Philips Momentum 43" 4K HDR gaming display

[gan7114]

Philips Momentum 43" model 436M6VBPAB

Now available for purchase for $999 (typical), and is aimed primarily at console and PC gamers. This is not a TV.


Given its retail price, it has attractive specs. Features include:

- 4K UHD 3840x2160

- 43" display (actual size 42.51")

- 103.64 PPI

- MVA panel with W-LED backlighting

- Anti-glare 3H screen coating

- VESA mountable (200x200mm)

- 162W power draw

- HDMI 2.0, DP 1.2, USB-C ports

- 4ms G2G pixel response time

- Low input lag (to be determined)

- No PWM (flicker free)

- 4,000:1 contrast ratio

- 720 cd/m2 (overall brightness)

- DisplayHDR 1000 certified (peak nits)

- 97.6% DCI-P3 coverage (with quantum dots)

- 8bit + 2bit FRC (simulated 10bit; 1.07B colors)

- 23-80 Hz over HDMI and Displayport

- Adaptive Sync (FreeSync compatible)

- LowBlue Mode

- Philip's Ambiglow (ambient rear lighting)


General Information:

Philip's Website:
https://www.philips.com.au/c-p/436M6VBPAB_75/momentum-4k-hdr-display-with-ambiglow

Product PDF:
https://www.download.p4c.philips.com/files/4/436m6vbpab_75/436m6vbpab_75_pss_engau.pdf


Reviews:

TFT Central:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/philips_436m6vbpab.htm

PC Monitors:
https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/philips-436m6vbpab/


Additional Photos:
https://twitter.com/hashtag/getinthemoment?src=hash

Edited for additional information, pricing, photos, and reviews.

 

[Mad Maxx]

I like! I'll be looking for that monitor when it's available.

 

[Sancus]

32 zone backlight allegedly(in the tftcentral blurb), not fantastic but better than nothing.

 

[EniGmA1987]

That actually seems just about perfect for combined XBox and PC gaming.
Bright enough to take good advantage of HDR, some of the best contrast you can get on LCD to also take good advantage of HDR. 4k res so everything will look nice. Quantum dot for great color. No PWM. Freesync for One X can take advantage too. Seems like it checks all the boxes except for 120Hz, but given its release date and price that isnt too much of a knock against it.

EDIT: Just saw range goes up to 80Hz, so thats huge over a basic 60Hz 4k display. With all these other specs this looks like the best deal anyone will find for a while considering the $2000+ price on the GSync, 120hz 4k monitors.

 

[Armenius]

€799. Will probably be the same in USD without VAT. Will be keeping an eye on it, but I haven't had a good experience with Philips in the past. Might replace my 49" Samsung.

 

[gan7114]

I like! I'll be looking for that monitor when it's available.

Especially at that price point, this monitor will be packing some serious value. Count me in as interested too.

32 zone backlight allegedly(in the tftcentral blurb), not fantastic but better than nothing.

Not sure if it's actual FALD. TFT Central states that it's a "32-zone edge-lit" backlight, so perhaps around the perimeter? I agree, still better than nothing, and better than your usual edge-lit system. The pictures on Twitter look good to my eyes.

 

[tchalikias]

The only thing that bothers me about this otherwise attractive monitor is that it apparently does not utilize a true 10-bit panel, but rather a 8 bit + FRC one. It's 2018, I would expect all 4K HDR panels to be true 10-bit.

As for local dimming that is a bonus for sure, but I don't expect it to work particularly well, based on the current crop of FALD monitors (which have 384 zones). Actually I would imagine it to be almost bothersome, unless you're watching a movie.

The leds are indeed most probably around the perimeter - Sony has proven that an edge lit local dimming system can indeed work, sometimes even better than a FALD in the same price range (for example, last year's 930E has less blooming and more dimming zones utilizing two layers of edge leds across all four sides than the true FALD 900E/F), but I don't think Phillips' solution will be that advanced.

 

[Kdawg]

$1000 oooo weee.
Might as well get a good TV for that price.

 

[euskalzabe]

$1000 oooo weee.
Might as well get a good TV for that price.

The cheapest you'll find is a Samsung Q6F or Sony X900E, both 49" for $800. Way too big for most (not all) people to use as monitor - and I'm speaking as someone using a 40" 4K TV as a monitor 3 feet away from my face. 49" would give me neck pain, plus the sides would start to shift color due to viewing angle limitations.

What this Philips offers at 43" is unparalleled in the TV market. ALL the 40" TVs are decent but on the mediocre side of things: little to no innovation for the max size that most people would prefer as monitor (I should know, I bought my Samsung KU6290 because nothing else was worth any more money at this size, "upgrades" that were plain jokes). A regular 40" 4K TV goes for about $400, with no option for better image quality (say, like a QLED 9 series on 40 inches, just doesn't exist) - they force smaller screens to have the worst quality. An entry level Q6F is $800 at 49". This Philips has more brightness than the Q series, so a $800-100 price for higher image quality, at the otherwise nonexistent 40" size... that's quite reasonable at this point in time (probably not in a year or two, but this will be the first product to offer this combo of size and quality).

 

[EniGmA1987]

The only thing that bothers me about this otherwise attractive monitor is that it apparently does not utilize a true 10-bit panel, but rather a 8 bit + FRC one. It's 2018, I would expect all 4K HDR panels to be true 10-bit.

As for local dimming that is a bonus for sure, but I don't expect it to work particularly well, based on the current crop of FALD monitors (which have 384 zones). Actually I would imagine it to be almost bothersome, unless you're watching a movie.

The leds are indeed most probably around the perimeter - Sony has proven that an edge lit local dimming system can indeed work, sometimes even better than a FALD in the same price range (for example, last year's 930E has less blooming and more dimming zones utilizing two layers of edge leds across all four sides than the true FALD 900E/F), but I don't think Phillips' solution will be that advanced.

Does XBox and PS4 even support proper 10 bit output?
And are there really a lot of monitors out there that support 10 bit? I keep hearing that internally monitors only do 8 bit for the most part even if they accept a 10 bit input signal.

 

[gan7114]

The only thing that bothers me about this otherwise attractive monitor is that it apparently does not utilize a true 10-bit panel, but rather a 8 bit + FRC one. It's 2018, I would expect all 4K HDR panels to be true 10-bit.

As for local dimming that is a bonus for sure, but I don't expect it to work particularly well, based on the current crop of FALD monitors (which have 384 zones). Actually I would imagine it to be almost bothersome, unless you're watching a movie.

The leds are indeed most probably around the perimeter - Sony has proven that an edge lit local dimming system can indeed work, sometimes even better than a FALD in the same price range (for example, last year's 930E has less blooming and more dimming zones utilizing two layers of edge leds across all four sides than the true FALD 900E/F), but I don't think Phillips' solution will be that advanced.

I get what you're saying about 8bit + 2bit FRC. I also wish it were truly 10bit, but it would likely be much more expensive.

OTOH, I don't think 10bit vs 8bit + 2bit FRC makes much of a difference in the end. One is actual, the other is dithered, but both are capable of showing 1.07B colors. And the difference when moving up from just 8bit (16.7M colors) is vast.

I see other sites around the web referring to 8bit + 2bit FRC as "fake" HDR, when that's not really the case. The HDR spec supports varying color bit depths, so the proper argument is 8bit + 2bit FRC is "fake" 10bit, which technically it is, although in practice the difference is negligible. People in general make too big a deal over the difference when what matters most for HDR is panel brightness, contrast, and gamut coverage. This display looks to be well-rounded in all those areas, given its price.

$1000 oooo weee.
Might as well get a good TV for that price.

This isn't a TV. But if we're talking TVs, then we'd be talking about the features of QLED or OLED models as equal comparisons, which start at $1,500.

The cheapest you'll find is a Samsung Q6F or Sony X900E, both 49" for $800. Way too big for most (not all) people to use as monitor - and I'm speaking as someone using a 40" 4K TV as a monitor 3 feet away from my face. 49" would give me neck pain, plus the sides would start to shift color due to viewing angle limitations.

What this Philips offers at 43" is unparalleled in the TV market. ALL the 40" TVs are decent but on the mediocre side of things: little to no innovation for the max size that most people would prefer as monitor (I should know, I bought my Samsung KU6290 because nothing else was worth any more money at this size, "upgrades" that were plain jokes). A regular 40" 4K TV goes for about $400, with no option for better image quality (say, like a QLED 9 series on 40 inches, just doesn't exist) - they force smaller screens to have the worst quality. An entry level Q6F is $800 at 49". This Philips has more brightness than the Q series, so a $800-100 price for higher image quality, at the otherwise nonexistent 40" size... that's quite reasonable at this point in time (probably not in a year or two, but this will be the first product to offer this combo of size and quality).

If this display can live up to how Philips is hyping it, then it's going to be a good value. Will it do high Hz? No. Will it have OLED quality contrast? No. But for what it's spec'd as, it looks to be a good 4K experience at 60Hz with HDR and FreeSync. Most importantly, the price point will put it in reach of many gamers without breaking the bank, and a huge step up from 6bit and 8bit monitors they've been using.

 

[peppergomez]

This looks very attractive. I would be doing mostly photo editing, with some gaming and 1080 TV/movie watching.

Does anyone know how well suited it would be for photo editing?

 

[gan7114]

This looks very attractive. I would be doing mostly photo editing, with some gaming and 1080 TV/movie watching.

Does anyone know how well suited it would be for photo editing?

Professional grade monitors for photo editing are either 8bit + 2bit FRC or 10bit, so this would be perfectly suitable for doing your work. And because of quantum dots, this will have almost complete coverage of DCI-P3, so that's a pretty wide color gamut to work with.

I've been using wide gamut monitors for almost a decade now (currently using a Dell U2713H) in single monitor set ups for my desktop, photo editing, and gaming and there is no way in hell I'll ever go back to 8bit or lower.

 

[Zepharus]

FEG! This looks noice

 

[Krisium]

I'd definitely consider it if I had an AMD card and a setup suitable for such a large display.

Looks like it has a matte finish tho?

Also can someone confirm 80hz? TFTC doesn't mention that. The Philips pages themselves say "• Scanning Frequency: VGA: 47 - 63 Hz ; HDMI/ DisplayPort: 23 - 80 Hz / VGA/HDMI: 30 - 99 kHz ; DisplayPort: 30 - 160 kHz" but also say "Optimum resolution: 3840 x 2160 @ 60 Hz".

 

[peppergomez]

Professional grade monitors for photo editing are either 8bit + 2bit FRC or 10bit, so this would be perfectly suitable for doing your work. And because of quantum dots, this will have almost complete coverage of DCI-P3, so that's a pretty wide color gamut to work with.

I've been using wide gamut monitors for almost a decade now (currently using a Dell U2713H) in single monitor set ups for my desktop, photo editing, and gaming and there is no way in hell I'll ever go back to 8bit or lower.

Thanks

 

[Sancus]

It's a DP1.2 monitor so no way it does more than 60hz 4K -- the 80hz support may work at lower resolutions though, which is neat if you want to do that. But in-display scaling usually looks like crap.

 

[HiCZoK]

32 zone backlight allegedly(in the tftcentral blurb), not fantastic but better than nothing.

lol 32 zones while tvs have 400.
It will look like backlight bleeding in the middle of the screen like on that shitty Dell monitor year ago

 

[Armenius]

It's a DP1.2 monitor so no way it does more than 60hz 4K -- the 80hz support may work at lower resolutions though, which is neat if you want to do that. But in-display scaling usually looks like crap.

DP 1.2 can do 4K up to 120 Hz with 4:2:2 chroma. It is more than capable of doing 80 Hz at full chroma.

 

[Sancus]

DP 1.2 can do 4K up to 120 Hz with 4:2:2 chroma. It is more than capable of doing 80 Hz at full chroma.

Well I wasn't referring to non-full-chromas and don't consider them usable on PC. It''s rare that higher refresh rates are supported this way by PC monitors anyway. Otherwise we'd have had 120hz 4K for a while as you say, because panels have supported 4K 120hz for a long time.

But I'm not convinced that 4k@80hz is possible on DP1.2. 1440@165hz is barely possible, after all, and that's equivalent to about 73hz 4K. And of course HDR is higher bandwidth. I'm aware that the naive math strictly implies it should work for CVT-R2 timings but has anyone actually ever supported that much bandwidth on any DP1.2 monitor? I don't believe they have, so it's entirely possible that the scaler/tcon/etc hardware don't even exist unless you buy the much more expensive, newer parts intended for DP1.4.

In any case I'm 99.9% certain this is restricted to 4k60hz, if it was 80hz they would be trumpeting it as a key feature especially at this price point.

 

[Necere]

lol 32 zones while tvs have 400.
It will look like backlight bleeding in the middle of the screen like on that shitty Dell monitor year ago

Maybe, maybe not. Remember this is VA while the Dell is IPS, and the latter is much more susceptible to backlight bleed.

 

[Armenius]

Well I wasn't referring to non-full-chromas and don't consider them usable on PC. It''s rare that higher refresh rates are supported this way by PC monitors anyway. Otherwise we'd have had 120hz 4K for a while as you say, because panels have supported 4K 120hz for a long time.

But I'm not convinced that 4k@80hz is possible on DP1.2. 1440@165hz is barely possible, after all, and that's equivalent to about 73hz 4K. And of course HDR is higher bandwidth. I'm aware that the naive math strictly implies it should work for CVT-R2 timings but has anyone actually ever supported that much bandwidth on any DP1.2 monitor? I don't believe they have, so it's entirely possible that the scaler/tcon/etc hardware don't even exist unless you buy the much more expensive, newer parts intended for DP1.4.

In any case I'm 99.9% certain this is restricted to 4k60hz, if it was 80hz they would be trumpeting it as a key feature especially at this price point.

Whatever the deal is, optimal resolution is listed as 4K @ 60 Hz on the product page. I also noticed I was calculating using 8-bit color, not 10-bit. 10-bit would be over 21 Gb/s, while 8-bit is 16.9.

 

[gan7114]

Whatever the deal is, optimal resolution is listed as 4K @ 60 Hz on the product page.

I agree. The primary usage of this monitor is for 4K@60Hz. I suppose, as others have said above, that it may be able to push 80Hz using 1080p (although it kind of defeats the purpose of this monitor; there's lots of cheaper, better options out there if you're looking to game at high hertz 1080p).

Bottom line is, if you're looking for high hertz gaming, this isn't the monitor for you. But if you're looking for a beautiful 4K HDR experience at normal hertz with FreeSync thrown in then it's looking pretty nice.

 

[igluk]

First review is out

https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/philips-436m6vbpab

Sounds pretty good, strong HDR performance - at Normal setting even better looking than the 384 dimming zone IPS panel according to review. Response times also very good for VA and a low input lag.
Only major issue seems to be the quirky subpixel rendering and static dithering patterns which makes this display suboptimal for up-close use and reading/text work. Shame really, could have been a great all-purpose display.
But it seems to be intended primarily for multimedia (games, movies, HDR) and console gaming and then there's not much to say against it. Also you get solid HDR performance for a relatively low price.
Btw. there's no overclocking above 60Hz no matter the resolution.

 

[Armenius]

First review is out

https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/philips-436m6vbpab

Sounds pretty good, strong HDR performance - at Normal setting even better looking than the 384 dimming zone IPS panel according to review. Response times also very good for VA and a low input lag.
Only major issue seems to be the quirky subpixel rendering and static dithering patterns which makes this display suboptimal for up-close use and reading/text work. Shame really, could have been a great all-purpose display.
But it seems to be intended primarily for multimedia (games, movies, HDR) and console gaming and then there's not much to say against it. Also you get solid HDR performance for a relatively low price.
Btw. there's no overclocking above 60Hz no matter the resolution.

They only measured 6ms of input lag. That is pretty damned good. May have to replace my Sammy when this goes on sale.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

This looks very attractive. I would be doing mostly photo editing, with some gaming and 1080 TV/movie watching.

Does anyone know how well suited it would be for photo editing?

Professional grade monitors for photo editing are either 8bit + 2bit FRC or 10bit, so this would be perfectly suitable for doing your work. And because of quantum dots, this will have almost complete coverage of DCI-P3, so that's a pretty wide color gamut to work with.

While gan7114's statement above is correct, you need to be very careful about venturing into >SRGB colorspaces and >8bit for photo editing. This is generally only useful if your output is suitable for higher bit depths and expanded colors spaces, and for most professional photography uses SRGB remains the most suitable option simply because that's what nearly all consumer clients will be using, and also what many printers use.

If you are intent on using 10bit, ensure that your entire workflow is up to par too so as to avoid unneeded frustration .

 

[insoc123]

Other than better input lag, what would be the advantage of this monitor vs a 43" Sony X800E or an equivalent Samsung UHD TV?

 

[igluk]

The X800E doesn't even stand a chance spec wise - other than having better viewing angles due to the IPS panel used
Other than higher input lag it has no local dimming, less than half peak brightness (~420cd/m²), smaller color gamut (DCI-P3 85% xy vs. 97% xy) and less than a quarter of the contrast
Also the Philips has adaptive sync/freesync support including for Xbox, even though the range is quite limited (48-60fps)

Compared to HDR Samsung models it is available in 43'' size, has better pixel overdrive, a DisplayPort connection, adaptive sync (but 2018 Samsungs will get updates later this year) and no PWM
And even though it's only 32 zones it also has better local dimming than most Samsungs, except for the high end 2018 FALD models (Q8FN, Q9FN - which start at 55'')

 

[Armenius]

While gan7114's statement above is correct, you need to be very careful about venturing into >SRGB colorspaces and >8bit for photo editing. This is generally only useful if your output is suitable for higher bit depths and expanded colors spaces, and for most professional photography uses SRGB remains the most suitable option simply because that's what nearly all consumer clients will be using, and also what many printers use.

If you are intent on using 10bit, ensure that your entire workflow is up to par too so as to avoid unneeded frustration .

Important to note that GeForce cards only support 10-bit color in HDR. You need a Quadro to get 10-bit and higher color support for productivity applications. AMD cards don't have this issue.

 

[igluk]

I wonder if the static dithering patterns on this screen are really as bad as on the 49'' TCL 49S405 that Kdawg tested:

https://hardforum.com/threads/tcl-4...t-color-but-unsuitable-as-pc-monitor.1946321/

If you can't see the images, try to multi-quote the post. Or use these links:

https://i.imgur.com/mhqVVXx.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/LjxkqUD.jpg

Philips pic from pcmonitors:
https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/436M6-zoomed-out.jpg
https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/436M6-zoomed-in.jpg

Looks similar to me and if it really is that bad it's a major issue unless you sit at least quite a distance away from it.
According to Kdawg it's a firmware thing so maybe there is hope that Philips could fix it.

I went on another little research trip..
...and I noticed that the 43'' TCL 43S405 has identical subpixels as the Philips so it is likely a very similar or even the same panel (but with a completely different backlight unit)
The 43'' TCL has an AUO panel, the 49'' uses a different CSOT panel.
Funny enough the 43'' TCL does not appear to have any static dithering artifacts like the 49'' version has! Might really be due to some idiotic firmware programming.

Subpixels:
43'' TCL S405: http://i.rtings.com/images/reviews/tv/tcl/s405/s405-pixels-large.jpg
Philips (enlarged): https://i.imgur.com/lqjyDIV.jpg

 

[Armenius]

I wonder if the static dithering patterns on this screen are really as bad as on the 49'' TCL 49S405 that Kdawg tested:

https://hardforum.com/threads/tcl-4...itable-as-pc-monitor.1946321/#post-1043499886

If you can't see the images, try to multi-quote the post. Or use these links:

https://i.imgur.com/mhqVVXx.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/LjxkqUD.jpg

Philips pic from pcmonitors:
https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/436M6-zoomed-out.jpg
https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/436M6-zoomed-in.jpg

Looks similar to me and if it really is that bad it's a major issue unless you sit at least quite a distance away from it.
According to Kdawg it's a firmware thing so maybe there is hope that Philips could fix it.

I went on another little research trip..
...and I noticed that the 43'' TCL 43S405 has identical subpixels as the Philips so it is likely a very similar or even the same panel (but with a completely different backlight unit)
The 43'' TCL has an AUO panel, the 49'' uses a different CSOT panel.
Funny enough the 43'' TCL does not appear to have any static dithering artifacts like the 49'' version has! Might really be due to some idiotic firmware programming.

Subpixels:
43'' TCL S405: http://i.rtings.com/images/reviews/tv/tcl/s405/s405-pixels-large.jpg
Philips (enlarged): https://i.imgur.com/lqjyDIV.jpg

You're imgur links are not working. Change them to .png and they will.

 

[igluk]

Press F5 on Chrome if you get denied message. No such message on Firefox. On the other hand renaming to PNG causes some issues on Firefox. There appear to be issues with imgur links at the moment, different kinds of issues depending on whether you're using Firefox or Chrome. And it seems to have broken all embedded images on the board.

 

[gan7114]

First review is out

https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/philips-436m6vbpab

Sounds pretty good, strong HDR performance - at Normal setting even better looking than the 384 dimming zone IPS panel according to review. Response times also very good for VA and a low input lag.
Only major issue seems to be the quirky subpixel rendering and static dithering patterns which makes this display suboptimal for up-close use and reading/text work. Shame really, could have been a great all-purpose display.
But it seems to be intended primarily for multimedia (games, movies, HDR) and console gaming and then there's not much to say against it. Also you get solid HDR performance for a relatively low price.
Btw. there's no overclocking above 60Hz no matter the resolution.

Interesting read, thanks for providing.

Was quite surprised with the measured contrast levels. Glad to see it's very strong, even for a VA, and those measurements for the HDR settings were even more pleasantly surprising.

It has disappointing luminance uniformity though, and the "SmartUniformity" setting didn't seem to produce any results... Perhaps a firmware update will correct this, along with the dithering as you mentioned in your other post.

Overall, it's a pretty damn good review for a VA monitor that's meant for 4K HDR gaming.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

Important to note that GeForce cards only support 10-bit color in HDR. You need a Quadro to get 10-bit and higher color support for productivity applications. AMD cards don't have this issue.

The 10-series does support 10bit on the desktop, but per-application support is still up to the application and driver. Something I need to play with in Lightroom.

 

[Kdawg]

I wonder if the static dithering patterns on this screen are really as bad as on the 49'' TCL 49S405 that Kdawg tested:

https://hardforum.com/threads/tcl-4...t-color-but-unsuitable-as-pc-monitor.1946321/

If you can't see the images, try to multi-quote the post. Or use these links:

https://i.imgur.com/mhqVVXx.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/LjxkqUD.jpg

after you click the imgur links, you can right click the blank/failed image and reload in Firefox.

Philips pic from pcmonitors:
https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/436M6-zoomed-out.jpg
https://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/436M6-zoomed-in.jpg

Looks similar to me and if it really is that bad it's a major issue unless you sit at least quite a distance away from it.
According to Kdawg it's a firmware thing so maybe there is hope that Philips could fix it.

that Phillips dithering pattern is fuckin awful and looks identically as bad as the 49 TCL.

Only cheap TVs have this shit..... like the 43" Hisense/Sharp Roku, 43" Vizio, and 43 Insignia.
The only ones I know of that don't have that static dither are sony samsung and TCL.
The 43 Hisense h6/h7/h8 non-roku doesn't have static dither, but it has some other pixel rendering problems.

total deal breaker unless Philips fixes it.

Sometimes manufacturers don't fix shit,
like my 43" TCL has a slow 60hz temporal dithering frequency, so I see motion artifacts if I move my eyeballs or if something moves on screen, and TCL never fixed it because not enough people complained.

The static dither is a little harder to see on a 43" due to smaller pixel size, so maybe Philips got lazy and thought you wouldn't notice.

 

[GNUse_the_force]

Hopefully there will be a fix for the dithering as that is a show stopper for me even when sat at a reasonable distance. If it wasn't for that it would definitely be on my shortlist.. But a 120hz version with no dithering would probably be an insta-buy, I need two panels like this at least.

 

[AORUS]

Interesting read, thanks for providing.

Was quite surprised with the measured contrast levels. Glad to see it's very strong, even for a VA, and those measurements for the HDR settings were even more pleasantly surprising.

It has disappointing luminance uniformity though, and the "SmartUniformity" setting didn't seem to produce any results... Perhaps a firmware update will correct this, along with the dithering as you mentioned in your other post.

Overall, it's a pretty damn good review for a VA monitor that's meant for 4K HDR gaming.

On this Philip's is only a DP1.2 you will not get 4K HDR on a PC you will need a DP1.3 Nvidia future 1180 cards! also It's only a VA panel.

 

[gan7114]

On this Philip's is only a DP1.2 you will not get 4K HDR on a PC you will need a DP1.3 Nvidia future 1180 cards! also It's only a VA panel.

All newer GPUs support HDR. This is a FreeSync display, so you wouldn't get much benefit from an NVIDIA card. Also, it's primarily aimed at consoles first, PC second, which is why there is HDMI 2.0. As such, HDMI connectivity is going to be preferred, although I will concede that it is a little odd they didn't include DP 1.4 for PC users.

Not sure what you mean by it's "only" a VA panel.

 

[Armenius]

On this Philip's is only a DP1.2 you will not get 4K HDR on a PC you will need a DP1.3 Nvidia future 1180 cards! also It's only a VA panel.

I don't know what you're talking about. All Pascal cards have DisplayPort 1.4. I'm pretty sure all Vega cards do, too.

 

[AORUS]

I don't know what you're talking about. All Pascal cards have DisplayPort 1.4. I'm pretty sure all Vega cards do, too.

I mean the monitor not the graphic card, yes my 1080 ti have a DP1.4 but not HDR also the monitor have only a DP1.2 is not going to cut it for HDR gaming on a 1080 TI get real