Soldato
60Hz at most, any higher is impractical on 4K at the moment.
Cheap 4k monitors
- Thread starter Nightglow
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 522
i'm looking forward to an array of 22"-24" IPS 4K monitors, like the dell U2414Q but at less than £500 for the consumer. I reckon the second half of 2014 will bring that.
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,375
$799? I think we can do a bit better than that -
The 28" Dell P2815Q at $699
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...hat-28-inch-sub-1000-4k-monitor-its-only-699/
http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/04/campaigns/p2815q-coming-soon-page?=us&l=en&s=bsd
IPS panel with 99% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB coverage and 178/178 degree viewing angles, an 8 ms GTG response time, a contrast ratio of 1,000:1 (dynamic contrast ratio is 2,000,000:1), a media card reader, a 4-port USB 3.0 hub, HDMI, DisplayPort and Mini DisplayPort inputs, and a stand enabling tilt, swivel, pivot and height adjustment (NOT CONFIRMED)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...hat-28-inch-sub-1000-4k-monitor-its-only-699/
http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/04/campaigns/p2815q-coming-soon-page?=us&l=en&s=bsd
IPS panel with 99% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB coverage and 178/178 degree viewing angles, an 8 ms GTG response time, a contrast ratio of 1,000:1 (dynamic contrast ratio is 2,000,000:1), a media card reader, a 4-port USB 3.0 hub, HDMI, DisplayPort and Mini DisplayPort inputs, and a stand enabling tilt, swivel, pivot and height adjustment (NOT CONFIRMED)
Last edited:
Its meant to be IPS!
Man of Honour
$699 would probably work out about £600? That's mighty affordable for 4k.
Give it 6 months & we will see 4k monitors being brought out in every size imaginable, manufacturers will be pushing 4k for all it's worth this year, even though there isn't much 4k material around.
4k is the new buzz word for 2014.
4k is the new buzz word for 2014.
Asus and Dell will have them for the same price. The Dell will be available before either. The Viewsonic is at $999 but will probably fall due to the more aggressive pricing by competitors. Also, the IZGO monitors are enormously expensive because they're IZGO and pretty much pilot production atm.
Edit: Dell witll be less - $699 - and available from the end of this month.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 522
I think the delay and high cost of 4K IPS monitors has partially been a lack of direction in the consumer industry.
They're priced to target professionals but in reality the technology doesn't cost $999+ to manufacture regardless whether it's LTPS, a-Si or IGZO based - it has existed in a mixture of those forms in high DPI mobile devices such as the retina iPad and Nexus 7 tablets with a part cost of somewhere between £50-70, granted these are on a smaller scale.
But why make better 4K IPS screens to be sold for approx. £150-200 when you can carry on churning out the uncalibrated TN rubbish for the same price.
Selling the screens for professional use only stalls innovation because even most professionals don't have much of an influence on technology, unless you're Hollywood and pick up the phone to LG and say I want 10x IPS 4K monitors delivered in a fortnight whatever the cost. It's good to see them slipping through to prosumer use now though.
Continue the enthusiasm and don't buy anything TN or with a DPI <100 and the message will be clear
They're priced to target professionals but in reality the technology doesn't cost $999+ to manufacture regardless whether it's LTPS, a-Si or IGZO based - it has existed in a mixture of those forms in high DPI mobile devices such as the retina iPad and Nexus 7 tablets with a part cost of somewhere between £50-70, granted these are on a smaller scale.
But why make better 4K IPS screens to be sold for approx. £150-200 when you can carry on churning out the uncalibrated TN rubbish for the same price.
Selling the screens for professional use only stalls innovation because even most professionals don't have much of an influence on technology, unless you're Hollywood and pick up the phone to LG and say I want 10x IPS 4K monitors delivered in a fortnight whatever the cost. It's good to see them slipping through to prosumer use now though.
Continue the enthusiasm and don't buy anything TN or with a DPI <100 and the message will be clear
Tbh, IPS are on their way out for large panels. They won't be a driver of premium, high profit margin monitor sales going forward. Their image quality has been stagnant for a long time, and the variant PLS hasn't really improved anything. They still have high response times (which still haven't been improved significantly), poor contrast and 'glow'. I'd imagine that IZGO, its competing technology (name I don't remember), VA and eventually OLED when they hit volume production will replace it quite quickly and no-one will be sorry. In terms of colour accuracy and panel uniformity, they were simply the best of a bad bunch for a long time but the drawbacks they always had haven't got better, but competing technologies have.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 522
You're confusing pixel arrangement and type (OLED, TN, IPS, VA etc...) with manufacturing materials and method to drive the pixels (IGZO, LTPS, a-SI etc...). All of which are for TFT based display technologies.
AH-IPS is a pixel arrangement that offers accurate colours, wide colour-gamut, good contrast, and a wide viewing angle and has been made using IGZO (new iPad), LTPS (iPhone 4 onwards), and a-SI (desktop monitors) and will continue to offer those benefits and low power consumption when paired with an LED backlight.
LTPS is the best TFT backplane but does not bode well with larger screen sizes hence AMOLED displays (SGS4 etc...) and LTPS-IPS displays (iPhone etc...) both being limited to mobile devices. IGZO is the answer to a better backplane for IPS or OLED but hasn't reached mass production yet because it's a lot easier to continue manufacturing a-SI TN panels at a much lower cost all together.
AH-IPS is a pixel arrangement that offers accurate colours, wide colour-gamut, good contrast, and a wide viewing angle and has been made using IGZO (new iPad), LTPS (iPhone 4 onwards), and a-SI (desktop monitors) and will continue to offer those benefits and low power consumption when paired with an LED backlight.
LTPS is the best TFT backplane but does not bode well with larger screen sizes hence AMOLED displays (SGS4 etc...) and LTPS-IPS displays (iPhone etc...) both being limited to mobile devices. IGZO is the answer to a better backplane for IPS or OLED but hasn't reached mass production yet because it's a lot easier to continue manufacturing a-SI TN panels at a much lower cost all together.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 522
hmmm, could be a limitation of HDMI (3840x2160 @ 30Hz or 4096x2160 @ 24Hz). I understand DisplayPort gets round the timing limitation by using Packet Delivery of the data and/or sending two data streams - one for each side of the screen.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 522
Yeah you're right
"However, when displaying 4K content via an HDMI 1.4 port the refresh rate is limited to 30 Hz, so until an HDMI 2.0 update is released, you're better off using the DisplayPort."
I presume they mean a hardware update/refresh to HDMI2.0.
But dell can claim the highest DPI desktop monitor we've seen for years so we can't be too critical and you can get 60Hz out the DisplayPort
"However, when displaying 4K content via an HDMI 1.4 port the refresh rate is limited to 30 Hz, so until an HDMI 2.0 update is released, you're better off using the DisplayPort."
I presume they mean a hardware update/refresh to HDMI2.0.
But dell can claim the highest DPI desktop monitor we've seen for years so we can't be too critical and you can get 60Hz out the DisplayPort
Last edited:
Associate
Holy bejebus this display is gorgeous. 24" 4K is amazing (UP2414Q).
Doing some tests checking for PWM, tried just about every exposure, ISO, shutter speed stills, and also video test (30 FPS).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k3BIIXQdFY&feature=youtu.be
Either the display has zero PWM, or the frequency is really high. (Tested display brightness of 0). I couldn't get the line to separate, which is a good thing.
Doing some tests checking for PWM, tried just about every exposure, ISO, shutter speed stills, and also video test (30 FPS).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k3BIIXQdFY&feature=youtu.be
Either the display has zero PWM, or the frequency is really high. (Tested display brightness of 0). I couldn't get the line to separate, which is a good thing.
Yeah you're right
"However, when displaying 4K content via an HDMI 1.4 port the refresh rate is limited to 30 Hz, so until an HDMI 2.0 update is released, you're better off using the DisplayPort."
I presume they mean a hardware update/refresh to HDMI2.0.
But dell can claim the highest DPI desktop monitor we've seen for years so we can't be too critical and you can get 60Hz out the DisplayPort
There are some TV manufacturers that claim a BIOS update is all that is required to go from HDMI 1.4 >>HDMI 2.0 (of course this depends on what electronics are inside to start with)
Could go either way, but as DisplayPort is already on this model and works at 60Hz Dell would have to be petty (which I dont think they are) to say this is not upgradable in a similar fashion
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 522
yeah will be interesting, just have to wait and see. £1k is a good introductory price for this tech.
I think the extra graphics power required to drive 4K screens isn't quite as much as others are saying. Here is some reasons I can think of:
* font-smoothing is no longer required (HiDPI mode on Mac; 200% font size on Windows).
* Anti-aliasing is no longer required in games, since the screen resolution is likely higher than the texture themselves.
* The same textures are loaded in memory
* lighting and shading effects remain the same
* in cases where the above is still not enough, it will encourage games developers to write efficient code again.
It's a bit like the change from 1024x768 to 1920x1080 - not as much as people thought it would be. If you think about the reverse effect - you have a game running at fullHD and getting poor fps, how many more frames per second do you gain from dropping the resolution? Very little in all the tests i've done, guild wars 2 is a good example for that.
I think the extra graphics power required to drive 4K screens isn't quite as much as others are saying. Here is some reasons I can think of:
* font-smoothing is no longer required (HiDPI mode on Mac; 200% font size on Windows).
* Anti-aliasing is no longer required in games, since the screen resolution is likely higher than the texture themselves.
* The same textures are loaded in memory
* lighting and shading effects remain the same
* in cases where the above is still not enough, it will encourage games developers to write efficient code again.
It's a bit like the change from 1024x768 to 1920x1080 - not as much as people thought it would be. If you think about the reverse effect - you have a game running at fullHD and getting poor fps, how many more frames per second do you gain from dropping the resolution? Very little in all the tests i've done, guild wars 2 is a good example for that.
Last edited: