New Samsung 4k for everyone.

It was in 4:4:4 @60hz HDMI 1 PC Mode

I'm almost positive that latency is in the mid to low 30's as reported

Perfect, thanks. My current monitor has almost become unusable, so went ahead and placed the order. $785 shipped from Crutchfield is a pretty decent price.
 
Hmm, not a bad idea. I've been meaning to get some foam pads for a while now...can't remember which ones I looked at but a lot of people were using them with the KRK Rokits and had great things to say about the improvement in sound. Of course, I think my A5s sound great as is so it would be interesting to see the difference.

Those stands might be nice if I could get the drivers pointed toward my ears so that the sound wasn't shooting over/behind me. Apparently placement is critical with nearfield monitors like these. Just a few degrees can throw the sound way off.

Yes, placement is key. I have mine so they are pointed right at my ears - and I find the down angle to be a lot better than flat (at the appropriate level) or angled up from down lower. Seeing yours sitting level on the desk, putting them on stands will be a big difference I can guarantee it.

Hear are the pads I have. Some say they're overpriced and you can buy plain foam for pennies on the dollar if you want to do a little DIY work, but I wanted the perfect angle already cut so I could angle them down. 16" high and sitting on these with no adhesive, my KEF x300a (which are pretty heavy) speakers are rock solid so I am quite happy - they really sink into the foam on their pegs. The pads I linked are two pieces each - the top piece can be flipped to be either flat on the top, angled backward [pointing speaker up], or angled forward [pointing speaker down].

I downloaded some 4k videos. I also have an F8500 plasma. From a distance, the F8500 is superior. It may be because PC mode turns off most video processing. In my opinion, 4k video is not much better than 1080p from a distance. The F8500 plasma is superior. For me, it's not worth it to buy this for watching movies.

I was more impressed with the streaming than videos I have on my PC and viewed in PC mode. There is definitely something lost with the signal processing, and no video upscaling.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I downloaded some 4k videos. I also have an F8500 plasma. From a distance, the F8500 is superior. It may be because PC mode turns off most video processing. In my opinion, 4k video is not much better than 1080p from a distance. The F8500 plasma is superior. For me, it's not worth it to buy this for watching movies.

That is what I would expect, no LCD comes close to a top tier Plasma. Contrast is simply more important to PQ than resolution alone, unless you're sitting so close that you can see the pixel grid.
 
My TV had to receive an update because out of the box it kept losing signal between source switching and game starts/closes. Now the TV runs like water.

Which do you like best now you have them side by side?

Initial impressions after putting the 48" where the 40" was (a little over arm's length):

The display itself is VERY impressive (but we know that already). Otherwise, bleh! This is way too large, way too close. I felt more productive on the 40" because it was more manageable. White screens are blinding even with the backlight on 5. I thought that it might redeem itself by blowing me away in games (you know, the whole IMAX thing) but it's just too large. Overwhelming, and not in a "OMG, awesome!" way. I played for a few minutes and I feel somewhat physically ill. And I NEVER get that way when playing games. Not from 3D, not from wacky FOVs, nothing.

Need to move it back ASAP. Corner testing will come tomorrow.

Note that none of this is the monitor's fault...and some of it may come down to individual preference. But let this serve as a caution for all of you who game at the typical ~2' and are thinking of getting the 48". Contrary to what was stated earlier, bigger is NOT always better.

If I had to keep it at this distance I'd go back to my 40" in a heartbeat. I'm sure it'll be better after I move it another foot or two away, which (correctly) seems to be a more reasonable distance that most people are using it from.
 
Ordered my UN40JU6700. :)

Now what to do with my U3011?

Use it as a side monitor if you have another PC or laptop.

Take it and use it at work if it would help your productivity there.

Sell it.

Give it away.

I've done the first 3 out of 4, lol. :)
 
I downloaded some 4k videos. I also have an F8500 plasma. From a distance, the F8500 is superior. It may be because PC mode turns off most video processing. In my opinion, 4k video is not much better than 1080p from a distance. The F8500 plasma is superior. For me, it's not worth it to buy this for watching movies.

I watched some Netflix last night and it was beautiful. Only issue I have with it is audio - I want to use my bookshelf monitors with the TV but they only accept USB digital signal and the TV only outputs digital audio via Optical / HDMI. Still working on how to get that resolved - I started a thread on Head-Fi but if anyone has ideas I'd welcome them (need some sort of HDMI-USB Mini adapter)

Anyway, I thought Netflix ran really well. Even if the television doesn't have a 24p mode, if a movie is filmed in 24p you're still only viewing that amount of frames. I guess I could see how the refresh rate not matching the frame-rate on the film could annoy some people but I guess I'm not one of them, I just wasn't sensitive to it. Did get Soap Opera effect with motion smoothing, but I turned that off and it acted quite normal to me. From what I've read upgrading to the 7000 series doesn't seem to be worth the price (for me). If I was going to spend substantially more money I'd want the Quantum Dots, but that won't be below 5 figures for a year or two it seems.

I have the 6700.

Perfect, just the type of feedback I was looking for, thanks Cyph/Darth.

As with every other issue in the entire thread, for sane/grounded/realistic people anyway, the 6700 is yet again more than "good enough".
 
Perfect, just the type of feedback I was looking for, thanks Cyph/Darth.

As with every other issue in the entire thread, for sane/grounded/realistic people anyway, the 6700 is yet again more than "good enough".

I wish it had a 200x200mm VESA mount compatibility though. I bought the desk arm and 200x200 adapter for the friggin Philips that I canceled, and now I can't even order the Samsung because I can't use my mount with it. >:\

Also, $5k? The 48" JS9000 quantum dot set is $3500 but you could probably find it for less. :p
 
You're certainly welcome. Glad to contribute anything that can help get these sorted and running optimally.

What did you decide to do if the three you ordered didn't work? Gonna try some more long ones or just resort to having your PC closer?

I'll probably keep the computer close for now, and then keep searching for a cable that will work. I've already got 3 50' DP cables along with all the others that are needed for my setup. I guess I could save some money by selling the long cables I've already purchased...
 
What does the group think about the 24p advantage of the 7500 versus the 6700, for those of us who plan on watching streaming content on these?

It's a $450 price difference, which seems massive, and you also get a bit more contrast along with 3D capability.

To those who have the 6700 and are playing with it, worth the jump or are you fully satisfied with the 4k streaming you've watched thus fat?

I haven't done a ton of TV/movie watching on my 48 yet, but what I have done I've been impressed with - the upconverter does a great job.

I should really check out what little 4k content there is. So much to do...!
 
What does the group think about the 24p advantage of the 7500 versus the 6700, for those of us who plan on watching streaming content on these?

It's a $450 price difference, which seems massive, and you also get a bit more contrast along with 3D capability.

To those who have the 6700 and are playing with it, worth the jump or are you fully satisfied with the 4k streaming you've watched thus fat?

If you don't mind, can you explain what the 24p advantage is? I have been using my computer+monitor to watch content for years instead of an actual TV.
 
Initial impressions after putting the 48" where the 40" was (a little over arm's length):

The display itself is VERY impressive (but we know that already). Otherwise, bleh! This is way too large, way too close. I felt more productive on the 40" because it was more manageable. White screens are blinding even with the backlight on 5. I thought that it might redeem itself by blowing me away in games (you know, the whole IMAX thing) but it's just too large. Overwhelming, and not in a "OMG, awesome!" way. I played for a few minutes and I feel somewhat physically ill. And I NEVER get that way when playing games. Not from 3D, not from wacky FOVs, nothing.

Need to move it back ASAP. Corner testing will come tomorrow.

Note that none of this is the monitor's fault...and some of it may come down to individual preference. But let this serve as a caution for all of you who game at the typical ~2' and are thinking of getting the 48". Contrary to what was stated earlier, bigger is NOT always better.

If I had to keep it at this distance I'd go back to my 40" in a heartbeat. I'm sure it'll be better after I move it another foot or two away, which (correctly) seems to be a more reasonable distance that most people are using it from.

Same way I felt when I saw the 48" in the store. I had to take a step back to enjoy it. Estimating the distance, I'd need to place my kb/m on a table away from my desk. The 40" looked small'ish in the store, but the size quickly increased when I placed it on my desk. Right now I'm sitting 2' away from my 40", using Photoshop and I can comfortably view the entire screen without any strain to view the corners or just the feeling of being overwhelmed.
 
Use it as a side monitor if you have another PC or laptop.

Take it and use it at work if it would help your productivity there.

Sell it.

Give it away.

I've done the first 3 out of 4, lol. :)

I'll see if my wife wants to upgrade.
I don't really want to change my setup at work.
So far most people are more interested in 4K for some reason. :D
Heh, not giving it away when I paid $999.99 for the thing.
 
We should also sticky how to get the best PQ out of Game Mode. I still for the life of me can't figure out where the edge enhancement setting is.

What do you guys mean the 6700 doesn't support 24Hz? I'm able to pick that refresh rate just fine and the display info shows it as 24p.
 
Last edited:
Initial impressions after putting the 48" where the 40" was (a little over arm's length):

The display itself is VERY impressive (but we know that already). Otherwise, bleh! This is way too large, way too close. I felt more productive on the 40" because it was more manageable. White screens are blinding even with the backlight on 5. I thought that it might redeem itself by blowing me away in games (you know, the whole IMAX thing) but it's just too large. Overwhelming, and not in a "OMG, awesome!" way. I played for a few minutes and I feel somewhat physically ill. And I NEVER get that way when playing games. Not from 3D, not from wacky FOVs, nothing.

Need to move it back ASAP. Corner testing will come tomorrow.

Note that none of this is the monitor's fault...and some of it may come down to individual preference. But let this serve as a caution for all of you who game at the typical ~2' and are thinking of getting the 48". Contrary to what was stated earlier, bigger is NOT always better.

If I had to keep it at this distance I'd go back to my 40" in a heartbeat. I'm sure it'll be better after I move it another foot or two away, which (correctly) seems to be a more reasonable distance that most people are using it from.

Yeah, I have mine 22 inches from where I sit, and the 40" screen fills my entire vision through my prescription glasses. Any larger and I'd have blurry peripheral vision that I'd have to move my head to see. Then again, I had decided 40" was the best size for me before I found out there was a 48" model. I'm coming from a 27" so those who are used to even larger displays might need to feed their desire for something larger - more so than I. With the pixel density I could move the 40" even closer if I wanted to experience more immersion though, and I may very well do that - I'm stopped from doing that at the moment due to my other screens though.

I wish it had a 200x200mm VESA mount compatibility though. I bought the desk arm and 200x200 adapter for the friggin Philips that I canceled, and now I can't even order the Samsung because I can't use my mount with it. >:\

Also, $5k? The 48" JS9000 quantum dot set is $3500 but you could probably find it for less. :p

It does have 200x200 vesa compatibility, its just that no current arms have the appropriate adapter kit. I suspect that will be remedied shortly. I'm still waiting to hear back from Ergotron about how I can get it working though.
 
Got my new 980FTW installed and ready for the 6700 coming tomorrow. That card is dead even on performance (to the frame) of what my 2 670FTWs were together. I'm definitely going to need a 2nd 980, possibly 2 980tis. Yikes.
 
Got my new 980FTW installed and ready for the 6700 coming tomorrow. That card is dead even on performance (to the frame) of what my 2 670FTWs were together. I'm definitely going to need a 2nd 980, possibly 2 980tis. Yikes.

For consistant good performance 4K gaming @ max details, you will probably going to need 2x Titan X.
 
Initial impressions after putting the 48" where the 40" was (a little over arm's length): The display itself is VERY impressive (but we know that already). Otherwise, bleh! This is way too large, way too close. I felt more productive on the 40" because it was more manageable. White screens are blinding even with the backlight on 5. I thought that it might redeem itself by blowing me away in games (you know, the whole IMAX thing) but it's just too large. Overwhelming, and not in a "OMG, awesome!" way. I played for a few minutes and I feel somewhat physically ill. And I NEVER get that way when playing games. Not from 3D, not from wacky FOVs, nothing. Need to move it back ASAP. Corner testing will come tomorrow. Note that none of this is the monitor's fault...and some of it may come down to individual preference. But let this serve as a caution for all of you who game at the typical ~2' and are thinking of getting the 48". Contrary to what was stated earlier, bigger is NOT always better. If I had to keep it at this distance I'd go back to my 40" in a heartbeat. I'm sure it'll be better after I move it another foot or two away, which (correctly) seems to be a more reasonable distance that most people are using it from.
Same way I felt when I saw the 48" in the store. I had to take a step back to enjoy it. Estimating the distance, I'd need to place my kb/m on a table away from my desk. The 40" looked small'ish in the store, but the size quickly increased when I placed it on my desk. Right now I'm sitting 2' away from my 40", using Photoshop and I can comfortably view the entire screen without any strain to view the corners or just the feeling of being overwhelmed.

That the 48" is way too big became clear to me after simulating the height of 40" using my present 27" monitor. Even if the 40" is lowered to the desk level it felt too high for me forcing eyes/head to move up to see the upper part of the screen. Maybe for gaming where upper part of the screen is mostly sky or ceiling this is not critical but for productivity apps it is definitely. Then there are ergonomic recommendations which say the best position is when eye level is near the upper edge of the display. After simulation this translated to me that the biggest ergonomic monitor is about 32" and that is what I have on order (BenQ).

However the 40" and bigger 4K monitors are intriguing. I started speculating if they could be used with fullfilling ergonomic recommendations in totally different setup. In this setup the desk would be cut just to fit the keyboard and monitor positioned on a support in such a way that its bottom edge would be below the desk level, upper edge would be then near the eye level. In such setup the view of the monitor would be slightly from above and the desk would not be an obstacle for lowering it.
 
Think you're way over complicating ergonomics. I have the 40" 6700 on its factory stand flat on my desk, and my eyes are level with the top bezel when sitting straight.

Perhaps you just need a shorter desk or taller chair. For reference my desk surface is 29" off the floor, chair seat is 19", monitor top bezel is 23" off the desk, so 52" off the floor. The monitor itself is 21" tall, that really isn't that extreme.
 
Initial impressions after putting the 48" where the 40" was (a little over arm's length):

The display itself is VERY impressive (but we know that already). Otherwise, bleh! This is way too large, way too close. I felt more productive on the 40" because it was more manageable. White screens are blinding even with the backlight on 5. I thought that it might redeem itself by blowing me away in games (you know, the whole IMAX thing) but it's just too large. Overwhelming, and not in a "OMG, awesome!" way. I played for a few minutes and I feel somewhat physically ill. And I NEVER get that way when playing games. Not from 3D, not from wacky FOVs, nothing.

Need to move it back ASAP. Corner testing will come tomorrow.

Note that none of this is the monitor's fault...and some of it may come down to individual preference. But let this serve as a caution for all of you who game at the typical ~2' and are thinking of getting the 48". Contrary to what was stated earlier, bigger is NOT always better.

If I had to keep it at this distance I'd go back to my 40" in a heartbeat. I'm sure it'll be better after I move it another foot or two away, which (correctly) seems to be a more reasonable distance that most people are using it from.

Totally agree. I had my48JUU7500 at 2 feet for a few days but it was too close. Move it back 1 feet and lower it if your can 1-3 inches (I put mine on bar stools behind desk that are a little lower then desk). Now at 3 feet the 48JU7500 is awesome.
 
Turn off Auto-Motion Plus. It's terrible. It gives a weird effect to video playback.
 
Turn off Auto-Motion Plus. It's terrible. It gives a weird effect to video playback.

The presets are garbage, but if you fine tune the settings it can help with motion clarity (still wouldn't use it on games, though).

I don't have experience with these sets, but for last year's 4K models, leaving judder reduction at 0 with blur reduction at 10 did help. And did not give any SOE effect.
 
If you don't mind, can you explain what the 24p advantage is? I have been using my computer+monitor to watch content for years instead of an actual TV.

If you display 24p content at anything other than 24 fps/hz or multiple of, the frame cadence/timing will be slightly off. You've no doubt done this every time you've viewed movies on the computer in the past since few people bother to switch refresh rate just for movies. If you didn't notice it then you probably won't anyway.

Also I'm not sure why people are using these at 2ft monitor distances. That was only done because those displays were small. Push it to the back edge of the desk and welcome to the future.
 
No, you're just a normal human being who doesn't dwell on trivialties and sees the bigger picture. Literally. :D

OH NOES, 42MS VERSUS 21MS WHAT SHUD I DO GUYZ I AM TEH BATTLEFIELD MASTAR AND NEEDZ LOW MS FOR KILLLZZZZZZ!!!!!?!!!?!!!

These are televisions. Not monitors. Comparing them to some ASUS ROG or other similarly rinky dink small micro-screen is ridiculous. If that's you, you're in the wrong thread, as again, these are televisions...Philips thread is that-away, good luck getting one shipped out.

What makes pro gamers/athletes pro isn't pure visual reflex anyway, but years of honing instincts/anticipation/intuition. A pro gamer will easily beat any amateur scrub even with some supposed lagfest monitor because their timing is perfect and doesn't (and cannot) rely on some ~10ms reaction/feedback.

There's also several dozen steps from origin of the video signal on the computer to final changes in the panel with nuanced variations within, so there's no one "lag" number anyway. Unless a display is particularly bad or inconsistent (eg. I briefly had a vizio where the mouse pointer would noticeable follow mouse movement) the whole low-lag l33t gam3r marketing scheme is overblown.
 
For consistant good performance 4K gaming @ max details, you will probably going to need 2x Titan X.

Depends on the game. My system ran surprisingly well at 4k with three GTX 780Ti's. And you know how SLI scaling is. That third card was decorative in some games and a parasite in others.
 
Depends on the game. My system ran surprisingly well at 4k with three GTX 780Ti's. And you know how SLI scaling is. That third card was decorative in some games and a parasite in others.

I am kinda concerned that my 970 will be able to play games at 4k... if I have to play games at 1080p then I dont see the point .... ugh
 
I would definitely be concerned about using a single 970 to play games. I'd go with at least two. If course 980s and Titan X s would be better. :)
 
I just hate to buy another 980 when the ti's are right around the corner. Of course, if the AMD 3xxx's aren't due til August, the 980ti could come as late as Sept/Oct...
 
I would definitely be concerned about using a single 970 to play games. I'd go with at least two. If course 980s and Titan X s would be better. :)

Yea... I was afraid of that. I was gonna just use the 970 until I can get my hands on a Titan X, I think once I had the Titan X that would play games at 4k without AA at a good framerate and then eventually get a second Titan X.

Anyone just using one Titan X and seeing good performance at 4k? Preferrably without AA as I would assume the framerates would be much better without it and 4k is not as nearly needing AA ( still could benefit from it of course).
 
I have no problem playing 1080P on this set. I bought it mostly for desktop work, and I don't like 2 cards in my system. I'd rather play 1080P smooth than struggle at 4K on a tweener card so wait it is.
 
I have no problem playing 1080P on this set. I bought it mostly for desktop work, and I don't like 2 cards in my system. I'd rather play 1080P smooth than struggle at 4K on a tweener card so wait it is.

How does 1080p look like in game mode? I imagine alot softer then native 4k.. right? Any photos showing the difference you could take?
 
Think you're way over complicating ergonomics. I have the 40" 6700 on its factory stand flat on my desk, and my eyes are level with the top bezel when sitting straight. Perhaps you just need a shorter desk or taller chair. For reference my desk surface is 29" off the floor, chair seat is 19", monitor top bezel is 23" off the desk, so 52" off the floor. The monitor itself is 21" tall, that really isn't that extreme.

You must be tall :cool: : my eye level is 18" from the desk, it would be thus full 5" below the monitor top bezel and this makes huge difference. My coming 32" Benq will have the top screen edge at my eye level.
 
How does 1080p look like in game mode? I imagine alot softer then native 4k.. right? Any photos showing the difference you could take?

1080P
image.jpg


4K
image.jpg


Here is 4K blown up to 1080P proportion:
blownup.jpg


1080P is ever so slightly less sharp, but it's extremely good. I've had monitors where it was a smearfest at anything less than native resolution.

With the Iphone taking a picture up close, you can see that there's more detail in 4K. However, when viewed at a distance, it looks good, as much as a 1080P 48" would look. I'm sure when my 40" arrives today, 1080P would look even better as it won't be so in your face.

This is not in game mode. I don't use game mode as I don't need it.
 
Interesting. I'll be testing 1080p vs 2160p tonight as well... Might be my stop til 980ti-time.
 
1080P
image.jpg


4K
image.jpg


Here is 4K blown up to 1080P proportion:
blownup.jpg


1080P is ever so slightly less sharp, but it's extremely good. I've had monitors where it was a smearfest at anything less than native resolution.

With the Iphone taking a picture up close, you can see that there's more detail in 4K. However, when viewed at a distance, it looks good, as much as a 1080P 48" would look. I'm sure when my 40" arrives today, 1080P would look even better as it won't be so in your face.

This is not in game mode. I don't use game mode as I don't need it.

Would you be so kind to do the same tests in game mode? The sharpness needs to be a t 0 in game mode. I imagine that the upscaling your seeing is not in use in game mode and the difference will be much larger I think.

Interesting. I'll be testing 1080p vs 2160p tonight as well... Might be my stop til 980ti-time.

Let us know what you think!
 
You must be tall :cool: : my eye level is 18" from the desk, it would be thus full 5" below the monitor top bezel and this makes huge difference. My coming 32" Benq will have the top screen edge at my eye level.

You sure it isn't desk height difference? My keyboard and mouse are on the desktop, at 28" above the carpet. My eyes are 25" above the desktop. The 25" gives me a perfect 90 degree angle at my elbows. I currently have my 30" on a triple monitor stand, at the top bezel lines up with my eyes. The 40" top bezel will also line up with my eyes, if it is resting on the desk with its factory stand.

Unless a person has a longer torso (taller people often have longer legs), there shouldn't be too much height difference. 9" would be an extreme difference, even for a 1-foot height difference.
 
Back
Top