The elusive 4k 40" monitor

Discussion in 'Displays' started by zzz, Jul 27, 2015.

  1. munkle

    munkle [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,196
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    One thing I haven't seen on any of these 4k monitors is how they support hdcp protected content. Can I play that content at 4k resolution or do I need to drop it to 1080p?

    I ask because my dell 3008wfp supports hdcp, but only at 1080p. If I keep the resolution at 2560x1600 I get the message hdcp isn't supported, when I set the resolution to 1080p then I can play hdcp protected content fine.

    Just want to know if I am going to have to be switching resolutions.
     
  2. Neon01

    Neon01 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,024
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    I'm curious if any support lower resolutions like 3440x1440p. I'm using a UHD TV and it will not support anything in between 1080p and UHD TV. I can drive most games in UHD with my GPU setup, but sometimes the Ultra Widescreen aspect is actually preferable.

    I had hoped Nvidia CP would let me make a custom resolution that rendered a game at the resolution specified (e.g. 3440x1440) and just output a standard UHD res with black/gray borders around the rendered content to the TV, but no joy on that. Not sure if it's supposed to support this feature and its just broken.
     
  3. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Neon, in general I think you're restricted to the resolutions that are shown in the particular game. Then once you select that, the way it's rendered is based on your Nvidia control panel. The option "NVIDIA scaling" should give you letterboxing/pillarboxing.
     
  4. Tgrove

    Tgrove [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,484
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2013
    Are you asking how it is they support it? Or do they support it? The good 4k freesync 40"+ monitors all use hdcp 2.2
     
  5. zone74

    zone74 Gawd

    Messages:
    621
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2015
    Your timings should be set to UHD, but the display mode should be set to something like 3840x1620
    The default timings should be your display's native resolution/refresh rate, so just switch that to manual prior to editing the display mode so that it doesn't change.

    Here's an example of 1440x1080 on my 1080p screen:
    [​IMG]
     
  6. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    I think 40" monitors are the sweetspot @4k.


    I did the math and 4k displays at 40" in size have right about the same ppi as 1440p displays at 27" in size. So all the people with korean off brand 1440p displays that want a size upgrade without degrading the ppi, should jump straight to 40" on a desk and no larger.
     
  7. MistaSparkul

    MistaSparkul [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,038
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Yeah that's kind of where I'm at right now. Currently using a 28 inch 4k monitor without any sort of scaling and the amount of stuff you can cram on screen is great and all, but I just wish it was bigger. 40 inch seems to be the perfect size for this.
     
  8. munkle

    munkle [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,196
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    how it is supported
     
  9. MistaSparkul

    MistaSparkul [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,038
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Now don't grill me for this if I'm wrong but my guess is that your dell doesn't support HDCP at 2560x1600 because the only way it could reach that resolution is through dual link DVI which probably did NOT have HDCP in the past so you were limited to HDCP through HDMI which caps out at 1080p on the Dell. I'm pretty sure modern monitors now support HDCP through DVI so it would no longer be a problem to get HDCP at 2560+ resolutions. As for these 4k displays, they support HDCP through HDMI 2.0 and should also support it through Displayport.
     
  10. gunbust3r

    gunbust3r Gawd

    Messages:
    900
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    It does seem to still be a unicorn at the moment.

    The Hisense was promising in that it was cheap and claimed to do 4K 60Hz but it was lies in that it syncs at that but then just drops every other frame before it gets to the screen...

    My perfect 40" 4K: Works as advertised at 4K 60Hz (DP or HDMI I don't really care), Affordable, Can drop to 120Hz 1080P (seems like the current generation lost this, why can my grandpa Seiki 39" do it? but gen 2 sets cant), can skip the "smart" junk, USB hub, no PWM, from a US vendor none of this import ebay nonsense.
     
  11. Dan_D

    Dan_D [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    54,649
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    All the 30" Dell monitors support HDCP at 2560x1600.
     
  12. geok1ng

    geok1ng 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,132
    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Add the old school Apple ACD 30" to the list of DL-DVI only monitors with HDCP available even before Blu-Ray reached the PC market.:cool:
     
  13. MistaSparkul

    MistaSparkul [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,038
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Then perhaps it's OP's GPU that doesn't support HDCP through DVI, or maybe even the cable used. If the GPU, cable, and display all support HDCP I don't see why he couldn't get it to work.
     
  14. cbf123

    cbf123 n00b

    Messages:
    50
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2013
    One possible issue is that there are a lot of existing computers out there that can (barely) support 3440x1440, but can't support 4K at all. My current machine is one of them.

    I see 3440x1440 as a sort of stopgap measure until most computers out there can support 4K.

    Certainly I personally would rather have a 4K 40"-48" curved monitor, but a) that doesn't exist yet, and b) it'll have to wait until I get a new laptop that can actually drive it.
     
  15. zone74

    zone74 Gawd

    Messages:
    621
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2015
    Over HDMI perhaps, but DisplayPort 1.2 has been in use since 2010.
    I would argue that UHD/4K - at least in typical monitor sizes - is just a stop-gap until DisplayPort 1.3 gets here and "5K" monitors can be supported over a single cable.
     
  16. Dan_D

    Dan_D [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    54,649
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    I think 5k will probably be the next 2560x1600. It will fall out of fashion about as fast as it arrived. 4k will be the standard we all live with for some time until 8k or something better becomes popular.
     
  17. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Because that was the best option for displays larger than 25"


    27" monitors at 1080p and desktop viewing distances were stretched to the point where you could actually clearly see the pixels. For 27" and larger you NEEDED higher resolution displays for content to look sharp. But this was before 4k was widespread, it was a good interim step. Now that 4k is here, it's less enticing, but even then. The ppi of a 1440p 27" monitor is pretty damn close to the ppi of a 40-43" monitor @ 4k. So that size at 4k seems like the IDEAL monitor size to increase the displays field of view without hitting diminishing returns at 4k resolutions. I expect us to be there for awhile to come. So best to target a display size where that excels.
     
  18. zone74

    zone74 Gawd

    Messages:
    621
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2015
    UHD is the high pixel density replacement for 1080p
    "5K" is the high pixel density replacement for 1440p

    Until every single application supports scaling perfectly, it will always be detrimental to use anything less than 2x scaling.
    Legacy applications look terrible when doing so, and OS X doesn't even support anything other than 1x or 2x scaling.

    So with UHD you either have a 1920x1080 workspace at 2x, or you go big and have a low density 3840x2160 workspace.
    5120x2880 gives you a 2560x1440 workspace at 2x scaling, which satisfies most people when it comes to both workspace and pixel density.
     
  19. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    On that point, we are all waiting for the perfect 4k monitor display, but the quickest ideal 4k display will probably come from lg. A future cheaper 40" oled "tv." For 4k that seems like the sweet spot in terms of size and ppi at similar distances to current monitors that are 27 inches at 1440p.


    The tv makers will get there first, so all we need to do is wait until lg starts flooding the market with smaller oled displays. They have to get the economies of scale up. All of you reading this with crazy levels of disposable income, buy the current crop of oled tvs to speed things along.


    And then eventually, we will have a 120+ Hz 40" 4k oled tv with netflix 4k streaming support, displayport 1.3/1.4/1.x - supermhl - hdmi still obsolete. rec 2020 support for high dynamic range, and much brighter oled capability to boot. TVs will be the first perfect monitor. I just wonder if the korean off brand makers will ever get their hands on the cheaper oled displays from lg of if that will ALWAYS stay in house.
     
  20. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Cmon Dell, make one of these already.