Dream Monitor

L

LatexRat

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
181
I've been waiting quite a while to upgrade my 3x Dell u2412m monitors.. Nothing looks ideal though. All the ultrawides are like running < 2x monitors and are :9 ratio crap. 4K is nice and all, but i still need 3x monitors and would love to do without bezels.

So, here's how my perfect monitor would spec:

>24" equivalent
48:10 Aspect Ratio (equivalent to 3x 16:10 monitors)
IPS
120Hz or above
4K or above
Gsync or Freesync
An adaptive backlight that would allow for a central 16:10 view only

Is that so much to ask? ;)
 
I want a 27" 5K 120Hz OLED with no bezels under 500$. We'll get there some day... :D
 
I'd like a VR headset with about double the resolution of the current models, eye-tracking for dynamic detail rendering, and viewing angles of 180 degrees on both axes. Nvidia's multiprojection seems like it'd actually make this feasible.
 
alex_di said:
I'd like a VR headset with about double the resolution of the current models, eye-tracking for dynamic detail rendering, and viewing angles of 180 degrees on both axes. Nvidia's multiprojection seems like it'd actually make this feasible.
Click to expand...

That is a good point.. A high resolution VR Headset could potentially replace monitors. However I have heard people waking up in the morning after playing a few hours with a VR ghost image still visible. I feel the long term effects of having a screen strapped to your face are still unknown.
 
Another thing I think would be nice is if the Ultrawides had resolution/size matched wing monitors available. Which would allow you to have a large center view and two smaller side monitors for the extra real estate... as I feel 3x ultawides would be a bit too much fov.
 
I just want the specs of the 5000$ OLED monitor.

32", 4K, 120hz, OLED, and then also Freesync and a strobing mode for that ultra low OLED response time to shine like my CRT. A 1440p version would also do it for me
 
I think the companies making these don't want zero bezel monitors because they know people will buy them instead of getting ultrawides.

I would love 2 24" 144 2K zero bezel monitors. Or at least g-sync
 
You can upgrade to triple portrait 25" 2560x1440, which has 50% more pixels than 4k and a much higher information density than your current setup. In portrait they are pretty close to your beloved 16:10 aspect ratio. as a side note 16:9 is no longer a compromise, because all video content is generated in 16:9 and now 16:9 means 1440 vertical pixal, which is more than the 1200 pixels of older 16:10 monitors.
 
I'm really hoping for OLED to proliferate in monitors in the next few years... I hate back-lighting quite a bit.

So I want a 27" 1440 OLED that can do 240Hz with FreeSync. I'll be disappointed if I can't get an affordable monitor like this in the next 2-3 years.


As a real dream I'd love to see VR with effectively "5K" per eye (not sure what actual resolution and aspect ratio) and 480Hz... with less than a frame of latency from movement sensors to the display. That would require frames being rendered and drawn in what, less than 2ms? Probably the eye tracking and dynamic detail rendering mentioned earlier in this thread, to make it so you don't need petaflops to actually run it...
 
If you're really talking pie in the sky, what you really want is 1000hz+. At that refresh rate, you don't even need any kind of vertical sync. You wouldn't be able to see the tearing anyway.

Even 480hz would probably be enough to make it almost unnoticeable. That's probably the end game for sync issues and input lag.
 
bigbluefe said:
If you're really talking pie in the sky, what you really want is 1000hz+. At that refresh rate, you don't even need any kind of vertical sync. You wouldn't be able to see the tearing anyway.
Even 480hz would probably be enough to make it almost unnoticeable. That's probably the end game for sync issues and input lag.
Click to expand...
You'll get tons of image skew at those kind of rates without V-Sync.
It's not ideal for latency, but for fast-moving images the ideal situation would be to buffer a single frame and do a fast scanout. (global display)
 
geok1ng said:
as a side note 16:9 is no longer a compromise, because all video content is generated in 16:9 and now 16:9 means 1440 vertical pixal, which is more than the 1200 pixels of older 16:10 monitors.
Click to expand...
It's still a compromise when you're dealing with things other than typical video (because video is not the only content people deal with). If I'm editing a typical 3:2 ratio photo, having that 16:10 ratio allows for my view of the photo to be bigger, especially when vertical space is lost due to menus and such. There's less wasted space on a 16:10 than a 16:9. I just wish they'd make less-than-30-inch 2560x1600 monitors...
 
zone74 said:
You'll get tons of image skew at those kind of rates without V-Sync.
It's not ideal for latency, but for fast-moving images the ideal situation would be to buffer a single frame and do a fast scanout. (global display)
Click to expand...

Valve did extremely high refresh rate tests and there weren't any problems with image skew.
 
Shit, just give me a CRT that's 27 inches, perfect geometry, can scan to 3440x1440, and I'll be good for life. Size doesn't matter to me - my desk is big enough. :)
 
bigbluefe said:
Valve did extremely high refresh rate tests and there weren't any problems with image skew.
Click to expand...
On a scanning display?
The Vive and the Rift both use global displays to avoid skew.
Skew is pretty noticeable on my CRT if I disable V-Sync in a game like Quake. Looks like the world is bending when I move the mouse quickly.
 
zone74 said:
On a scanning display?
The Vive and the Rift both use global displays to avoid skew.
Skew is pretty noticeable on my CRT if I disable V-Sync in a game like Quake. Looks like the world is bending when I move the mouse quickly.
Click to expand...

I believe so. On my 144hz LCD with vsync off, the tearing is actually pretty minimal. I think what you're referring to is a CRT problem.
 
What I want more or less already exists.
Dell UP3017Q OLED 4K monitor review

Although it will be interesting to see what NEC and Eizo do with the same panel. If it all is color manageable and does a large portion of the ProPhoto RGP gamut (in addition to 100% Adobe RGB), then this thing is basically everything one could ask for. At least in terms of what I want it to do, which is photo/video work.
 
bigbluefe said:
Unfortunately, that monitor's probably going to blow for gamers, which makes the price a joke. I'm expecting high input lag and no variable refresh, which just isn't acceptable for 5 grand. For 5 grand, it really should do everything exceptionally.
Click to expand...

Not everyone thinks as you do.
First you disqualify a product based on what you "think" it's like. Even with 14 ms input lag (which I might add, I don't know what it has, but let's just say it's a worst case scenario), it would be much faster than most of the market with next to no response time.

Secondly the professional market pays quite a bit to get displays. Their interest and whom this display is designed for could care less about gaming. It's a specialized tool.

Third and to that end, price is not indicative of versatility. If it was, your argument should carry that a $250k Ferrari should be able to carry as many people as a van, carry as much as a truck, tow as much as a truck, and go as fast as a sports car. Something priced high doesn't mean it's intended to do everything. Nor should it. And whether you want to admit it or not, the professional market is willing to spend far more than gamers.

Finally, this is the dream monitor thread. My dream can be different than yours. It wasn't necessary to quote me and then take a dump on my dream.
 
Last edited:
Cool down, Timmy. No one's shitting on your dream. A sports car and a truck aren't even the same type of product. A monitor is a monitor. For decades, there were no tradeoffs and people used the same type of monitors for everything. A highend CRT was better at displaying images PERIOD whether it was games or photography. There weren't exceptions for displaying images in different contexts.

The fact that you're comparing the difference between different types of monitors to the difference between a Ferrari and a truck just shows how shitty the display industry has become.

Yes, a 5 grand monitor should do everything regarding displaying images exceptionally. Especially a 5 grand OLED monitor. OLED displays have good response time. There is no excuse for them to not be great gaming monitors as well as great for photography. There's no excuse.
 
Kinda reminds me of the 3214Q release at $4,000. In less than 18 months there were 32" 4K monitors with better specs (no MST) for $700 (Acer B326HK). It's really something most people should just wait a bit and you can have all the bells and whistles from a mass market company instead of a limited release for a fraction of the price.
 
Geez, all I want is a nice 24" IPS LED backlit 1920x1200 matte finish (glossy can suck it) and I'd be happy for years to come I suppose. Crazy super high resolutions just don't do nothing for me, had a 23" 1920x1200 HP IPS years ago and I miss it pretty bad, so hopefully at some point I'll find a good deal on one of those last Dell UltraSharp 24" 1920x1200 displays before they vanish forever I suppose.
 
bigbluefe said:
Cool down, Timmy. No one's shitting on your dream. A sports car and a truck aren't even the same type of product. A monitor is a monitor. For decades, there were no tradeoffs and people used the same type of monitors for everything. A highend CRT was better at displaying images PERIOD whether it was games or photography. There weren't exceptions for displaying images in different contexts.

The fact that you're comparing the difference between different types of monitors to the difference between a Ferrari and a truck just shows how shitty the display industry has become.

Yes, a 5 grand monitor should do everything regarding displaying images exceptionally. Especially a 5 grand OLED monitor. OLED displays have good response time. There is no excuse for them to not be great gaming monitors as well as great for photography. There's no excuse.
Click to expand...

My simile holds. All the vehicles are all for transportation, but specialized for specific purposes, much like monitors.

This is called market segmentation. Hating the fact that there is products for different segments and different niches doesn't change the fact that that is the way it is.

There is zero evidence that the Dell sucks at gaming. Which would make it great in all contexts.

But comparing CRT technology to LCD isn't a fair comparison in the sense of the expectation that they are or can perform the same.

Your disdain doesn't change anything.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top