Seiki Pro SM40UNP 40"/ SM32UNP 30"4K LED Monitors

I thought 10 bit panels were the highest possible, actually 8+2.
What on earth is this 12 bit panel??
 
quovadis123 said:
I thought 10 bit panels were the highest possible, actually 8+2.
What on earth is this 12 bit panel??
Click to expand...

Apparently, 12-bit commonly refers to the monitor's "internal processing", not the actual color depth - so in essence it's a marketing ploy. Simply Google "12-bit color monitor" and see what comes up.

For example Dell states: http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/04/campaigns/dell-ultrasharpmonitor_color

"A color gamut of at least CIE (1976) 110 percent lets you enjoy a large range of colors, awesome color details and minimal loss in tones and hues. 12-bit internal processing enables up to 1.07 billion colors."

You might find manufacturers referring to 12-bit or 10-bit or 16-bit ‘processing’, but that’s not necessarily the monitor’s bit depth.

According to this recent PCGamer article: http://www.pcgamer.com/seikis-40-inch-4k-display-is-a-desk-dominating-beauty-for-under-1000/, They state that"

"In a quick look at the [Seiki] monitors... colors looked vibrant, but the budget pricing of the monitors may be a deal-breaker when it comes to color depth. They support a disappointing 1.07 million colors, or a 6-bit color depth. That’s far narrower than the 16.7 million colors of most mainstream monitors, and dramatically lower than the 1.07 billion of 10-bit monitors aimed at graphic professionals who need full sRGB support.

10-bit is usually prohibitively expensive for gaming, but 16.7 million is pretty standard these days. Still, the monitors looked great on display at CES, so I wouldn't write them off on specs alone.

4K is all about pushing resolution, but those extra pixels aren’t worth much without brilliant (or, at least, good enough!) color quality to go with them. We’ll have more on Seiki’s 40-inch 4K monitor when we get our hands on a review unit."
---

I'm not sure how PCgamer "knows" that the Seiki 40in panel is 6-bit since they haven't publicly released any detailed specs.

This excellent TFTcentral piece explains 6-bit vs 8-bit color depth and the use of dithering and FRC (frame-rate control) techniques to simulate a larger number of colors from lower bit rates: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/content/6bit_8bit.htm

Published specs can certainly be misleading. Digging deeper into understanding them and using our own 'perception' in the end on actual content will "rule the day..." I'll look forward to seeing an actual live review of the 40-incher. :)
 
Instead of having to put up with such counter-productive retrofitting, wouldn't it be better to replace all the ports with thunderbolt? I'm kind of interested in getting one or two 34UC97s, but I am not sure if this should be a deal breaker. I noticed on Adobe blog site saying that Thunderbolt slot on non-Mac product is what makes LG curved 21:9 a pretty decent choice (http://blogs.adobe.com/davtechtable/). Any thoughts?
 
Why Thunderbolt when displayport already support daisy chaining? If they put new ports in there, just put in USB 3.1 Type-C, VESA DP 1.3 compatible.
 
How will this be compared to the Philips 40" that's out. Also did they fix the refresh rate issues?
 
The 40 inch SEIKI SM40UNP Pro Monitor is now listed for pre-order on Amazon.com (USA):
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RVGXZ08/

There are still not any extra specs/details available but it is encouraging that this monitor is in the pipeline for delivery :)
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
batmanwcm said:
PC Gamer talks more in-depth about the monitor.

Highlights:
8.5ms gray-to-gray pixel response time (40")
9.5ms gray-to-gray pixel response time (32")
Samsung Super MVA panel
6-bit color depth (Definitely a con)

http://www.pcgamer.com/seikis-40-inch-4k-display-is-a-desk-dominating-beauty-for-under-1000/
Click to expand...


Wait what? Arent all samsung VA panels 8-bit color? Using 6 bit is a TN panels problem, and something that creeped into some budget IPS panels too but VA's have been consistently full 8 bit color. :confused:
 
batmanwcm said:
PC Gamer talks more in-depth about the monitor.
Highlights:
8.5ms gray-to-gray pixel response time (40")
9.5ms gray-to-gray pixel response time (32")
Samsung Super MVA panel
6-bit color depth (Definitely a con)
Click to expand...
MaZa said:
Wait what? Arent all samsung VA panels 8-bit color? Using 6 bit is a TN panels problem, and something that creeped into some budget IPS panels too but VA's have been consistently full 8 bit color. :confused:
Click to expand...

The "6-bit" panel spec statement from PCGamer is suspect. Combing through the Panelook.com database reveals ZERO 6-bit VA panels in production.
http://www.panelook.com/modelsearch.php?op=advancedsearch&order=panel_id&inch_low=38.2&inch_high=41&resolution_pixels=38402160

Unless it's some (highly unlikely) unpublished panel...
 
Last edited:
JTB3 said:
The "6-bit" panel spec statement from PCGamer is suspect. Combing through the Panelook.com database reveals ZERO 6-bit VA panels in production.
http://www.panelook.com/modelsearch.php?op=advancedsearch&order=panel_id&inch_low=38.2&inch_high=41&resolution_pixels=38402160

Unless it's some (highly unlikely) unpublished panel...
Click to expand...


I also searched for opinions on google and it seems like pcgamer journalist heard wrong. The seiki screen processes internally in 12 bit and gamma in 14 bit, which all points towards either true 10 bit panel or more likely 8-bit, plus dithering. 6 bit is far fetched. Most likely he was told (or was supposed to told) 10.7 billion colors, but he got 10.7 million and made a connection to 6-bit. Which is still wrong because IIRC 6-bit panel is about 262k colors dithered to 16.7 million.

So yes, the pcgamer article is very likely wrong.
 
The more I think about it, I'm going to wait for the LG OLED curved 4k's. If I'm going to spend $1000 dollars, I'm going to do it right.
 
At 1$K the Seiki won't sell, but it will make headlines when the price drops precipitously.
 
depends on the size. Im guessing I can get into a 50" for $1500 or so. I meant anything around $1000 and over
 
I won't sink a dime on another Seiki product in this lifetime.

My 39" lasted about 18 months before starting random resets, that becoem more and more frequent the longer the TV keeps ON. The technician diagnosed chip overheating, but unfortunately not even installing a heatsink+ fan over the chip solved the issue.

so it was more like a monitor rent than a TV buy. $500 for 18 months of 4k@30Hz.

and now i am addicted to 4k , without a single working 4k/60hz tv/monitor on sale in my country.:mad:

samsung tvs can't do 4k 60hz 4:4:4, Seiki are very low quality and very poor warranty. we should start a public petition for Philips to release their in the Americas .
 
geok1ng said:
I won't sink a dime on another Seiki product in this lifetime.

My 39" lasted about 18 months before starting random resets, that becoem more and more frequent the longer the TV keeps ON. The technician diagnosed chip overheating, but unfortunately not even installing a heatsink+ fan over the chip solved the issue.

so it was more like a monitor rent than a TV buy. $500 for 18 months of 4k@30Hz.

and now i am addicted to 4k , without a single working 4k/60hz tv/monitor on sale in my country.:mad:

samsung tvs can't do 4k 60hz 4:4:4, Seiki are very low quality and very poor warranty. we should start a public petition for Philips to release their in the Americas .
Click to expand...

Seiki's reliability has always been an unknown factor and anyone who purchased one should have made their purchase with that in mind...
 
I want a 40", but I may go with three 30" monitors if they are priced right!
$1000 for the 40" could mean sub $600 for the 30".

I've already pre-ordered the 40" at Amazon.
 
A few new dribbles of information about the 40in Seiki monitor. Two new rendered images of the rear panel (I/O ports) recently surfaced on the Amazon page (still in pre-order status).
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RVGXZ08/

I'm happy to see two full-sized DisplayPort ports and side-oriented downstream USB3 + audio ports. Still no formal specs listed yet. Wondering if the DVI port is dual-link as well.
Really hoping this monitor will support Picture-in-Picture (PIP) mode along with the stated Picture-by-Picture support.
Also hoping the internal Super MVA panel has square (1:1) pixels!

Slowly we are getting more insight here...

71Kkl45qfWL._SL1500_.jpg


61J8fViFM1L._SL1271_.jpg
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
JTB3 said:
A few new dribbles of information about the 40in Seiki monitor. Two new rendered images of the rear panel (I/O ports) recently surfaced on the Amazon page (still in pre-order status).
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RVGXZ08/

I'm happy to see two full-sized DisplayPort ports and side-oriented downstream USB3 + audio ports. Still no formal specs listed yet. Wondering if the DVI port is dual-link as well.
Really hoping this monitor will support Picture-in-Picture (PIP) mode along with the stated Picture-by-Picture support.
Also hoping the internal Super MVA panel has square (1:1) pixels!

Slowly we are getting more insight here...

[IM]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71Kkl45qfWL._SL1500_.jpg[/IMG]

[IM]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61J8fViFM1L._SL1271_.jpg[/IMG]
Click to expand...

If the render is accurate that is a Dual Link DVI port.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
$1000? Man $800 I'd preorder now. $1000 seems like it'll have a bit of competition.

I"m getting sick of 4k@30hz, I've got some 4k@60hz stuff at work now and getting spoiled.
 
I was able to obtain a "Product Sheet" with specifications for the 40in Seiki Pro SM40UNP
It is available at this link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/357i9s1gs5tlcs8/Seiki%20Pro%20SM40UNP%20Product%20Sheet.pdf

Unfortunately it reveals a couple of downers for me and there are still a lot of missing details:
  1. Non-square (horizontally stretched pixels with 1:1.018 aspect ratio) just like the Philips 40in.
  2. Maximum color 1.07 million (a puzzling number, perhaps a typo and should read 1.07 billion)
  3. No PIP (Picture-in-Picture) mode
  4. No speakers (could be a plus from some folks)
  5. Heavier (25.4 lbs. w-o stand) than the Philips (18.74 lbs.)
  6. Slightly wider than the Philips (0.15in) due to larger bezels.

It does have a more convenient 100x100 VESA bracket (requiring no adapter)

Here is a link to the most probable 39.5in panel Seiki is using. The Innolux V400DK1
http://www.panelook.com/V400DK1-KE7_Innolux_40_LCM_parameter_22942.html
 
Last edited:
hannibl said:
Panel is listed as having 120Hz and 3D, which is a plus for me. Can you elaborate on what the issue is with non 1:1 pixel ratio?
Click to expand...

With this (and the Philips 40in) monitor, the pixels are not square (e.g. they are not proportionally sized at 1:1 - for reference, nearly all flat-panel monitors are 1:1)

To cut down on panel production costs, the pixels on this monitor are horizontally stretched to a ratio of 1:1.018 - so this will result in images looking wider than they really are, by nearly 2%.

For many of us, this is not too big an issue as the brain will compensate - but for those seriously/professionally involved with graphics, this slight distortion could be an annoyance, or a deal breaker. People will look slightly (2%) fatter and images will appear slightly wider than reality.

The following two links will demonstrate the difference (normal vs stretched):
http://i.imgur.com/9wsgrTb.gif
http://i.imgur.com/4J19WtM.jpg

You can be the judge...
 
JTB3 said:
With this (and the Philips 40in) monitor, the pixels are not square (e.g. they are not proportionally sized at 1:1 - for reference, nearly all flat-panel monitors are 1:1)

To cut down on panel production costs, the pixels on this monitor are horizontally stretched to a ratio of 1:1.018 - so this will result in images looking wider than they really are, by nearly 2%.

For many of us, this is not too big an issue as the brain will compensate - but for those seriously/professionally involved with graphics, this slight distortion could be an annoyance, or a deal breaker. People will look slightly (2%) fatter and images will appear slightly wider than reality.

The following two links will demonstrate the difference (normal vs stretched):
http://i.imgur.com/9wsgrTb.gif
http://i.imgur.com/4J19WtM.jpg

You can be the judge...
Click to expand...

Just curious but is the stretching effect really that bad on the Phillips or is the example just exaggerated?
 
MistaSparkul said:
Just curious but is the stretching effect really that bad on the Phillips or is the example just exaggerated?
Click to expand...

The examples above are not exaggerated. They are representative of the difference you would see on the Philips (or the new Seiki 40in).

Keep in mind however, that the A/B comparison above will yield the highest perceptual effect. Most of the Philips users have not complained about this stretching issue with everyday use of the monitor. There are obviously no other choices available at present, and for most users, the other benefits of these 40in monitors seem to outweigh this small amount of distortion. :)
 
People on the Phillips thread said they couldn't tell the difference between those two images. Made me think I was OCD as hell or crazy, seems like a huge difference to me. It's the only thing preventing me from buying this Seiki or the Phillips. I couldn't tolerate knowing what I was looking at wasn't accurate. Imagine trying to buy things online.
 
TDSlam720 said:
People on the Phillips thread said they couldn't tell the difference between those two images. Made me think I was OCD as hell or crazy, seems like a huge difference to me. It's the only thing preventing me from buying this Seiki or the Phillips. I couldn't tolerate knowing what I was looking at wasn't accurate. Imagine trying to buy things online.
Click to expand...

From my read in the Philips thread, most users stated that they mainly did not perceive the stretch/distortion while using the monitor. Isolated usage is quite different from a side-by-side A/B comparison (like the above images). YMMV
 
JTB3 said:
From my read in the Philips thread, most users stated that they mainly did not perceive the stretch/distortion while using the monitor. Isolated usage is quite different from a side-by-side A/B comparison (like the above images). YMMV
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm sure you can't notice it without the side by side, but it would just bother me knowing that everything I'm looking at isn't accurate. If you've never seen an image before and see it on the Phillips for the first time obviously you wouldn't notice it being distorted, but that's because you never saw the original. Even if it's small difference I'd be too OCD knowing what I'm looking at isn't true. Kind like how people are ultra serious about color accuracy. I think this would bother me more than color accuracy.
 
Can't you just run some sort of software correction that reduces the resolution width by 2% or something? It seems like software can fix what hardware caused in this case as it is just a case of distortion.
 
someone is splitting hairs over this non-square pixels issue.

cheking panellook.com. the only 4k panels that do not use are the original 32" sharp IGZMO ones, all the rest, from 24 to 40", uses some form of non-square pixel.

about the above images being accurate examples of the distortion issue:

NOT A CHANCE IN HELL, unless you are viewing the test images on a square pixel 4k monitor, there is no F way that the example is representative of a 2% assimetrical pixel over a 4k display, the reason is: SCALING, when you stretch the image 2%, the scaler kicks in and introducfes image artifacts where there will be NONE on a 4k display using non-square pixels, sure the image will be stretched, but it will not occur the kind of artifacts that the Lincoln test image used shows.
 
Just because all 4K panels use the non-square pixels does not mean it's not something to make note of and consider when buying a monitor. People who do graphic design and other pixel perfect things would want to keep this in mind.

Is there any way a person can actually demonstrate what the difference would be? I do a shit load of graphic design, web design and graphic art. While I don't think it would be a HUGE deal as I could just leave one of my 24" IPS monitors attached for final verifying, I would like to know ahead of time what I would be looking at.

Nothing against either of you but at this moment, I have the opinions of two members. One saying its not that bad, and one showing an example of something "that bad". I would really like to see some hard evidence, like the pixel shift in a 1000x1000 image or something. Is there any way to accurately represent the distortion?

Also, where does this 1:1.018 come from? Your post is literally the only thing that comes up when you google that exact number.. I am extremely interested a 40" 4k monitor but I would like to know all the variables before buying.
 
I'm sure there's someone on this forum who has used both one of the IGZO panels and the Phillips, and could perhaps comment on the difference (if any).

Try posting in the Phillips thread?
 
geok1ng said:
Not trying to start a flame war, but this user at the philips thread has done more test about the non-square pixel issue:

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041451133&postcount=1826

he provided a more accurate example of the kind of stretching one can expect in real life
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_XWEZHd0z9EVXdSWDlRSFBMb0U/edit
Click to expand...

The images I listed above do accurately show the proportional horizontal stretch. They were generated by simply stretching a jpeg image horizontally by a factor of 1.0178 (approx 2%). I verified them and anyone else here can do the same.

Text examples, of course, will be the least noticible on this monitor, and most graphics will be barely noticeable unless an A/B comparison is made. It's simply 'good to know' about this issue if you are a graphics professional or enthusiast. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top