The 32 inch 4k IPS 144hz's...(Update - this party is started) (wait for it...)

Vega said:
In case anyone is interested in seeing what's inside one of these $2,500 FALDs.
Click to expand...
It's interesting how these things look somehow so very low tech once you get past the panel with pixels and the controller hardware.

The LEDs in the back (not the FALD backlight) that give some light effect behind the display are probably no better than what you can buy from IKEA. Then inside those polarization layers look like some sleeve for carrying papers around. The tape holding various cables in place makes them look almost home made.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
JohnnyFlash said:
That blue light spectrum though...
Click to expand...
That's the cost of wide gamut colors. If you want to try and get near REC.2020, it has to be three narrow spikes to happen. If you want the smoother, wider, spectrum from a white backlight, it will by necessity reduce the color gamut.
 
Armenius said:
The G7 is curved, which is a deal breaker. The flat version is edge lit. I'd buy a G7 if Samsung made a flat miniLED FALD version.
Click to expand...
I hear you, I actually like the curve a lot but it is aggressive. They can't make a VA flat panel that won't suck, maybe they'll make an IPS version with 10k dimming zones or something in a few years. I'm hoping not everyone goes the route of OLED, I use my computer to program 8+ hours a day, I don't need an OLED with burn in in like 1 year tops. I like my OLED, but it's off all day unless I'm watching TV or gaming.
 
Decko87 said:
I hear you, I actually like the curve a lot but it is aggressive. They can't make a VA flat panel that won't suck, maybe they'll make an IPS version with 10k dimming zones or something in a few years. I'm hoping not everyone goes the route of OLED, I use my computer to program 8+ hours a day, I don't need an OLED with burn in in like 1 year tops. I like my OLED, but it's off all day unless I'm watching TV or gaming.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I love my OLED for media consumption, but I want a good LCD to go with it.
 
People with the new OLED 32'' 4K, how is the text? past OLED text clarity was an issue, so how is it on this new gen of OLEDs, is it up to par with an IPS?
 
Abula said:
People with the new OLED 32'' 4K, how is the text? past OLED text clarity was an issue, so how is it on this new gen of OLEDs, is it up to par with an IPS?
Click to expand...
It's fine with 150% scaling. You only notice it if you're looking for it and only then in specific colour combinations. I have no problem using excel.
 
Last edited:
sblantipodi said:

View: https://youtu.be/wp87F6gczGw?si=8E-fBG38rofWbi6K

I really hope to see more MiniLED than OLEDs in the future...
gaming monitors, what a stupid tech.
Click to expand...


? You've already got plenty of Mini LED options available in both 27" and 32" from various brands.

1724780270971.png
1724780289091.png
1724780486853.png

1724780512722.png
1724780527025.png
 
Last edited:
Also, the Gsync module is officially dead.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne81k-SvsK4

With nvidia now working along with MediaTek this should hopefully mean that future mini led monitors using the newest MediaTek scalers would have better local dimming algorithms compared to the current crop of mini led. People kept glazing the PG32UQX for having the best local dimming and pointing everything to the Gsync module, well now hopefully all mini led monitors get the same good local dimming.
 
when are we going to get sizes between 27 and 32? I can see pixels on a 32" 4k. I think 29 or 30 would be ideal.
 
MistaSparkul said:
With nvidia now working along with MediaTek this should hopefully mean that future mini led monitors using the newest MediaTek scalers would have better local dimming algorithms compared to the current crop of mini led. People kept glazing the PG32UQX for having the best local dimming and pointing everything to the Gsync module, well now hopefully all mini led monitors get the same good local dimming.
Click to expand...
Part of that could be scaler improvements, but part of it also is driver hardware. I think a lot of MiniLEDs have a cheap/poor quality driver setup meaning they can't get many levels on their backlights, and their response isn't great. That's one of the things Sony went hard on with their new MiniLED TVs, and it paid off, is good drivers where they can directly address each and they have like 12-bit control over the brightness levels. That makes for more expensive panels, of course.
 
Sycraft said:
Part of that could be scaler improvements, but part of it also is driver hardware. I think a lot of MiniLEDs have a cheap/poor quality driver setup meaning they can't get many levels on their backlights, and their response isn't great. That's one of the things Sony went hard on with their new MiniLED TVs, and it paid off, is good drivers where they can directly address each and they have like 12-bit control over the brightness levels. That makes for more expensive panels, of course.
Click to expand...

Yeah Sony's Bravia 9 has proven that we don't need something like a Gsync module in order to have really good local dimming. I'm interested to see how much further they can improve it from here.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Yeah Sony's Bravia 9 has proven that we don't need something like a Gsync module in order to have really good local dimming. I'm interested to see how much further they can improve it from here.
Click to expand...
I imagine cost will be one real limiting factor. The more accurate and complex driver hardware costs more. Given people are already not that willing to pay for high end MiniLED monitors, I don't know if companies will pursue it or not.
 
Sycraft said:
I imagine cost will be one real limiting factor. The more accurate and complex driver hardware costs more. Given people are already not that willing to pay for high end MiniLED monitors, I don't know if companies will pursue it or not.
Click to expand...

Mini LED monitors an be as cheap as $500. Realistically how much more expensive will they get by having much better local dimming capability? Even if the price is doubled to $1000 it would still put it in line with top end OLED monitors and there should be plenty of people willing to pay that price. The PG32UQX at $2000+ is an obvious no go for 99% of people.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Mini LED monitors an be as cheap as $500. Realistically how much more expensive will they get by having much better local dimming capability? Even if the price is doubled to $1000 it would still put it in line with top end OLED monitors and there should be plenty of people willing to pay that price. The PG32UQX at $2000+ is an obvious no go for 99% of people.
Click to expand...
I don't know, but it could be a lot because you are talking lots of pieces of hardware to do the dimming (the drivers) and those probably go up in cost as they get more precise, and as they get smaller (which is needed to cram more of them in). You also have the issue that costs aren't linear. The less of something you sell, the more the cost per unit is going to be. So you might double the production cost of a monitor, yet the street price has to go up 3-4x because the market is smaller. Hence why most receivers will chose DACs that are "good enough" and have good specs, but not use the highest end ones that really aren't that much more expensive per unit (maybe $30/chip) even in somewhat expensive units.

You see it with high end audio all the time. When you look at the components vs more mainstream stuff they are more expensive, but not as much as the cost of the unit. The problem is that as the cost rises, sales numbers drop and there are fixed costs so per unit it has to go up even more, and so on.

Obviously I'm hopeful they can bring the costs down, but it may not be doable while also having high quality.
 
Gabe3 said:
when are we going to get sizes between 27 and 32? I can see pixels on a 32" 4k. I think 29 or 30 would be ideal.
Click to expand...

My guess is probably never, it's not a big enough of a size gap to be worth it unless it ends up happening as part of a larger reshuffling of common sizes. Looking at other common desktop LCD sizes and ignoring changes in aspect ratio over the years gives 19-40% increases in area from one common screen size to the next. Sticking an in between size at an even inch level would result in a step size of only 14 or 15%. You'd need to go back to CRTs and the 14-15" transition for one that small; and in laptops the 14" size has been almost entirely squeezed out between 13" ultra portables and 15" as the larger size that still fits reasonably well on things like airplane seat tables.

15 -> 17 = 28%
17 -> 19 = 25%
19 -> 22 = 34%
22 -> 24 = 19%
24 -> 27 = 26%
27 -> 32 = 40%

27 -> 30 = 23%
30 -> 32 = 14%
or
27 -> 29 = 15%
29 -> 32 = 22%


While 27-32 is the largest size bump, it happened because it let makers use the same 140 PPI manufacturing process for 15" 1920x1080p and 32" 4k screens; just as the 30" 2560x1600 panels used the same 100 DPI tech as 20" 1600x1200 models. The same factors that Sycraft mentioned above regarding miniLED where fixed costs get more problematic the lower your production volume is also apply to large high resolution monitors sold only to enthusiasts. In both cases this let the premium model piggyback on the base tech from a much more common model. The size also splits the difference vs the 30" displays it nominally replaced being about 2.3" wider and 0.3" shorter.

Years ago the dream option I was hoping would become available was a 30" 5120x2880 or a ~34" 6k display because both would have hit the sweet spot of ~200 PPI; but DPI scaling in windows has gotten much better over the years and even for the residual bits of non-DPI aware software still in use that the OS needs to brute force with non-integer scaling the results are much better than they were with XP or even Win 7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gabe3
like this
Sycraft said:
I don't know, but it could be a lot because you are talking lots of pieces of hardware to do the dimming (the drivers) and those probably go up in cost as they get more precise, and as they get smaller (which is needed to cram more of them in). You also have the issue that costs aren't linear. The less of something you sell, the more the cost per unit is going to be. So you might double the production cost of a monitor, yet the street price has to go up 3-4x because the market is smaller. Hence why most receivers will chose DACs that are "good enough" and have good specs, but not use the highest end ones that really aren't that much more expensive per unit (maybe $30/chip) even in somewhat expensive units.

You see it with high end audio all the time. When you look at the components vs more mainstream stuff they are more expensive, but not as much as the cost of the unit. The problem is that as the cost rises, sales numbers drop and there are fixed costs so per unit it has to go up even more, and so on.

Obviously I'm hopeful they can bring the costs down, but it may not be doable while also having high quality.
Click to expand...

Well either way if mini LED does not improve then at the very least OLEDs will. The tandem hybrid tech that LG will be using and I think Samsung is also looking to do that as well is the next step. Eventually OLEDs will just catch up to and then surpass mini LED in HDR brightness if that tech remains stagnant so regardless I say the future is looking pretty promising.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Well either way if mini LED does not improve then at the very least OLEDs will. The tandem hybrid tech that LG will be using and I think Samsung is also looking to do that as well is the next step. Eventually OLEDs will just catch up to and then surpass mini LED in HDR brightness if that tech remains stagnant so regardless I say the future is looking pretty promising.
Click to expand...
For sure. I'm not concerned, I mean for all my whining about what I'd like, I am happier with this monitor than I've ever been with any other before it. We have a lot of really good options these days, particularly at the high end.
 
MistaSparkul said:
? You've already got plenty of Mini LED options available in both 27" and 32" from various brands.

View attachment 675677View attachment 675678View attachment 675681
View attachment 675682View attachment 675683
Click to expand...
Most of the models on that list are not being made anymore, some of them are not sold in the US, and the rest are all varying levels of disappointment. The PG32UQX is the only decent one still being sold. There are some new ones coming out this year, but I have not seen any news of a US release for most of them yet. And then you have TCL denying that their new monitors even exist despite people being able to buy them.
 
Armenius said:
Most of the models on that list are not being made anymore, some of them are not sold in the US, and the rest are all varying levels of disappointment. The PG32UQX is the only decent one still being sold. There are some new ones coming out this year, but I have not seen any news of a US release for most of them yet. And then you have TCL denying that their new monitors even exist despite people being able to buy them.
Click to expand...
Acer X32FP is even better than the Asus in some areas but it's difficult to find now.
 
sblantipodi said:
Acer X32FP is even better than the Asus in some areas but it's difficult to find now.
Click to expand...
The X32 FP is the budget version of the X32. ASUS has their own version called the PG32UQXR. It has half the dimming zones, slightly worse peak brightness, and no G-SYNC Ultimate module. And as far as I know, it's hard to find because Acer stopped making them.
 
Armenius said:
Most of the models on that list are not being made anymore, some of them are not sold in the US, and the rest are all varying levels of disappointment. The PG32UQX is the only decent one still being sold. There are some new ones coming out this year, but I have not seen any news of a US release for most of them yet. And then you have TCL denying that their new monitors even exist despite people being able to buy them.
Click to expand...
TCL's denial that these monitors exist is almost laughable at this point. I got bounced around their different TV / appliances divisions last week while trying to garner information on the display, and after having my call escalated to several people I was told to be wary of any product claiming to be from TCL as they have no plans to enter the PC market, and that monitors with their badging are fraudulent products. I guess we shouldn't be holding our breath to see these two new monitors in North America any time soon, and after experiencing the gong show that is their customer support I don't think I would ever consider purchasing one of their products despite how great the specs are.
 
Is there anyone else that just feels there is nothing to pull them away from their PG32UQX? The only reason I would even consider an "upgrade" would be if I upgrade my 4090 to a 5090, the 5090 would be so underutilized at 4K it would be laughable. I would need more than 144hz at that point to let it shine. Hell, half the time I'm pegged at 144 FPS now on a 4090... lol. But the monitor does feel right with the card paring.
 
JohnnyFlash said:
Ray tracing and RTX Remix will fix that for you.
Click to expand...
I use RT in every game I play, even multiplayer ones. There are a few games like CP2077, Portal RTX, etc. that obviously push it to the limits, but there are other games I play too like Forza, COD or BF2042 that are seemingly locked at 144 FPS at 4K. I only use DLAA in FH5 and COD and still get 144 locked... lol.
 
III_Slyflyer_III said:
I use RT in every game I play, even multiplayer ones. There are a few games like CP2077, Portal RTX, etc. that obviously push it to the limits, but there are other games I play too like Forza, COD or BF2042 that are seemingly locked at 144 FPS at 4K. I only use DLAA in FH5 and COD and still get 144 locked... lol.
Click to expand...

Graphics can always be pushed further if you really wanted to lower your frame rate. If you were getting 144fps with DLAA then using DLDSR 2.25x would easily drag the frame rates down below that. On the flip side, using DLSS Performance mode would greatly increase it. I personally use DLSS Performance mode since it looks really good now as long as you have v3.7 installed and that allows me to get 200 fps in many games that I play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top