I want 30" 1600p at 100+Hz

StormClaw

StormClaw

Gawd
Joined
Jun 10, 2009
Messages
565
I tried 27" and it turns out that anything less than 30" is too small for me.

I want a 30" at 2560x1600 with 100+ Hz and Gsync.

Any idea if there is anything like that on the horizon?
 
Sorry, i don't think so, 16:10 seems to have a hard time, and the proffesional audience doesn't want to pay G-sync. (imho)

but they do have a 32" 4K Gsync version, only just 60Hz and 16:9 instead of 16:10.

i dream of the day when a large and quick VA sync'd monitor arrives (32"+/min 120hz/some-kind-o-sync(TM))

Or, the blessed lands - Oled screen with the above..
 
16:10 is dead for almost a decade now. All video content is produced on 16:9 and 16:9 is available in resolutions higher than 1600p. 1600p is mostly CCFL, hot as hell and high gamut= oversaturated colors. My Apple is on retirement, it is worth more as a backup monitor to spare than the market price for used 30"
 
Ok, what about 4k but on a big screen? Like 34"-40"

I want a lot of viewing real estate but don't want to squint at tiny font/icons.
 
StormClaw said:
There is a cool 38" UltraWide LG monitor 3840 x 1600 75Hz+freesync LG is showing off a monster 38-inch ultra-wide monitor at IFA
It would be perfect with Gsync. AMD cards gonna have a hard time powering it.
Click to expand...

Oh, sorry, missed those as I glanced through the first post.

There's a review at tftcentral and the screen is a bit of a disappointment. Hopefully, Acer or Asus will make a G-Sync version of it, but it's not a given as they seem to choose only the common screen types (e.g. 27" and 34") for G-Sync. I'd count the XB271HK and XB321HK as exceptions here, but here's hoping.
 
Bexster said:
i dream of the day when a large and quick VA sync'd monitor arrives (32"+/min 120hz/some-kind-o-sync(TM))
Click to expand...
Samsung have a 34" 100Hz VA model with Freesync coming out soon. That's about as good as it's going to get for large VA monitors for some time, I suspect.
 
30" at 2560x1600 is perfect. I ordered Asus PA328Q 4k and this thing looks like shit. Sending back tomorrow.
 
StormClaw said:
Is everything too small in 4k ?
Click to expand...

With 100 percent scaling it's tiny. You can set it to 150 percent it's a lot bigger but then it defeats the purpose of having 4k. Then, the monitor itself is bad. It heats up to 45 degress Celsius in upper part.

30" 2560x1600 and 27" 2560x1440 are really perfect resolutions.
 
Iching said:
With 100 percent scaling it's tiny. You can set it to 150 percent it's a lot bigger but then it defeats the purpose of having 4k.
Click to expand...
The point of 4K on a monitor that size is that you use DPI scaling to increase the resolution (detail) of text and images being displayed.
Equating resolution to workspace is antiquated thinking with the advent of high DPI displays.
Workspace should largely be determined by display size, not resolution.
If you don't want to use DPI scaling, buy a standard DPI 40-46" 4K panel, or a lower resolution standard-DPI display if that's too big.
 
Iching said:
With 100 percent scaling it's tiny. You can set it to 150 percent it's a lot bigger but then it defeats the purpose of having 4k. Then, the monitor itself is bad. It heats up to 45 degress Celsius in upper part.

30" 2560x1600 and 27" 2560x1440 are really perfect resolutions.
Click to expand...
Anything under 40" is too small for most users at 4K. At 40", 4K has the same pixel density as a 27" 2560x1440 screen. I found myself squinting a bit too much even with a 40" 4K. Once I jumped to a 49" 4K, my eyes were very happy.
 
How far away are you putting your huge 4K displays? To me even a 30" display almost fills my field of vision as I keep my display quite close.
 
kasakka said:
How far away are you putting your huge 4K displays? To me even a 30" display almost fills my field of vision as I keep my display quite close.
Click to expand...
I have a ten year old 30" Dell at 2560x1600 and the size and resolution is simply perfect - 1600p is so much better than the 1440p (that extra vertical space!)
Problem is it's outdated and i want the new bells and whistles like 100+hz and Gsync.
I have it placed at about 3 feet away from me.
 
Visual TV Size Comparison : 30 inch 16x10 display vs 32 inch 16x9 display

Here's the relative size of 30" 16:10 (blue) vs 32" 16:9 (green)

30-inch-16x10-vs-32-inch-16x9.png
 
You are not taking into account the resolution.

30" 16:10 2560x1600 (blue) will fit more stuff on the screen than 32" 16:9 2560x1440 (green)
 
StormClaw said:
You are not taking into account the resolution.
30" 16:10 2560x1600 (blue) will fit more stuff on the screen than 32" 16:9 2560x1440 (green)
Click to expand...
A 32" monitor is likely to be 4K not 1440p. 1440p monitors are typically 27" in size.
4K with 1.25x scaling gives you a 3072x1728 workspace and text size equivalent to a 110 PPI display.
 
StormClaw said:
You are not taking into account the resolution.

30" 16:10 2560x1600 (blue) will fit more stuff on the screen than 32" 16:9 2560x1440 (green)
Click to expand...

Indeed, I didn't mention resolution, I was just comparing the area of the screens.
 
StormClaw said:
I have a ten year old 30" Dell at 2560x1600 and the size and resolution is simply perfect - 1600p is so much better than the 1440p (that extra vertical space!)
Problem is it's outdated and i want the new bells and whistles like 100+hz and Gsync.
I have it placed at about 3 feet away from me.
Click to expand...

I had one of those too and moved a 27" 16:9 1440p display. I did not feel that anything significant was lost. The small drop in vertical resolution doesn't really matter when you have displays at 1440p+ and 27" or more.

How about going ultrawide? Sure, vertical res is still only 1440 pixels but do you really do anything that absolutely requires those extra pixels? More width would allow to put larger windows side by side.
 
OP get in line with the rest of us!

While you wait, you can always make your own super massive, super hi-res, super high refresh setup using triple 24" Dell S2417DGs 4320 x 2560 @ 165hz gsync is pretty epic!

debezel_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
^^ What kind of horsepower do you need to run that setup? Quad SLI Titans? ;)
 
Running TitanXP SLI overclocked.... pretty much only play battlefield games on portrait surround setups and I put this together for BF1 goodlyness come the 21st!

In BF4 with everything set to ultra + HBAO.....FPS generally stays pinned at my gsync capped 164 frames with occasional dips to 150fps under heavy combat activity!

image ru
 
Last edited:
l88bastard said:
Running TitanXP SLI overclocked.... pretty much only play battlefield games on portrait surround setups and I put this together for BF1 goodlyness come the 21st!

In BF4 with everything set to ultra + HBAO.....FPS generally stays pinned at my gsync capped 164 frames with occasional dips to 150fps under heavy combat activity!
Click to expand...

It's a good way to work around current monitor limitations for gaming.

My own experience with 5x 24" monitors in Eyefinity portrait was that in gaming its was fine but when using any productivity software the layout and bezels are annoying (even bezels as small as those above).

I actually ended up making a second monitor group just for productivity software.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top