Why doesn't someone make a curved 4k 36"

Discussion in 'Displays' started by zzz, Jun 16, 2014.

  1. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Wouldn't that be glorious. And make it support 1080p120. And why not OLED?

    Does anyone even make simply a flat 35"-46" 4k@60Hz?
     
  2. turbineseaplane

    turbineseaplane Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    204
    Joined:
    May 6, 2014
    I'd buy for sure...

    Only thing being made at all is a Samsung 40" that has hdmi 2.0 (no display port) and is not sold in the USA.
     
  3. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    I doubt you'd even see a difference at 36" between a 4K display and a 1440/1600p display.

    We are reaching the point of diminishing returns with regards to resolution at display sizes below 40". I'd just like a nice 27" 1440p OLED display.
     
  4. dmonkey

    dmonkey [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,552
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. At 36" the screen is 78% larger than your 27". You're definitely going to notice if you blow up your 2560x image to that size, at even half as much more viewing distance.
     
  5. Odellus

    Odellus [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,696
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    from what distance? if it's on a desk, it'd definitely be noticeable. if 1440p at 27" viewed around 2-3 feet away was enough i wouldn't see jaggies in games.
     
  6. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    As soon as you get more than 5 inches away from the screen, I am willing to wager you won't notice it.

    We have a Fry's Electronics here in Indianapolis and they had several 4K televisions last I was in there, 3 curved and 2 regular going up to 85". Side by side on a 60" display, as soon as you got back to 4 feet it was impossible to discern which was which, and typical viewing distance is much farther away than that for a TV that size. That's on a 60" display, condensing that resolution down to something as small as a 36" monitor is going to be even less noticable.
     
  7. Odellus

    Odellus [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,696
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2010
    you have to be blind
     
  8. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Maybe, I did forget to wear my placebo glasses.
     
  9. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    That's 122 vs 84 PPI. Since I can tell a difference between my 120 PPI laptop and 100 PPI monitor, I can certainly tell 122 vs 84 apart.

    Anyway, I just want a curved 35"-46" 4k@60Hz, and that's in the right PPI range. Bonus features: OLED and 1080p120.
     
  10. King Icewind

    King Icewind [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,441
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    I haven't seen one in person but I've always assumed the viewing angles on curved screens are total ass considering part of the sides get cut off. Now, I generally am directly in front of the TV anyways, but that's not always the case and especially if other people are watching too..
     
  11. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    There's pretty much no such thing as off-angle viewing on a curved display. You have to look at it straight on otherwise the image quality starts to degrade very quickly, I spent an hour in the store looking for a new TV and left severely underwhelmed by the "curved" screen.

    Seems like something they're doing because they can, rather than providing any measurable benefit in image quality. As for 4K i'll leave that to someone else to debate. I'm aware the numbers are larger and that means it must be better, but I wasen't impressed.
     
  12. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    I'm talking for a monitor, not a TV.
     
  13. NCX

    NCX [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,224
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    The real question is "Can I afford a high end monitor with <insert features>?" A 4K 36" non-TN would likely cost at least 4,000$ (remember the 32" 4K launch prices)? The 24" 1080p Sony OLED monitor costs 5,500$...The OP made a thread about owning a 660 ti, so the answer to the question I asked is NO.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2014
  14. Church

    Church Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    371
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    50" 4K Panasonic TX-50AX800E with DisplayPort 1.2 (with MST though) costs ~ 1900eur in Europe. I guess after some time in US there might be 1900$ TC-50AX800U (for now only more expensive TC-58AX800U selling). Prices are way less then those of 32" sharp oled monitor clones.
    Seiki's chinese 4K 39" sold in US can be got <600$. So all we need to wait when some of vendors will finally get from high horse of making uber expensive (and still not big enough) screens or feeding us unacceptably small for this resolution monitors, and start selling 39-50" 4K displays, as seen from Panasonic example, not THAT expensive.
     
  15. bexamous

    bexamous [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,670
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Dude...
    4k 36" = 122DPI
    1440p 27" = 108DPI
    1440p 36" = 84DPI

    So you want a 108DPI screen but you think there is no difference between 84 and 122?

    How about this:
    1280x1024 19" sscreen is 86PPI
    1600x1200 19" screen is 105PPI

    You do not think you could tell the difference between 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 on a 19" screen?

    Or even better:
    1440p 27" = 108DPI
    1080p 27" = 82DPI

    Why do you want a 1440p screen? Get a 1080p because you don't think you can tell the difference between 84 and 122, how do you expect to see difference between 82 and 108?
     
  16. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    LOL, that was partly due to PSU limitations with my current setup, and it was $250 btw. I dropped $1500 on a Dell 30". Considering you can get a 39" 4k for $389 and a Samsung 60" 1080p for about $1000, it's not unreasonable at all to think someone could make a 36" 4k curved for <$2000.
     
  17. AgentQ

    AgentQ [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,546
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2000
    Speaking about DPI in isolation is useless.

    DPI only makes sense when considered in conjunction with the viewing distance.

    What you're really after here is the arc span of your field of view occupied by a single pixel, which is a function of pixel pitch and viewing distance.

    At 36", most people would end up moving the monitor further away from their face than they would for a 27" or a 19" monitor. Otherwise, the monitor would occupy too much of your field of view to be comfortable for most people.

    So you can't use analogies on 19" monitors for useful DPI on a 36" monitor.



    Back to the original question: I'd love to have a 36" 4K curved monitor with 120Hz just as much as everyone else, but I seriously doubt that more than a handful of people would want to pay what it would cost.

    So the answer is, as usual: Cost and lack of demand.
     
  18. AgentQ

    AgentQ [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,546
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2000
    Manufacturing difficulties go up as the pixel pitch gets smaller. Price goes up as the demand gets smaller.

    Most people looking for 4K TVs are going to be viewing them from far away, so they won't be looking for a 36" TV. If they are after a 36" TV for viewing from the couch, then 1080p is plenty sufficient.

    The pixels on a 60" 4K TV are much larger than those on a 36" 4K screen. Despite being physically larger, it's probably easier to manufacture the larger screen without defects.

    Also, the market for TVs is still orders of magnitude larger than the market for 4K computer monitors. Supply and demand.
     
  19. Church

    Church Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    371
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    AgentQ: i for example wish for contrary - wider POV covered for more immersion in games. So i won't put big display further away then current smaller one. Higher resolution like 4K's will just help bigger display image to not have ugly big pixels up close enabling same picture quality/DPI even with doubling screen size. 50" 4K DPI same as 24" FHD.
     
  20. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    I'm not sure why you're throwing numbers at me when i've said i've compared them in the store and couldn't see any difference at resonable viewing distances.

    I get that you disagree but my opinion is simply based on what i've personally seen. At that size, the benefits of 4K (espically for the cost) are slim, in my opinion. I'm not stopping you from buying one, go for it.
     
  21. cbf123

    cbf123 n00b

    Messages:
    50
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2013
    That's just it. I personally have a 24" and 23" now. I'd love a 4K 42" monitor. I'd put it exactly the same distance away as my existing screens, and have roughly 4x the screen real estate.

    I don't need teeny-tiny pixels, I want to be able to put more windows on the screen at one time.

    (I'm a software developer, and often have *many* windows open. I currently have eight virtual desktops in linux, and they've all got stuff layered in them. I've got about 40 text editor windows open right now.)
     
  22. kache

    kache Gawd

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    I'd say 50" would be the perfect size (same DPI as a 25" 1080p screen) for a 4k curved monitor! :D
     
  23. kache

    kache Gawd

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Well, curving the display is not really that much of a cost increase, and on a curved display TN would be fine (since every piece of the display is properly angled for the viewer.
    Which means that it would be fairly possible for Seiki or maybe the koreans to sell a ~40" version for less than $600.
     
  24. kache

    kache Gawd

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Currently I heavily doubt that, for the simple reason that there is zero 4k content available for consumers, while a 4k display can be used fully in both consumer and professional space, since software and workspace scales up without issues.
     
  25. NCX

    NCX [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,224
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Fail: Extreme Edition.

    The Seki is 30hz, you want a 30hz 4K 36? The 4K IGZO panels cost 2,500$ and launched at 5,000$.
     
  26. kache

    kache Gawd

    Messages:
    723
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Keep in mind the Seiki 39" and 50" screens sold quite a lot, and they would have sold A LOT MORE if they were 60hz, so I believe the demand is definitely there, both from consumers and from professionals.
     
  27. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Of course there's adequate demand for premium monitors. Look how many companies made a 30", and how many sequential 30" models Dell has made, all with price tags above $1000.

    NCX, I tend to think that 30Hz vs 60Hz isn't much difference in BOM cost. 30Hz was probably chosen since there's not a prevalent video interface for 4k@60Hz bandwidth. An HDMI 2.0 or DP1.4 chipset shouldn't cost too much more. Manufacturers regularly pay less than $2 per chip. The backlight, panel, and R&D contribute much more to the cost.
     
  28. bexamous

    bexamous [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,670
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Obviously at same distance. This isn't a home theater where room size and stuff comes into play. You sit at a desk.
     
  29. bexamous

    bexamous [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,670
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Okay, if you cannot see the difference then again I ask why do you want a 1440p 27" monitor when 1080p are so much cheaper? And FWIW I use a 39" 4k screen and a 27" 1440p next to it. They are almost exactly the same pixel density. 108 vs 112 DPI.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2014
  30. JDMFSeanP

    JDMFSeanP n00b

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
  31. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Because you sit much closer to a 27" than a 39", or at least you should. If you're one of those guys sitting 12 inches away from a television on your desk I don't think this conversation will be productive.

    I specifically said that 4K is unnoticable once you move back to a reasonable viewing distance, the pixel density is only noticable when you're right up next to it.
     
  32. Venomous

    Venomous Gawd

    Messages:
    663
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    I was working in an industry where cutting edge stuff like this was used for our job. One thing I took away from curved screens, is ergonomics. It's critical that the panel is eye level otherwise you may suffer neck strains. We had a hell of a time dealing with this the first year and to get a fix implemented.
     
  33. bexamous

    bexamous [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,670
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    How about just sit at a normal viewing distance? Arms length, or 24-30 inches . Look 36" curved display:
    [​IMG]

    Oh no that is just 3 separate 24" portrait panels with the side ones tilted in a bit. Wonder if they'd rather have a single curved display with no benzels getting in the way with similar pixel density? (Although 36" would be a bit smaller, 3x24 displays is like 41" or something).
     
  34. #Grey

    #Grey Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    136
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    If you're sitting 30" away I don't think you'd notice the pixel density at all, no.
     
  35. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    The Samsung UE40HU6900 someone mentioned has an initial sticker of $1700. 40" 4k. If it doesn't lag like a bitch, it could make an awesome monitor. They just need to make a curved version and sell it in the US.
     
  36. Church

    Church Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    371
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    zzz: remember that it has HDMI2. No current gpu supports that, so you are limited to 30Hz. By the time next gen gpus supporting it will come out, imho there might be even better & cheaper alternatives to this.
     
  37. Obi_Kwiet

    Obi_Kwiet 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,858
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2004
    For a computer moniter, you'd be blind not to.
     
  38. Sufu

    Sufu [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    2,004
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2006
    Coming from a 27" 1440p, I can absolutely see the difference between it and my Asus 32" 4k monitor. Definitely would have to be blind to not see the difference.
     
  39. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Ok, we've all concluded #Grey is blind.
     
  40. zzz

    zzz Gawd

    Messages:
    789
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Good point, but I bet GPUs will start to support HDMI2 soon. It's a shame HDMI2 won over DP, when DP is so technically superior and has already been around for years....