Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
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.
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.
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.I doubt you'd even see a difference at 36" between a 4K display and a 1440/1600p display.
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..
I'm talking for a monitor, not a TV.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..
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.
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.The OP made a thread about owning a 660 ti, so the answer to the question I asked is NO.
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?
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 <$2000.
Dude...
At 36", most people would end up moving the monitor further away from their face than they would for a 27" or a 19" monitor. Otherwise, the monitor would occupy too much of your field of view to be comfortable for most people.
Wouldn't that be glorious. And make it support 1080p120. And why not OLED?
Does anyone even make simply a flat 35"-46" 4k@60Hz?
Well, curving the display is not really that much of a cost increase, and on a curved display TN would be fine (since every piece of the display is properly angled for the viewer.The real question is "Can I afford a high end monitor with <insert features>?" A 4K 36" non-TN would likely cost at least 4,000$ (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.
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.Also, the market for TVs is still orders of magnitude larger than the market for 4K computer monitors. Supply and demand.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The Samsung UE40HU6900 someone mentioned has an initial sticker of $1700. 40" 4k. If it doesn't lag like a bitch, it could make an awesome monitor. They just need to make a curved version and sell it in the US.The 4K IGZO panels cost 2,500$ and launched at 5,000$.
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.
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....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.