. The picture quality superiority is one of those things that the numbers can't properly quantify. Basically, there is OLED.....and then there is EVERYTHING else.

However, I do like high refresh displays.....its pretty hard for me to take the 60hz in BF1....my holy grail display would be a 30"-36" 144hz 4k OLED....but I would settle for 24" 2560x1440 165hz in a heart beat.
Some quick questions about your OLED. First off, what price did you get it for, and where from? Second, when do you plan on selling it off for a new display (asking because Id personally want such a huge display to be somewhat future proof)?
I have the slightly newer version of the same monitor. The next upgrade that I'm going for is a Large Format 4K Display around 44" - 50".
For gaming I'm going to run a custom resolution of 3840x1600 and using the whole resolution for desktop work.
Are you comfortable with borders in gaming? Personally, I'm almost certainly going to get a 40"-50" 4K this time around. I kept flip-flopping between different options up until now, but I've been quite certain that I want a TV for a few days now. I mentioned some model numbers a few posts above. Problem is, the 43” KS7500 I want (from Samsung) is European only. And it's $1K (converted, even more with shipping etc.) The 49" version of the same TV is available in the US for a lower price, and w/o expensive shipping. I'm taking a closer look at the LG OLED because if I'll have to pay almost $1K for a 49" LED, why not cough up a little more and go with a slightly larger screen for a vastly superior picture quality?
 

suiken_2mieu

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
2,910
Some quick questions about your OLED. First off, what price did you get it for, and where from? Second, when do you plan on selling it off for a new display (asking because Id personally want such a huge display to be somewhat future proof)?

Are you comfortable with borders in gaming? Personally, I'm almost certainly going to get a 40"-50" 4K this time around. I kept flip-flopping between different options up until now, but I've been quite certain that I want a TV for a few days now. I mentioned some model numbers a few posts above. Problem is, the 43” KS7500 I want (from Samsung) is European only. And it's $1K (converted, even more with shipping etc.) The 49" version of the same TV is available in the US for a lower price, and w/o expensive shipping. I'm taking a closer look at the LG OLED because if I'll have to pay almost $1K for a 49" LED, why not cough up a little more and go with a slightly larger screen for a vastly superior picture quality?
Completely fine. I've already tried it on my friends 40" 4K and enjoyed it. But I want to sit farther away. Hence the bigger size. Plus, I don't think my desk can fit 3x40" 4K monitors, much less run them in game.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,572
While I would love to go OLED + HDR, the TV you own has 3 major problems that I can't overlook.

3. That refresh. It does seem acceptable, but I still think it'll be evident. Certainly there must be a noticeable shift going from 8ms to 30ms.

You are confusing response time and input lag. The response time of an OLED is something like 0.1ms or basically instant. It's also worth mentioning that input lag testing methods have changed a bit in the last few years. The best way now is using the Leo Bodnar method which typically gives higher numbers than the camera and CRT screen method used earlier. While your current display is probably fairly good for input lag, the about 20-40 ms in best TVs at the moment is not horrible at all.

I have the ASUS PG278Q which has super low input lag and 1ms response time and I don't mind playing games on my 4K Samsung which has a 20-40ms lag depending on the settings used.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Completely fine. I've already tried it on my friends 40" 4K and enjoyed it. But I want to sit farther away. Hence the bigger size. Plus, I don't think my desk can fit 3x40" 4K monitors, much less run them in game.
I wasn't referring to the bezels in your custom resolution setup (3840x1600). You are achieving that by using older displays in conjunction, right?
You are confusing response time and input lag. The response time of an OLED is something like 0.1ms or basically instant. It's also worth mentioning that input lag testing methods have changed a bit in the last few years. The best way now is using the Leo Bodnar method which typically gives higher numbers than the camera and CRT screen method used earlier. While your current display is probably fairly good for input lag, the about 20-40 ms in best TVs at the moment is not horrible at all.

I have the ASUS PG278Q which has super low input lag and 1ms response time and I don't mind playing games on my 4K Samsung which has a 20-40ms lag depending on the settings used.
I read around a bit about input lag. People claiming it's perfectly fine on TVs is one of the many factors that made me settle on buying a TV in the first place. Point being, I was a little ignorant in that post, but I'm aware of the diffeeence now.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,352
Some quick questions about your OLED
. First off, what price did you get it for, and where from?

(A) My first one I got from Cleveland Plasma about 6 months ago for $2,400. I used it as a desktop monitor for a while then replaced the 65" LED 4k in my bedroom because my wife was complaining about its size (thats what she said) 65" was too much for her, but 55" is good (thats also what she said) lol

Missed the large format on my desk, so went with the triple dells like you saw, but I can't stand TN panels in portrait due to black crush and picture quality degredation.....also the bezels, even though small, gradually drove me nuts. I hate surfing the web on a portrait display. So I got my second one for $1,599 shipping included, from a shady amazon reseller that had over 9,000 positive ratings. They now have lowered their prices to $1,595 and if you look under new/used sellers on the Amazon merchandise page you will find them. It was not exactly a smooth process, the first one they sent me had a huge dent in the side bezel, but they were very good at immediately sending me a replacement unit which is perfect, and what I am typing on right now in all its OLED glory.

Second, when do you plan on selling it off for a new display (asking because Id personally want such a huge display to be somewhat future proof)?

(A) after trying EVERY possible display combination the last decade, I have decided that I hate multi-screen setups. I like a nice large high res display that I can fit all of my information on. When I do my real estate work I need room for three webpages, my report file and CADD, Fox Live news, web whore cams, and the calculator....which 4k accomodates nicely. So for me to replace this off my desk, I would like a 30-36" 4k OLED 120+hz display. If something inferior comes out, like that 27" 144hz 4K ips I will get that to replace the Dell S2417DG that flanks the OLED on my desk.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,551
I recently bought 3 HP Omen 32" monitors.

1440p
75hz
VA panel 5ms
Freesync

A pair of Dell 2007 panels flanking my 30" Dell 3014 was my monitor configuration the last couple years. I don't recommend it too highly because of vsync tearing that is supper noticeable in eyefinity on the portrait oriented Dell 2007 at 60hz.

I thought the HP Omen 32" was just a hair inferior to the Dell 3014 in image quality, but made up for that with 75hz and freesync.

I don't like the ultrawide curved too much personally.

Here is my comparison for your reference coming from a similar 30" starting point.

 

suiken_2mieu

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
2,910
I wasn't referring to the bezels in your custom resolution setup (3840x1600). You are achieving that by using older displays in conjunction, right?
-snip-
Currently I'm running 7680x1600 actually. (3x3007wfp-hc) I'm looking to cutting the extra resolution off the sides and then maybe updating my video card eventually.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Currently I'm running 7680x1600 actually. (3x3007wfp-hc) I'm looking to cutting the extra resolution off the sides and then maybe updating my video card eventually.
Ahhhh I get you. How's the triple 16:10 working out?
 

QuiteSufficient

Sufficiently [H]ard
Joined
Mar 2, 2001
Messages
5,151
I've tried the 34" ultrawides, 31.5 4ks, the 4k TVs, the Korean 4k monitors, the dell 144hz 27", the Asus 144hz, and others.

I've never found anything I like as much as the Dell 30 - the resolution is wonderful with no need for scaling (which still doesn't work in several windows programs I regularly use), the colors are great, and the 16:10 ratio is hard to beat.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
60,245
I came from a 3x3007WFP-HC monitor setup I used with Eyefinity and NVSurround for many years. I switched to more modern ROG Swift 27" (2560x1440) panels and I couldn't stand them. Horizontal viewing angles were surprisingly good for being TN panels. With a custom color profile they were even decent in regard to image quality. Unfortunately, that ultra-wide FOV was as bad as my 3x30" setup for games. Basically it wasn't usable in many games due to the fisheye effect. I had actually bought them so I could switch to a portrait setup for gaming. This gave me roughly 48" of space give or take. This was even worse as the vertical viewing angles of those monitors were terrible. I had to sit at an odd angle to make that work. There was also the bezels being super close together.

Coming from 16:10, I found 16:9 too confining given that I had less pixels to work with. I hated that setup and didn't run it for more than a couple of weeks. While I enjoyed G-Sync and the 144Hz response time I hated almost everything else about those displays. I went back to the drawing board and found out about various forum members using Samsung 4K TV's as monitors. This never occurred to me before as the 1080P TV's had a horrendous dot pitch and looked like smashed assholes with a response time that was like dragging an 18-wheeler through half frozen molasses using a chain gripped by your teeth. The image quality of such "displays" was always subpar in my experience. Then I heard about 4:4:4 chroma subsampling and the new game modes which put the input lag in the reasonable range. So after doing my research I decided to take the Samsung plunge with the 48" JU6700. This was chosen because its dot pitch was close enough to my Dell 30"s and like that of 2x24" 1080P monitors. It wasn't as good as my ROG Swifts but I felt I could live with it. The size of the 48" was almost identical to that of my 3x27" Swift array in portrait mode with the same aspect ratio. I wasn't as concerned about the displays being 16:9 as 3840x2160 is an increase in pixels compared to 2560x1440 or even 2560x1600. I thought I might miss G-Sync and the refresh rate, but with adaptive V-Sync and running at 4K I don't feel its as necessary as I once did. Even with my rig I rarely get a lot more than 60FPS with modern games and when I do I can crank the settings up even higher or limit the frame rate in some way to help compensate for it and reduce or eliminate tearing.

I opted for the curved version because it was in stock at the local Fry's for a good price. After seeing them in the store I felt that the curve was nice as it made the edges easier to see from a central position sitting the traditional distance most people sit from a monitor. Afterall, sitting 5 feet back from your computer desk when you are working on graphs in Excel is fucking bullshit. I hate text scaling and that brings me to another point. Scaling isn't generally needed at this size unless you have worse eyes than even I do. The displays are hard to get setup compared to a traditional PC monitor but I've been satisfied with my purchase. Yes there are trade offs but the image quality has been excellent with sharp blacks and good contrast. Viewing angles are reasonably good and I found the monitor did a good job of making games feel more immersive. For productivity applications I felt it was good, especially for multitasking but if there is a drawback to owning a 48" "monitor" its that its not necessarily the best productivity solution. Indeed the 40" to 43" segment seems best suited for monitor duty where productivity is the primary concern. In that arena I rarely found myself using the whole display due to the difficulty in reading some application windows at the edges of the screen. Many times I wanted to trade the 48" for the 40" version of the display in order to make better use of it. Anytime I fired up a game I put that notion to the back of my mind. In any case I enjoyed the monitor more than not despite the areas where such an option comes up a little short.

I've had that monitor for over a year and things have been great until recently. One day I noticed scorch marks in the bottom edge of the image. I'm not sure how long they've been there but the second I saw them I haven't been able to unsee them. It was out of warranty so I needed a replacement. I ended up right back where I started a year ago. I've been disappointed in the monitor market for some time now. While these TV's aren't perfect I think they are the best I can get for the things I value most in a monitor today. The sad fact is that no perfect monitor exists. In essence you have to choose a monitor that has the most to offer and the least crap you hate. I'm not sure how much of our display woes are due to technological limitations, cost limitations or the manufacturers being out of touch with our market segment. Ideally we'd be able to get a technology without the weaknesses of any display panel type, with no burn in issues, G-Sync and FreeSync, more than 100Hz refresh rates with response times that were instantaneous and no discernible input lag. I'd like it if it were like the CRT days where resolution was a matter of choice rather than limitations of how many pixels were used to make the display. A lot of that isn't realistic, so we deal with what we have.

That led me to revaluate my ownership experience and to take note of what else I'd seen since I purchased my monitor. I started my search where it usually began in the realm of PC monitors. Essentially there isn't much I would be happy with given where I'm coming from. The only monitors I know of that are equal or greater than 40" in size are the Philips 40" and 43" I think? Those are either not out or have mixed availability. Additionally, I've seen a handful of complaints about image persistence and other problems with them so I abandoned that idea. I knew the 21:9 monitors weren't for me as I couldn't stand 1440 pixels of vertical space today anymore than I could coming from those Dell 30" displays over a year ago. Again G-Sync and the higher refresh rates were attractive but I found that my immersion and enjoyment of the gaming experience was enhanced more by the quality of the image and its size than by how fast its drawn on the screen. So none of the 32" and other options held any appeal for me. In the past year I saw many people trade their 6700's on the forum for the 7500 and the JS9000's sighting various image quality reasons. After I had purchased my 6700, I had seen the JS9000 in person and noticed its superior image quality over my JU6700. A JS9000 seemed like it might be a good fit for me except that they are stil $2,000 in some cases unless you can find one on clearance somewhere or at least find it on sale. Despite being an older model its held its value well. I will spend the money if I need to, but 2k for a display that's more than a year out of date didn't sit well with me. Within reason anyway. Another friend of mine has a 49" KU7500. The image quality didn't seem as nice as the JS9000 and it wasn't really all that much if any better than my JU6700. Reviews indicated it was good for gaming but HDR performance wasn't great and it has bad judder when watching movies. So that didn't seem right either.

So I ended up getting the Samsung KS8500. I liked the curve and find the pixel pitch and resolution to be good enough. The size is great and the image quality is superior to the JU6700 I used to use. Would I like G-Sync/Freesync and higher response times? Who wouldn't? In short I'd recommend sticking to a 40 or 43" 4K TV for productivity and 48" or larger if gaming is the primary use of the machine. If your use is mixed like mine is, don't buy the entry level models if you are going to go to something like a 49" display. I've seen more than a few of the various Samsung models used as monitors and TV's (I own three) and I've concluded that the extra cash spent on a higher end model like the KS8500 is worth it over the 7x00 or 6x00 series.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
60,245
I've tried the 34" ultrawides, 31.5 4ks, the 4k TVs, the Korean 4k monitors, the dell 144hz 27", the Asus 144hz, and others.

I've never found anything I like as much as the Dell 30 - the resolution is wonderful with no need for scaling (which still doesn't work in several windows programs I regularly use), the colors are great, and the 16:10 ratio is hard to beat.

You do not (or most people would not) need scaling going up to a 48" or so LCD TV. The size of text in Windows is basically the same as your 30". I think the bulk of people who use the scaling are the ones who think that they need to sit 5 or 6 feet back from the screen. I know this for a fact as I still have my 30" Dell on my test bench. I move between that and my main machine constantly while writing reviews. A 40" LCD TV gives you roughly the same size text as a 27" 2560x1440 monitor. Again, I know this after looking at them and having the ROG Swift 27"ers. As for the 16:10 ratio, I would normally agree with you but you do get more vertical real estate with a 16:9 monitor when it has 2160 pixels vs. your 1600. This makes transitioning to a 16:9 ratio monitor much easier.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,551
Dan_D how about one of those 37.5" 1600P LG monitors?

If I wasn't derailed by the price I think I'd try that next.
http://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38UC99-W-ultrawide-monitor

As it is - I think that form factor is novelty priced and REALLY needs to drop to about half what it is to be something I would consider. $1500 -> $750.


I came from a Dell 3014 and tried at 2560x1080 34" widescreen. I thought it was pretty terrible. I stopped using it after two days. The resolution and short vertical pixel setup really seemed 'off' after using the Dell 3014 for the last couple years previous.

I went from that to a HP Omen 32" 1440p - and that (with freesync) I actually liked a bit better than the Dell 3014. The Dell 3014 was a touch better PPI and quality, the HP Omen 32 was a fair bit better smoothness with freesync in combo with a Fury X, and noticeably darker - without the IPS backlight glow, and no hotspots. (The HP Omen 32" is a VA panel) Anyway - 16x9 at 32" didn't bother me after a few days as compared to 16x10 at 30". I tried a 37" HDTV once and thought it was just too big since the gui elements for games required me to turn my head to see them at my seating distance. The eyefinity setup I use now is 81" across (3 HP Omen 32) and yet - eyefinity (and probably NVidia surround? I don't know) lets you center GUI elements on the center monitor with most modern games and even old games with an app called flawless widscreen. So even though my monitors go way beyond my peripheral ---- the gui elements I can all see without turning my head on the 32" 16x9.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1144.JPG
    IMG_1144.JPG
    136.8 KB · Views: 146
Last edited:

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
60,245
Dan_D how about one of those 37.5" 1600P LG monitors?

If I wasn't derailed by the price I think I'd try that next.
http://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38UC99-W-ultrawide-monitor

As it is - I think that form factor is novelty priced and REALLY needs to drop to about half what it is to be something I would consider. $1500 -> $750.

Had I been coming off a 30" Dell or HP monitor, I might be tempted to go that route with the right specs. The price isn't out of line with what some of the higher end monitors cost now or have been priced at in the past. The first of my Dell 3007WFP monitors was around $1,500 or so when I bought it. Apple Cinema Display's and NEC monitors of a similar size cost well more than that. The HP ZR30w wasn't cheap either. I picked up another Dell 3007WFP-HC after the price dropped to around $1,000 or so. I think I picked up the last one for just over $800 off the FS/FT forums here. All the 34" ultra-wide IPS displays are over $1,000 if I am not mistaken. My Samsung 48" and 49" 4K TV's were around $1,100 each when I bought them. So again, I don't think the price of that LG is way out of line. I think $1,199 or $1,299 would be more reasonable and that might actually be closer to street price. $1,1499.99 looks suspiciously like MSRP for that.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,551
agreed - it isn't that it's overpriced compared to past premium monitor prices.

It's that it's overpriced now. IMO

With quality 55"-60" 4K HDTVs at $800 all day everyday.
and
quality 32" 1440P displays everywhere for $350.

$1500 MSRP, and $1400'ish street price is IMO, definitely novelty over-priced.

They'll come down, significantly in the next year or two I suspect.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
60,245
I don't think the monitor market prices displays according to what 4K TV's go for. I think very few people consider going that route, much less actually do it. 55"+ isn't a good size for computer work unless you only play games on it. Text on those just doesn't look good. The dot pitch isn't great and those displays are so large that you'd have to turn your head constantly to use it. I'm not sure I'd call any of the 32" 2560x1440 displays "quality." Most of those panels are shit. Hell, most monitors are shit regardless of price.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,551
I'm not sure I'd call any of the 32" 2560x1440 displays "quality." Most of those panels are shit. Hell, most monitors are shit regardless of price.

Disagreed.

Would you say the Dell 3014 is a junk monitor? I used one for 2 years. I thought it was excellent.
I preferred the HP Omen 32" very slightly to the Dell 3014 overall. I've used one for six months.

The Omen is $300 to $400 street price - new.

That's the kind of price drop and quality uptick I'm talking about.

I used 55 -60" as an example. The raw cost to create a premium monitor over a big TV like that has to be negligible.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
60,245
Disagreed.

Would you say the Dell 3014 is a junk monitor? I used one for 2 years. I thought it was excellent.
I preferred the HP Omen 32" very slightly to the Dell 3014 overall. I've used one for six months.

The Omen is $300 to $400 street price - new.

That's the kind of price drop and quality uptick I'm talking about.

I used 55 -60" as an example. The raw cost to create a premium monitor over a big TV like that has to be negligible.

Dell makes pretty good monitors, but the U3014 is discontinued and not $300. Also, I have a hard time getting excited about any sub-4K resolution monitor.
 

Pastuch

Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
611
I came from a 3x3007WFP-HC monitor setup I used with Eyefinity and NVSurround for many years. I switched to more modern ROG Swift 27" (2560x1440) panels and I couldn't stand them. Horizontal viewing angles were surprisingly good for being TN panels. With a custom color profile they were even decent in regard to image quality. Unfortunately, that ultra-wide FOV was as bad as my 3x30" setup for games. Basically it wasn't usable in many games due to the fisheye effect. I had actually bought them so I could switch to a portrait setup for gaming. This gave me roughly 48" of space give or take. This was even worse as the vertical viewing angles of those monitors were terrible. I had to sit at an odd angle to make that work. There was also the bezels being super close together.

Coming from 16:10, I found 16:9 too confining given that I had less pixels to work with. I hated that setup and didn't run it for more than a couple of weeks. While I enjoyed G-Sync and the 144Hz response time I hated almost everything else about those displays. I went back to the drawing board and found out about various forum members using Samsung 4K TV's as monitors. This never occurred to me before as the 1080P TV's had a horrendous dot pitch and looked like smashed assholes with a response time that was like dragging an 18-wheeler through half frozen molasses using a chain gripped by your teeth. The image quality of such "displays" was always subpar in my experience. Then I heard about 4:4:4 chroma subsampling and the new game modes which put the input lag in the reasonable range. So after doing my research I decided to take the Samsung plunge with the 48" JU6700. This was chosen because its dot pitch was close enough to my Dell 30"s and like that of 2x24" 1080P monitors. It wasn't as good as my ROG Swifts but I felt I could live with it. The size of the 48" was almost identical to that of my 3x27" Swift array in portrait mode with the same aspect ratio. I wasn't as concerned about the displays being 16:9 as 3840x2160 is an increase in pixels compared to 2560x1440 or even 2560x1600. I thought I might miss G-Sync and the refresh rate, but with adaptive V-Sync and running at 4K I don't feel its as necessary as I once did. Even with my rig I rarely get a lot more than 60FPS with modern games and when I do I can crank the settings up even higher or limit the frame rate in some way to help compensate for it and reduce or eliminate tearing.

I opted for the curved version because it was in stock at the local Fry's for a good price. After seeing them in the store I felt that the curve was nice as it made the edges easier to see from a central position sitting the traditional distance most people sit from a monitor. Afterall, sitting 5 feet back from your computer desk when you are working on graphs in Excel is fucking bullshit. I hate text scaling and that brings me to another point. Scaling isn't generally needed at this size unless you have worse eyes than even I do. The displays are hard to get setup compared to a traditional PC monitor but I've been satisfied with my purchase. Yes there are trade offs but the image quality has been excellent with sharp blacks and good contrast. Viewing angles are reasonably good and I found the monitor did a good job of making games feel more immersive. For productivity applications I felt it was good, especially for multitasking but if there is a drawback to owning a 48" "monitor" its that its not necessarily the best productivity solution. Indeed the 40" to 43" segment seems best suited for monitor duty where productivity is the primary concern. In that arena I rarely found myself using the whole display due to the difficulty in reading some application windows at the edges of the screen. Many times I wanted to trade the 48" for the 40" version of the display in order to make better use of it. Anytime I fired up a game I put that notion to the back of my mind. In any case I enjoyed the monitor more than not despite the areas where such an option comes up a little short.

I've had that monitor for over a year and things have been great until recently. One day I noticed scorch marks in the bottom edge of the image. I'm not sure how long they've been there but the second I saw them I haven't been able to unsee them. It was out of warranty so I needed a replacement. I ended up right back where I started a year ago. I've been disappointed in the monitor market for some time now. While these TV's aren't perfect I think they are the best I can get for the things I value most in a monitor today. The sad fact is that no perfect monitor exists. In essence you have to choose a monitor that has the most to offer and the least crap you hate. I'm not sure how much of our display woes are due to technological limitations, cost limitations or the manufacturers being out of touch with our market segment. Ideally we'd be able to get a technology without the weaknesses of any display panel type, with no burn in issues, G-Sync and FreeSync, more than 100Hz refresh rates with response times that were instantaneous and no discernible input lag. I'd like it if it were like the CRT days where resolution was a matter of choice rather than limitations of how many pixels were used to make the display. A lot of that isn't realistic, so we deal with what we have.

That led me to revaluate my ownership experience and to take note of what else I'd seen since I purchased my monitor. I started my search where it usually began in the realm of PC monitors. Essentially there isn't much I would be happy with given where I'm coming from. The only monitors I know of that are equal or greater than 40" in size are the Philips 40" and 43" I think? Those are either not out or have mixed availability. Additionally, I've seen a handful of complaints about image persistence and other problems with them so I abandoned that idea. I knew the 21:9 monitors weren't for me as I couldn't stand 1440 pixels of vertical space today anymore than I could coming from those Dell 30" displays over a year ago. Again G-Sync and the higher refresh rates were attractive but I found that my immersion and enjoyment of the gaming experience was enhanced more by the quality of the image and its size than by how fast its drawn on the screen. So none of the 32" and other options held any appeal for me.

Awesome post Dan! I completely agree with everything you said regarding display choices, compromise and usability. I personally haven't bought any of the Samsung displays but I did just buy a 55 inch LG OLED (B series). It was a really amazing experience and the picture quality of OLED was so astonishing that I will be buying next years model. Panel uniformity was the best I've ever seen. Razor sharp image, perfect blacks, insane contrast ratio, good input lag, but it was SO HUGE that I had to return it. Also, the lack of 4k content in Canada is a sick joke. It's like they want us to pirate everything. It drives me insane that 55 inches is the smallest OLED model I can purchase. Best displays I've ever seen are on my 5.2 inch phone and a 55 inch TV, GIVE US SOME MIDDLE GROUND! A 40 or 48 inch option would be an instant purchase for me. I miss the image quality of the B6 every day and my QNIX 1440P is a pathetic replacement, the contrast ratio and blacks are awful by comparison.

Favorite OLED moment: I was playing Dragon Age Inquisition at 4k on the LG B6 in a dark room. Every time the game goes to a loading screen I can't see the panel at all other than the tiny Dragon age loading icon in the bottom right corner. Black levels and contrast ratio on that display are breathtaking.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
489
Awesome post Dan! I completely agree with everything you said regarding display choices, compromise and usability. I personally haven't bought any of the Samsung displays but I did just buy a 55 inch LG OLED (B series). It was a really amazing experience and the picture quality of OLED was so astonishing that I will be buying next years model. Panel uniformity was the best I've ever seen. Razor sharp image, perfect blacks, insane contrast ratio, good input lag, but it was SO HUGE that I had to return it. Also, the lack of 4k content in Canada is a sick joke. It's like they want us to pirate everything. It drives me insane that 55 inches is the smallest OLED model I can purchase. Best displays I've ever seen are on my 5.2 inch phone and a 55 inch TV, GIVE US SOME MIDDLE GROUND! A 40 or 48 inch option would be an instant purchase for me. I miss the image quality of the B6 every day and my QNIX 1440P is a pathetic replacement, the contrast ratio and blacks are awful by comparison.

Favorite OLED moment: I was playing Dragon Age Inquisition at 4k on the LG B6 in a dark room. Every time the game goes to a loading screen I can't see the panel at all other than the tiny Dragon age loading icon in the bottom right corner. Black levels and contrast ratio on that display are breathtaking.
This is really the only thing that held me back with OLED. The displays are just too huge. Anything smaller, even a 49" (which I personally think is to big but others seem to be ok with) would be a nice monitor experience, but certainly not a 55" behemoth.

I've also stopped looking at HDR as a feature. I was extremely close to purchasing the Sony X800D, but decided to hold off. Only then did I realize that the stance of HDR on the PC is so weak that it's not worth purchasing one (at least not one that's used as a monitor). At this point, I want to see what happens at CES 2016. If nothing good seems to be coming, I'll probably end up either browsing rting's recommendations for gaming or…

Adding 2 more 3007wfps and doing some molding to reduce bezels sizes. It'll probably be cheaper than most options out there and even sounds somewhat fun. I'm just not sure which models to buy for the other two 30"s, or if these screens even hold up in terms of quality. I know the 3014 and other models have added a lot of improvement.
 
Top