When Will We Have The Perfect Monitor?

cybereality

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
I got a 40" 4K TV I'm currently using for PS4 and PC for gaming. I do like it a lot, but I went back and played on my other machine, with a 27" 144Hz monitor and the motion clarity was so much better. But 27" is kind of small these days, and the 40" is a much nicer size.

So, what I'm looking for is a 40" - 50" 4K 16:9 aspect 144Hz 1ms response HDR 4:4:4 FreeSync/GSync TV or monitor. How long will I be waiting?
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
AFAIK there are no plans, by anyone, to build a good 4K HDR panel as large as 40", keeping in mind that HDR on any LCD without local dimming is an exercise in futility. AUO plans to build a 32" version of its 27" 4K HDR panels with 384-zone backlighting according to tftcentral, but not until Q3 2018, and given that they've delayed the 27" several times, I wouldn't put too much money on them making any panel release date rumored this far out.

The 40-50 inch size bracket doesn't seem like a popular market because it's too big for most peoples desks but too small for most peoples couch setups. Most likely if you want something that big, your best hope is HDMI 2.1 120hz OLEDs from LG, as mentioned above. They will certainly have better image quality than any LCD, that's for sure, but they'll start at 55".
 
SixFootDuo said:
Samsung C32HG70 32-Inch HDR QLED Curved Gaming Monitor (144Hz / 1ms)
Click to expand...
If I was getting one monitor for multipurpose (work and gaming) I would totally buy that. But I already have a triple 27" setup which is great for work and I don't see needing to switch these out for a while.

The 40" TV is for media use, 4K gaming, YouTube, etc. It's not bad, but the set I have (Samsung KU6300) has poor switching time, which adds motion blur, and it's only 60Hz so the motion clarity is not there. If there was something at 4K 100Hz w/ FreeSync I think it would be awesome.
 
zzz said:
3 feet wide isn't that much.
Click to expand...

Yes I'm aware that there's a minority who really loves monitors at the extreme end. The thing is that most people have desks that are only about 24" deep. Even if you can position your screen at the very back of the desk(which is difficult without a monitor arm, most stands won't allow it), that puts 40" at about the absolute maximum you can go and still be able to see the whole monitor without using peripheral vision or turning your head.

I mean there's a reason that manufacturers focus around the 27" size up to about 32" for their flagship screens, and the ones above that tend to be niche products lacking in features. It's cause those are the sizes that people buy for desktop monitors.
 
HDMI 2.1, 120hz at 4k, and variable refresh rate seems like a possibility on LG's 2018 OLED displays. The Xbox Scorpio is also going to have HDMI 2.1 and will support VRR. Support for these features on a high profile console is exactly what the market needs in order to get panel manufacturers to start implementing them.

I'm curious about how long it will take nVidia to support VRR given that it competes directly with gSync, which they invested a lot of money into.

There are also rumors that LG is looking to use blue TADF emitters in its 2018 panels which should result in either more longevity, a brighter image, or possibly both.

Some sources:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/lg-to-demo-4k-high-frame-rate-oled-tv-technology.html
https://www.oled-info.com/lg-looking-adopt-blue-tadf-emitter-its-oled-tv-panels-next-year
 
Nice. Thanks for the info. Looks like the 2017 models came out in February, so I may not be waiting long.
 
Beast Mode said:
HDMI 2.1, 120hz at 4k, and variable refresh rate seems like a possibility on LG's 2018 OLED displays. The Xbox Scorpio is also going to have HDMI 2.1 and will support VRR. Support for these features on a high profile console is exactly what the market needs in order to get panel manufacturers to start implementing them.

I'm curious about how long it will take nVidia to support VRR given that it competes directly with gSync, which they invested a lot of money into.

There are also rumors that LG is looking to use blue TADF emitters in its 2018 panels which should result in either more longevity, a brighter image, or possibly both.

Some sources:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/lg-to-demo-4k-high-frame-rate-oled-tv-technology.html
https://www.oled-info.com/lg-looking-adopt-blue-tadf-emitter-its-oled-tv-panels-next-year
Click to expand...
These links are great in regards to TVs. I'm really thinking about 21:9 with 2160 vertical pixels for my next computer monitor myself. Doesn't seem to be anything like that on the display market yet.
 
What I don't get is how the hell has someone not created a company that is 100% devoted to making nothing but gaming displays? I mean, HDR, 24 to 55 inch and EVERY INCH BETWEEN those numbers. Low latency, freak custom latency..you pick the ms!

If some guys who are google ocd with gaming displays got the money to start this shit, I think it could make money, no?
 
cybereality said:
I got a 40" 4K TV I'm currently using for PS4 and PC for gaming. I do like it a lot, but I went back and played on my other machine, with a 27" 144Hz monitor and the motion clarity was so much better. But 27" is kind of small these days, and the 40" is a much nicer size.

So, what I'm looking for is a 40" - 50" 4K 16:9 aspect 144Hz 1ms response HDR 4:4:4 FreeSync/GSync TV or monitor. How long will I be waiting?
Click to expand...

Over the next weeks Zysworks will be delivering their kits, that add 4k 120hz + scanning backlight to selected TN and VA panels. Blurbusters has not finished the scanning backlight review, but the kits did not skip frames even at 480hz.
 
jarablue said:
What I don't get is how the hell has someone not created a company that is 100% devoted to making nothing but gaming displays? I mean, HDR, 24 to 55 inch and EVERY INCH BETWEEN those numbers. Low latency, freak custom latency..you pick the ms!

If some guys who are google ocd with gaming displays got the money to start this shit, I think it could make money, no?
Click to expand...

Looked at this. Issue is dp transceivers.
You need a million bucks to buy a dp1.4 transceiver batch from rtl, or you have 6bit.
No gsync either.
 
Also have to take into consideration that you can only sit so far back before things get blurry even with 20/20 vision. I'd say no bigger than 32" at the maximum. You also lose pixel density the bigger you go. 32" 4K is 140 PPI which is the sweet spot IMO with 150% scaling.
 
MagnaMagicBtu said:
Also have to take into consideration that you can only sit so far back before things get blurry even with 20/20 vision. I'd say no bigger than 32" at the maximum. You also lose pixel density the bigger you go. 32" 4K is 140 PPI which is the sweet spot IMO with 150% scaling.
Click to expand...

I think you meant too small to be readable, not blurry. Some people like high ppi displays because images are sharp and without visible pixels. but at 150% scaling a 4k monitor has the desktop real state of a 1440p display. Without a higher refresh rate. a lose-lose situation.
 
Archaea said:
Capitalism is why you have have more than a pencil and paper at your computer desk right now.
Click to expand...

If we had technocracy, we'd have SEDs, hypersonic passenger planes, and paper you wouldn't have to chop down forests for.
 
geok1ng said:
I think you meant too small to be readable, not blurry. Some people like high ppi displays because images are sharp and without visible pixels. but at 150% scaling a 4k monitor has the desktop real state of a 1440p display. Without a higher refresh rate. a lose-lose situation.
Click to expand...

32" @ 150% scaling is a lot more desktop real estate than a 27" 1440p. It's the same as 32" 1440p real estate. It's the same PPI as a 21" 1440p. Yeah, higher refresh rate would be nice. I have a 32" glossy 4K and would really prefer a higher hz but It's hard to go back to anything less than 2160p. Everything is sharp and clean, higher immersion.
 
You know, after creating this thread I've tweaked the settings on my 40" 4K TV rig, and got it a little better. Aside from the refresh difference (from my 27" 1440P 144Hz G-Sync monitor), I think I was noticing the input lag and misinterpreting that as response time.

I've since disabled motion blur (in the games that have this option) and enabled AMD Enhanced Sync, and I think it actually made a difference. Things seem smoother now. Obviously not 144Hz G-Sync, but a bit better than before and acceptable for now until better tech becomes available.
 
i'd say 5 more years. Hardware is going to take a shitload of time to catch up. Hdmi 2.0 is pretty much still new, after being announced eons ago
 
hate to tell you but monitors have always been a little at a time. As soon as sales drop they introduce the next great super fantastic monitor. Its the same thing but this time it has one new thing.
And the price just doubled.
Its a F job that has been going on since the 1990's
what you want is 30" 4K at least 144 refresh 1ms better than srgb color and factory set
all for $499
free sync is a little better than a joke, free sync II where is it? G sync as long as morons will pay $200 for something that cost $12 and kiss nvidia ass to sell it to them...

CHANGE ? AINT GOING TO HAPPEN

I blame kyle LOL
 
Last edited:
geok1ng said:
I think you meant too small to be readable, not blurry. Some people like high ppi displays because images are sharp and without visible pixels. but at 150% scaling a 4k monitor has the desktop real state of a 1440p display. Without a higher refresh rate. a lose-lose situation.
Click to expand...

To me the amount of desktop real estate on a 1440p display is perfectly fine. Unless you are managing a server cluster I don't see much need to fit so much stuff on screen at once. If you do, then you should have multiple monitors as that will always be better for desktop space than a single monitor. High refresh rate, HDR 4K G-Sync 27" displays are coming next year with 32" models estimated for late 2018 or more likely Q1 2019.

I'm a bit on the fence because I like my current 27" 1440p display in terms of desktop space but for gaming feel that maybe I could have something a bit bigger, in the 30-32" size range. Yet the 16:10 30" Dell I used to have felt slightly too big on the desktop and of course the lower PPI didn't help.
 
When LG makes the 40" 120hz 4k OLED with Freesync 2....we will, damn well, have as close to perfect as you can get in this life....display.
 
kasakka said:
To me the amount of desktop real estate on a 1440p display is perfectly fine. Unless you are managing a server cluster I don't see much need to fit so much stuff on screen at once. If you do, then you should have multiple monitors as that will always be better for desktop space than a single monitor. High refresh rate, HDR 4K G-Sync 27" displays are coming next year with 32" models estimated for late 2018 or more likely Q1 2019.

I'm a bit on the fence because I like my current 27" 1440p display in terms of desktop space but for gaming feel that maybe I could have something a bit bigger, in the 30-32" size range. Yet the 16:10 30" Dell I used to have felt slightly too big on the desktop and of course the lower PPI didn't help.
Click to expand...

Yeah, once you get used to a truly high density display It's hard to go back. What we need is a 32" 5K 2880p so we can have 27" 4K PPI on a larger panel. Although I feel that 32" 4K is to a point where it can be considered "Good enough" my 27" 1440p looks like a pixelated mess now.
 
That is so subjective it is laughable. I would argue when it can be piped directly to your brain and you can't tell the difference between reality and that reality.

But until then the definition of the perfect monitor will keep changing as our understanding of what is needed in a perfect monitor continues. We can't define perfect nor create perfect for we are imperfect.
 
l88bastard said:
When LG makes the 40" 120hz 4k OLED with Freesync 2....we will, damn well, have as close to perfect as you can get in this life....display.
Click to expand...

LG may release 40" OLED in 2019/2020. Don't know about Freesync 2.

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1509531763

By that time, we should get HDMI 2.1 standard on TV's and video cards, Volta Titan/Ti to drive the 4k 120Hz, 8 or 10 Core Coffee Lake/Ice Lake, and hopefully RAM/SSD comes down in prices.
 
Samsung 55" did a fair job and still does for me.

Some here argue that it does not work since it's not 144hz but after all this time it's by far the best money I ever spent on a monitor / tv


I had 4 30" monitors in surround and then bought a 32 4k with gsync. It was "OK" but you know like you decided, "we want bigger"

I don't feel what we want is difficult to achieve. The tech is out there, overlord monitors tried doing it for awhile.

To the question, if your pro gaming then my idea of an option does not work. But for the perfect hybrid from what we have currently I feel the Samsung I have fits the bill. Just so happens it seems a lot of other people do too (forum thread at the top of displays).

However for the price I was looking for the same answer for a friend who wants a sub 1k gaming monitor /tv
 
Just wanted to update that I recently bought a Samsung 55" Q6F 4K TV, and it's basically what I asked for. Was originally looking for something in the 40-50" range, but 55" is nice for media (sub-optimal for desktop, but acceptable). Wanted 120Hz+, which this TV can do in 1080p mode. For 4K it's limited to 60Hz BUT has a Game Mode Motion Plus feature, which upscales lower refresh to 120Hz and does a decent job. 4:4:4 is supported, as well as FreeSync (though I prefer the motion interpolation). So, yeah, pretty much perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top