Poll: What monitor will you buy? Poll

[2Thumbs]

You don't have to have that much power to drive 2160p, though.
The Radeon RX 6900 XT 16 GB is around 50-60% faster than your card, and by the end of the year there should be a new generation, that is supposed to offer up to 100% higher performance than that RX 6900 XT 16 GB.

You do when you want all the eye candy turned up with a frame rate near the max of the panel frequency. Also that may be true for the 6900XT and beyond but that's assuming you can get one, let alone at a price that isn't extortionate. "An item in your hand that's suitable is much better than a theoretical one"

On another note, I was in the market for a secondary to replace my FHD 24" screen as it's quite old tech at 60hz and only a 6 bit panel. But yesterday I 'overclocked' it to 75Hz, so I'm gonna keep hold of it until it dies.

 

[EsaT]

Acer X32 FP should be the closest to what I'm waiting:
Modern response time 32" 4K with wide gamut.
Hopefully it wasn't paper release for the next Christmas availability.

 

[4K8KW10]

You do when you want all the eye candy turned up with a frame rate near the max of the panel frequency. Also that may be true for the 6900XT and beyond but that's assuming you can get one, let alone at a price that isn't extortionate. "An item in your hand that's suitable is much better than a theoretical one"

On another note, I was in the market for a secondary to replace my FHD 24" screen as it's quite old tech at 60hz and only a 6 bit panel. But yesterday I 'overclocked' it to 75Hz, so I'm gonna keep hold of it until it dies.

wow 6-bit panel is really bad. You are looking at a screen with quite poor colour representation.
If you upgrade to 4K 10-bit, you would see another level of picture quality..




6 bit vs 8 bit vs 10 bit - Google Search

 

[EsaT]

wow 6-bit panel is really bad. You are looking at a screen with quite poor colour representation.

6-bit panels use dithering to mask lack colour steps.

 

[HACO]

My next screen will have to be 8K (probably 32 inches). Ever since I saw the 8K Dell UP3218K in person, I can't think of any other screen, even the Apple Pro XDR seems like a downgrade. The sharpness you get from 8K 32-inches is miles ahead of 4K at that size. And noticeably sharper than Apple retina displays too.

The limiting factor for 8K monitors has been connectivity, as you'd have needed two DP 1.4 which isn't clean and comes with software issues. Even a single Thunderbolt 3/4 isn't enough for 8K@60Hz. But with HDMI 2.1 and DP 2.0, this is sorted out so I'm expecting to see some new options in 2022 or 2023.

 

[EsaT]

My next screen will have to be 8K (probably 32 inches). Ever since I saw the 8K Dell UP3218K in person, I can't think of any other screen, even the Apple Pro XDR seems like a downgrade. The sharpness you get from 8K 32-inches is miles ahead of 4K at that size. And noticeably sharper than Apple retina displays too.

The limiting factor for 8K monitors has been connectivity, as you'd have needed two DP 1.4 which isn't clean and comes with software issues. Even a single Thunderbolt 3/4 isn't enough for 8K@60Hz. But with HDMI 2.1 and DP 2.0, this is sorted out so I'm expecting to see some new options in 2022 or 2023.

Far higher resolution would certainly help making scaling of lower resolutions smoother in case of integer scaling not working.

But HDMI 2.1 can't really do 8K.
Already at just old 8 bits per colour channel 120Hz 8K exceeds its bandwidth by 140% and 10bit 120Hz by 200%.
DP2.0's bandwidth would be ecxceeded by 65% at 10bit 120Hz and with DSC it should be able to do beyond 200Hz.

 

[HACO]

Far higher resolution would certainly help making scaling of lower resolutions smoother in case of integer scaling not working.

But HDMI 2.1 can't really do 8K.
Already at just old 8 bits per colour channel 120Hz 8K exceeds its bandwidth by 140% and 10bit 120Hz by 200%.
DP2.0's bandwidth would be ecxceeded by 65% at 10bit 120Hz and with DSC it should be able to do beyond 200Hz.

HDMI 2.1 can do 10-bit 8K@120Hz with DSC based on my calculation. Obviously no chance of doing this without DSC.

I'll be happy with 8K@60Hz with DP2.0 for now though, it's several years before we see 120Hz 8K screens anyway, they won't come to market anytime soon. I'm not greedy I'll wait

 

[4K8KW10]

FUHD 8K is certainly needed for 65-inch TV, etc. But for smaller screens it is kind of overkill, especially that it is staggering four times the pixels of UHD 4K.
It is certainly very beautiful and life-like, through-the-window-looking experience but we can do it a bit slower.

How about 6K in-between 4K and 8K?!

 

[HACO]

FUHD 8K is certainly needed for 65-inch TV, etc. But for smaller screens it is kind of overkill, especially that it is staggering four times the pixels of UHD 4K.
It is certainly very beautiful and life-like, through-the-window-looking experience but we can do it a bit slower.

How about 6K in-between 4K and 8K?!

I used to think 5K would be the in-between (going 2x 1440p), but only Apple did that and it never became popular outside of Apple's ecosystem. And the only 6K monitor is also made by Apple. I don't think other brands will bother for in-between resolutions. Companies will make what they can market, and 5K or 6K wouldn't be easy to market, but pretty soon everyone will know what 8K is because of TVs.

 

[4K8KW10]

I used to think 5K would be the in-between (going 2x 1440p), but only Apple did that and it never became popular outside of Apple's ecosystem. And the only 6K monitor is also made by Apple. I don't think other brands will bother for in-between resolutions. Companies will make what they can market, and 5K or 6K wouldn't be easy to market, but pretty soon everyone will know what 8K is because of TVs.

Yeah, going this way:

1920x1080
2560x1440
3840x2160
5120x2880
7680x4320

5.2K is in-between and I think they don't need to market anything so good.
If they can sell very bad FHD 1080p screens en masse and no one notices the bad quality of the screens, then anything above should sell well.

Of course, these people must stop manufacturing the primitive 90s technology called FHD 1080p.. lol

 

[t2na]

If they can sell very bad FHD 1080p screens en masse and no one notices the bad quality of the screens, then anything above should sell well.

Of course, these people must stop manufacturing the primitive 90s technology called FHD 1080p.. lol

Until the hardware to support higher resolutions becomes cheaper/more easily available then I think 1080p will be an option for a few more years to come still.

 

[EsaT]

1920x1080
2560x1440
3840x2160
5120x2880
7680x4320

5.2K is in-between and I think they don't need to market anything so good.

It would be pretty good with integer scaling from 2560x1440.
Though 8K would also do that, besides integer scaling from 4K.
The higher the display's resolution, the more there are such starting points for easy scaling.

Until the hardware to support higher resolutions becomes cheaper/more easily available then I think 1080p will be an option for a few more years to come still.

Hardware has been there for many years.
Worser than consoles potato PCs shouldn't be allowed to dictate speed of advance.

 

[alec]

I have been on 1440p since Benq xl2730z came out, so 6 years?
Last upgrade to 32" 1440p@240hz

No experience with 4k. Wasn't interested because high refresh rate was not an option. No monitors available at reasonable prices and gpus weren't fast enough.

Monitors are coming now, 4k@144+hz. GPUs still not quite there.
I think next couple of years, advances in variable shading and dynamic resolutions will make it happen.

If I had to get a new monitor, would be nice to go slightly bigger. Say 34-36" high refresh. OLED if possible. Would have to be 4k because of pixel density. But not ultrawide.

 

[t2na]

Hardware has been there for many years.
Worser than consoles potato PCs shouldn't be allowed to dictate speed of advance.

I agree - but my comment isn't about hardware being there, it's about the hardware being affordable and available.

The market dictates the speed surely? So if people are still running hardware that performs better at 1080p than 4k then monitor sales will be heavily focused towards that as that is what will generate the most income. BenQ released their 'updated' 1080p monitors last year! Updated 1080p monitors in 2021... Mad.

When a GPU that can handle 4K at 60fps is priced in the same realm as a '1080p' GPU then people will upgrade and manufacturers will respond to that.

Honestly I'm just here waiting for a 25" 1440p high refresh and IPS panel - because whilst I don't mind 1080p at 25" I much prefer 1440p, and 27" monitors are huge to me.

 

[Grimley]

I'm currently using a Dell U2312 which I've had for 9-10 years now. If & when I change I want:

IPS
higher than 60hz
usb hub
1080p but willing to go 1440p if the price is right.
27"??

 

[chaparral]

Think am going be sticking with 35" & 34" 3440 x 1440 UW monitors for some time to come as i feel it the perfect size & resolution plus i no need to upgrade to the latest top end GPU all the time..

 

[EsaT]

I'm currently using a Dell U2312 which I've had for 9-10 years now. If & when I change I want:

IPS
higher than 60hz
usb hub
1080p but willing to go 1440p if the price is right.
27"??

Going from mediocre of the time to low end?
2560x1440 is mainstream for any serious PC user.
And selection is really wide.

 

[Grimley]

/\/\/\ well suggest a make & model as I have no clue these days. I bought the last one on recommendations on here. I'm not willing to change what I have at the moment as it still works.

 

[HACO]

/\/\/\ well suggest a make & model as I have no clue these days. I bought the last one on recommendations on here. I'm not willing to change what I have at the moment as it still works.

LG 27GP850 is very well regarded and reasonably priced.

 

[Grimley]

/\/\/\ I like that. I'll keep it in mind.