Seiki 39" 4K HDTV $650

Fooshnik

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
2,922
Not sure. Seems like some people are able to game at 1080p/120Hz, of course a television signal is going to be interpolated 120Hz. 4K is 30Hz.
 

spressa112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
422
it's true 120hz @ 1080p...not interpolated shit from what i've read.

30hz @ 4k
60hz @ 2560x1440
120hz @ 1080p

i'm really tempted to buy one but 1080p @ 39" is not something i wanna do right now.
 

Ultra Wide

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2000
Messages
1,397
Wow prices on 4K are starting out very low and very affordable! I like this trend!
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
it's true 120hz @ 1080p...not interpolated shit from what i've read.

30hz @ 4k
60hz @ 2560x1440
120hz @ 1080p

i'm really tempted to buy one but 1080p @ 39" is not something i wanna do right now.
Oh hell no, but 120hz is overkill for gaming anyway. Most of the time the game will look MUCH better with the settings on "ultimate" at 2560x1440 for 60FPS than it would be lowering the settings so that you can get over 60FPS yet alone average 120FPS.

The monitor cannot draw frames that don't exist (at least withouth interpolation that you don't want because of lag and what not anyway), so unless you have an insanely monster rig or are running old-ass games, 120hz is completely useless.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
731
Interesting that the asus 31.5" is $3,500. Lower contrast ration and lower response time than the Seiki. And it's smaller? 39" is too big for a monitor but still. Huge price difference and i'm not seeing the justification for it. Someone enlighten me?
 

Kaos_Drem

Gawd
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
970
Oh hell no, but 120hz is overkill for gaming anyway. Most of the time the game will look MUCH better with the settings on "ultimate" at 2560x1440 for 60FPS than it would be lowering the settings so that you can get over 60FPS yet alone average 120FPS.

The monitor cannot draw frames that don't exist (at least withouth interpolation that you don't want because of lag and what not anyway), so unless you have an insanely monster rig or are running old-ass games, 120hz is completely useless.

Except this is 120hz input not interpolated output, similar to a true 120hz input monitor.
 

Ultra Wide

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2000
Messages
1,397
Interesting that the asus 31.5" is $3,500. Lower contrast ration and lower response time than the Seiki. And it's smaller? 39" is too big for a monitor but still. Huge price difference and i'm not seeing the justification for it. Someone enlighten me?

The main selling point of the ASUS is that it can do 60Hz @ 4k using MST over DisplayPort. And 30" is more manageable on a desktop physically.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
Except this is 120hz input not interpolated output, similar to a true 120hz input monitor.
What doe sthat have to do with what I said? :confused:

Point was that if it can do 60hz at a high resolution (albeit not 4K) that is more than sufficient, as 120FPS average is 2560x1440 is virtually impossible to achieve on most modern titles at highest graphics settings on the average gaming computer anyway.

A lot of people seem to think that a 120hz monitor at 60FPS is going to look better than a 60hz monitor, which of course is nonsense.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
The main selling point of the ASUS is that it can do 60Hz @ 4k using MST over DisplayPort. And 30" is more manageable on a desktop physically.
4K is a shitton of pixels though, so the number one question before even entertaining something like the Asus is to see if people with similar hardware to you can even run at 60FPS with high graphics settings.

If you can't, you're lowering the resolution anyway for games making the entire issue moot.

For desktop viewing, if you're not super anal about your mouse cursor, 30hz is fine for browsing the web and doing email and such.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
39" is too big for a monitor but still.
Use a slim wall-mount and its not too big at all, at least not with sufficient resolution like this.

I have a Dell U3011 right now wall mounted, and if anything I wish it were a little bigger.
 

spressa112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
422
after seeing that article of what it takes to run stuff @ 4k made me scared. TRI-SLI Titans was still stuttery on certain games. I'm cfx 7970 vapor-x's and 4k still scares me quite a bit. Promised the wife I'd slow down this year.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
after seeing that article of what it takes to run stuff @ 4k made me scared. TRI-SLI Titans was still stuttery on certain games. I'm cfx 7970 vapor-x's and 4k still scares me quite a bit. Promised the wife I'd slow down this year.
Amen, but I think the appeal is that you have a large size screen for a very reasonable price that will be awesome for 4K desktop realestate.

1080P movies will still look good, as 39" isn't rediculously huge.

You can then play your games at say 2560x1440 at 60hz, and that doesn't take insane horsepower and a single decent GPU is fine.
 

wooj

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
384
after seeing that article of what it takes to run stuff @ 4k made me scared. TRI-SLI Titans was still stuttery on certain games. I'm cfx 7970 vapor-x's and 4k still scares me quite a bit. Promised the wife I'd slow down this year.

without AA turned on you're fine. they had 8 or 4 AA with 16AF, i'm pretty sure you can tweak settings and run it pretty smoothly with some compromises.
 

Lysdexik

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
348
So one could actually use this display @ 2560x1600 until they could afford better GPU power?
 

Warrior

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
13,839
A lot of people seem to think that a 120hz monitor at 60FPS is going to look better than a 60hz monitor, which of course is nonsense.

It looks the same...:rolleyes: And having a 120Hz monitor (which I do), Is awesome to have because if you are able to run games at 60+ FPS, you will actually see the FPS that goes 60+ In fact it happens A LOT. and I'm not sure what you mean by "most modern titles at that res you can't get 120fps" I'm not sure what "most games" you play, but a TON of games I can max out 120fps... Idie game are fucking awesome at 120Hz, BL2 loves 120Hz, any console port thats codded decently for PC will hit 120fps easily. Who gives a fuck about JUST "most modern titles"? It's all the other games and a lot of newer games that benifit greatly from it now.

I love 120Hz, and I'll never get a monitor with less now.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
and I'm not sure what you mean by "most modern titles at that res you can't get 120fps" I'm not sure what "most games" you play, but a TON of games I can max out 120fps... Idie game are fucking awesome at 120Hz, BL2 loves 120Hz, any console port thats codded decently for PC will hit 120fps easily. Who gives a fuck about JUST "most modern titles"? It's all the other games and a lot of newer games that benifit greatly from it now.

I love 120Hz, and I'll never get a monitor with less now.
Reading comprehension fail... the key part was "at that res". I have a fast computer, but I'm fairly confident it would crap itself if I asked it to punch out 120fps at 4096x2160. Remember, 4K is like playing your games on four 1080p screens simultaneously.
 

spressa112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
422
Amen, but I think the appeal is that you have a large size screen for a very reasonable price that will be awesome for 4K desktop realestate.

1080P movies will still look good, as 39" isn't rediculously huge.

You can then play your games at say 2560x1440 at 60hz, and that doesn't take insane horsepower and a single decent GPU is fine.

I'm currently on a 2b catleap and my computer handles 2560x1440 fine.

4770k @ 4.5ghz w/ 2x 7970 cfx.

it's just, i don't know if i can do the really big monitors anymore. i've done it a bunch of times (e.g. 37" 1080p w3 westinghouse, 46" 1080p bravia, 46" samsung unc led, 52 samsung unc led, etc.) and I always go back down to a 24-30" monitor again.
 

Justintoxicated

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 10, 2002
Messages
14,500
Whats with all the love for small monitors. I'm still rocking my 37" westy. Im getting to that age where I need to put on my light prescription reading glasses if I'm using a 24" all day like at work. I love getting home and using my westy.

The 37" westy is 1080P and I love it for gaming. This 39" sounds like a beast with that crazy high desktop resolution, but still has the ability to play games @ 1080. Really tempted.
 

w4ffles

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
2,355
It really depends on how far you're sitting from your monitor. Sitting 2 ft from a 39" or 6 ft from a 24" would kind of suck.
 

fociz

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
343
Oh hell no, but 120hz is overkill for gaming anyway. Most of the time the game will look MUCH better with the settings on "ultimate" at 2560x1440 for 60FPS than it would be lowering the settings so that you can get over 60FPS yet alone average 120FPS.

The monitor cannot draw frames that don't exist (at least withouth interpolation that you don't want because of lag and what not anyway), so unless you have an insanely monster rig or are running old-ass games, 120hz is completely useless.

Honestly, anyone who says 120hz is overkill are completely uneducated.
I suppose you also run around telling folks the human eye cannot detect anything over 30fps right?

People really need to do some research before spewing bullshit.
 

fociz

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
343
Whats with all the love for small monitors. I'm still rocking my 37" westy. Im getting to that age where I need to put on my light prescription reading glasses if I'm using a 24" all day like at work. I love getting home and using my westy.

The 37" westy is 1080P and I love it for gaming. This 39" sounds like a beast with that crazy high desktop resolution, but still has the ability to play games @ 1080. Really tempted.

Agreed 100%

I absolutely loved my old Westy 37.
I just don't get these folks who prefer gaming on 24/27 monitors.
My Sony 40 sits on the wall 3.5ft away from me, and is beast as a PC monitor.
Larger pixels@1080p? Sure, but surfing text is fine, and gaming is huge.

At 4k this 39 panel could be a gdamn beast for any gamer, and if it truly does 120hz at 1080p i just might have to grab one.
The question is, how good or bad the internal scaler is dropping it down to 1080p. A 1080p monitor with that kind of pixel density, and true 120hz would be crazy.
__________________
 
Last edited:

mdmikep

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 23, 2001
Messages
284
can this monitor run 1440P or 4K off a 1.4 HDMI cable? I have a 27" 2560X1440 monitor on dual 670's and it couldnt run native on anything but a diplay port or the full DVI.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
Honestly, anyone who says 120hz is overkill are completely uneducated.
I suppose you also run around telling folks the human eye cannot detect anything over 30fps right?

People really need to do some research before spewing bullshit.
People really need to develop 4th grade reading comprehension skills before going on childish rants.

I said that 120hz is pointless if you can't break 60fps on your games at the insanely high resolutions that 4K HDTVs are capable of. I don't think you grasp the concept of how much graphical power it takes to run four 1080p screens simultaneously.

And even at 2560x1440, as I already said ad nauseum you will have a FAR more attractive and still plenty smooth gaming experience with maximum settings and 60FPS than you will turning it down to look like crap so you can average anywhere close to 120FPS.

You can't draw frames that don't exist, so if you are averaging 45FPS at 2560x1440 like I typically do, you will not benefit from a 120hz monitor.

And high resolution IS very beautiful. I would take a 120hz 2560x1440 monitor over a 60hz one, but I'd take a 60hz 2560x1440 with a 4096x2160 resolution for desktop (wonderful for photoshop or adobe premiere where you are generally working with 24fps or 30fps footage) over a 120hz 1080p screen any day of the week even at twice the price.
 

Warrior

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Messages
13,839
People really need to develop 4th grade reading comprehension skills before going on childish rants.

You can't draw frames that don't exist, so if you are averaging 45FPS at 2560x1440 like I typically do, you will not benefit from a 120hz monitor.
WHO CARES??? Dude, that's just a FEW games... when MOST games in this world will be awesome at 120Hz/Fps You're missing my point... 95%+ of the time you DEFINITELY benefit from a 120Hz Monitor. That's like saying having a car that can do 150mph is pointless when speed limits are 60mph... :rolleyes: There is going to be many many times where you will be thankful you have the power. And it makes upgrading video cards more fun, cause you get more out of it then normal 60Hz people.
I said that 120hz is pointless if you can't break 60fps on your games at the insanely high resolutions that 4K HDTVs are capable of. I don't think you grasp the concept of how much graphical power it takes to run four 1080p screens simultaneously.

And high resolution IS very beautiful. I would take a 120hz 2560x1440 monitor over a 60hz one, but I'd take a 60hz 2560x1440 with a 4096x2160 resolution for desktop (wonderful for photoshop or adobe premiere where you are generally working with 24fps or 30fps footage) over a 120hz 1080p screen any day of the week even at twice the price.

You need to understand that 4K doesn't even support anything above 30Hz... so fps above 30fps is pointless so your whole speal is just dumb. BTW, I wouldn't take 30Hz over ANYTHING, I don't care how big it is, that would cause the worst headaches of your life. That's retarded... And...Everyone knows 4k is crazy to run games at on current video hardware...:rolleyes:
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
WHO CARES??? Dude, that's just a FEW games... when MOST games in this world will be awesome at 120Hz/Fps You're missing my point... 95%+ of the time you DEFINITELY benefit from a 120Hz Monitor. That's like saying having a car that can do 150mph is pointless when speed limits are 60mph... :rolleyes: There is going to be many many times where you will be thankful you have the power. And it makes upgrading video cards more fun, cause you get more out of it then normal 60Hz people.

You need to understand that 4K doesn't even support anything above 30Hz... so fps above 30fps is pointless so your whole speal is just dumb. BTW, I wouldn't take 30Hz over ANYTHING, I don't care how big it is, that would cause the worst headaches of your life. That's retarded... And...Everyone knows 4k is crazy to run games at on current video hardware...:rolleyes:
How old are you?

Stop talking, go back, and reread the post that you replied to, you'll be embarrassed. No one is talking about gaming at 4K, everyone understands it runs 4K at 30hz, and if you have insanely powerful hardware or enjoy gaming at low resolutions to achieve an average of near 120FPS in the games you enjoy then that is good for you. That has absolutely nothing to do with what was said nor about gaming at this monitor's 2560x1440/60hz resolution. Your lack of reading comprehension is nearly as bad as your car/speed analogy, so please stop with the nonsensical straw man arguments. :rolleyes:
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,542
http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/seiki-se50uy04-4k-uhd/4505-6482_7-35757100.html

Thats for the 50", but same concept here. Why bother with this when the picture quality is crap? You cant game at 4K because of the refresh rate, and there is essentially no 4K content, and if you use 1080P content, its going to look like a really shitty 1080P TV.
The reviewer is absolutely right if you are planning to put this in your living room to use as a HDTV. There isn't enough 4K content, you can get bigger screens for the same as the MSRP, the screen is too small to realize the benefit from a normal couch viewing distance, the remote control is bad, video processing isn't the best, and edge-lit TVs don't have the best color uniformity or blackest blacks. Note also that the reviewer thinks this set costs nearly twice what its selling for here.

This is hardforum, and we're talking about a completely different use as a computer monitor. You're going to be sitting up close, you don't want anything bigger than 42" tops that close, you won't use the remote, your 4K content is your desktop for multitasking, photo/video editing, etc, you're going to turn off all video processing anyway, you're surely going to run at lower 2560x1440 resolution for games which bumps the refresh up to a regular 60hz, and being edge-lit is advantageous as it means its ultra-thin and thus will look great on an ultra-thin wallmount over your desk, and its selling for way less than the $1500 MSRP sets he was comparing it to.

Totally different application! :cool:
 
Last edited:

fociz

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
343
People really need to develop 4th grade reading comprehension skills before going on childish rants.

I said that 120hz is pointless if you can't break 60fps on your games at the insanely high resolutions that 4K HDTVs are capable of. I don't think you grasp the concept of how much graphical power it takes to run four 1080p screens simultaneously.

No one here is even talking about using this panel for 4k gaming, and yet you're grasping onto, and contradicting your own arguments at the same time.

Oh hell no, but 120hz is overkill for gaming anyway.

Your words.

as 120FPS average is 2560x1440 is virtually impossible to achieve on most modern titles at highest graphics settings on the average gaming computer anyway.

Wrong. And most people here do not have average gaming computers. What was your point again? Oh yeah, nothing.

A lot of people seem to think that a 120hz monitor at 60FPS is going to look better than a 60hz monitor, which of course is nonsense.

If a user is capped at 60fps@60hz, it most likely means the card is able to draw more then 60fps. Therefore the user would most definitely benefit from 120hz. Also, it's not just simply about fps anyway.
Run along over to PCPER or The Tech Report and begin to educate yourself on Frame Rating, then comeback to us.

It looks the same... And having a 120Hz monitor (which I do), Is awesome to have because if you are able to run games at 60+ FPS, you will actually see the FPS that goes 60+ In fact it happens A LOT. and I'm not sure what you mean by "most modern titles at that res you can't get 120fps" I'm not sure what "most games" you play, but a TON of games I can max out 120fps... Idie game are fucking awesome at 120Hz, BL2 loves 120Hz, any console port thats codded decently for PC will hit 120fps easily. Who gives a fuck about JUST "most modern titles"? It's all the other games and a lot of newer games that benifit greatly from it now.

I love 120Hz, and I'll never get a monitor with less now.

More proof from someone who has experience, and knows what they're talking about, further exposing your delusional opinions Ducman.

Have a great day!:)
 

Fooshnik

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
2,922
I'd love to see this thing set up somewhere. Running a 30" the corners are already so far off axis I use them very little (desktop, gaming different story, I'll take all the FOV I can get), but the pixel pitch is far larger than a 30" so it can probably be set further back. That said, depending on the type of pixel array the text might still be fuzzy even with per pixel mapping (the Sony 4k looked a little fuzzy). If I had the space I'd love to gamble with 650 bux and get this thing.

As for reviews, they're not bad. Most people appear to be using it as a monitor not a TV. It is, after all, the largest 120Hz 1080p monitor you can get.

Edit: Scratch that, if the 50" does 1080p/120Hz then it's the largest. Unless the Sony 65" XBR does 1080p/120Hz, then it is. Unless there's something larger.
 
Last edited:

Cecil

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
5,060
The reviewer is absolutely right if you are planning to put this in your living room to use as a HDTV. There isn't enough 4K content, you can get bigger screens for the same as the MSRP, the screen is too small to realize the benefit from a normal couch viewing distance, the remote control is bad, video processing isn't the best, and edge-lit TVs don't have the best color uniformity or blackest blacks. Note also that the reviewer thinks this set costs nearly twice what its selling for here.

This is hardforum, and we're talking about a completely different use as a computer monitor. You're going to be sitting up close, you don't want anything bigger than 42" tops that close, you won't use the remote, your 4K content is your desktop for multitasking, photo/video editing, etc, you're going to turn off all video processing anyway, you're surely going to run at lower 2560x1440 resolution for games which bumps the refresh up to a regular 60hz, and being edge-lit is advantageous as it means its ultra-thin and thus will look great on an ultra-thin wallmount over your desk, and its selling for way less than the $1500 MSRP sets he was comparing it to.

Totally different application! :cool:
I fully get using it as a monitor (which cnet even brings up), but the only place I see that being useful is having many spreadsheets/browsers up at the same time on the same screen. I just don't feel personally that its worth it for the loss in picture quality in games/movies/etc... Plus how chuggy even normal desktop usage feels at 30Hz.
I could have sworn this thing was at least 100 cheaper the other day on amazon

amazon still has a bundle deal for the 700 that includes a flat wall mount and cables and the like
http://www.amazon.com/Seiki-SE39UY0...&sr=1-1-fkmr2&keywords=Seiki+39"+Class+LED+4K
This is a TV, so Amazon will price match if you chat with them.
I'd love to see this thing set up somewhere. Running a 30" the corners are already so far off axis I use them very little (desktop, gaming different story, I'll take all the FOV I can get), but the pixel pitch is far larger than a 30" so it can probably be set further back. That said, depending on the type of pixel array the text might still be fuzzy even with per pixel mapping (the Sony 4k looked a little fuzzy). If I had the space I'd love to gamble with 650 bux and get this thing.

As for reviews, they're not bad. Most people appear to be using it as a monitor not a TV. It is, after all, the largest 120Hz 1080p monitor you can get.

Edit: Scratch that, if the 50" does 1080p/120Hz then it's the largest. Unless the Sony 65" XBR does 1080p/120Hz, then it is. Unless there's something larger.

Again, I cant see the point in getting this to use for 1080P/120Hz, when it looks so bad.
 
Top