43″ BFGD 144Hz AUO Panels in Production Soon

El_MUERkO

El_MUERkO

El_MUERkO

Associate
Joined
27 Jun 2009
Posts
256
It was back in January 2018 that we brought you news of several very large “Big Format Gaming Displays” (BFGD) being showcased at the CES event. Models from Acer, Asus and HP were shown off with a massive 65″ screen size, Ultra HD resolution and 120Hz refresh rate. Not much has been heard of seen of them since this original concept / demo.

AUO now have the 65″ BDFG panel in their roadmap with a scheduled production of Q4 2018. This will be a VA technology panel and will now feature a 144Hz refresh rate instead of the 120Hz talked about earlier in the year. It has an Ultra HD resolution and support for HDR 1000. There is also talk of a 43″ sized panel of the same kind of spec, again scheduled for Q4 2018 production. There looks to be an HDR 1000 version and an HDR 600 version of the 43″ panel planned.
Click to expand...

I'm currently using the Philips BDM4350 & BDM4065 and I could never go back to a smaller panel size, but 60Hz and lots of tearing offends my eyes so these new AUO panels sound like the dream come true. A 43" UHD 144Hz GSync VA monitor is my perfect monitor, if there's a way to pre-order the first one to arrive and OCUK then I would!
 
Legend said:
Keep in mind the 65" is rumoured to be around the £5K mark... so the 43" might be close to £3K if you're lucky.
Click to expand...

It's possible, but it'd be madness for any manufacturer to try given the existence of monitors like the latest Philips 43" HDR (436M6VBPAB) which is a quarter that and the Wasabi Mango 120Hz would be similar if ebay sellers weren't price gouging.
 
El_MUERkO said:
It's possible, but it'd be madness for any manufacturer to try given the existence of monitors like the latest Philips 43" HDR (436M6VBPAB) which is a quarter that and the Wasabi Mango 120Hz would be similar if ebay sellers weren't price gouging.
Click to expand...

Well, how much does a 65" FALD 1000-nit TV cost? Add G-Sync to that and Nvidia tax and £5K doesn't sound so unlikely. So if that's the case, I don't see a 43" being even half that price, but I'd like to be wrong.
 
The Wasabi Mango's aren't anything that amazing though. The reviews I've seen really don't show them to be that great, but for the price I guess they're fine if 120Hz 4K is all you care about. For an IPS monitor though, it sucks for colour accuracy, which suggests they've used a substandard panel... and that then raises all kinds of red flags in my mind. The other issue is that you're still getting in to the monitor lottery that any new monitor purchase grants you entry to... and by importing one you're just upping your risk level to new heights.
 
The cheapest 65" VA FALD with over 1000cd/m2 peak brightness is the Samsung MU9000 at about £1500.

Those are not anything like these new screens in terms of backlighting and response time let alone the expensive uhd gsync module and next gen hdmi 2.1 input likely to be first used on these screens.

The tiny 120hz uhd gsync screens are £2500. The 43" will easily be £5000 and the 65" easily £7500+
Mark my words because I'll bump this post when the price drops.

Nobody other than the worlds elite will be able to justify the cost like buying a £5k 55" 8k tv from Samsung - it's just not for people earning less than 60k a year or so. Sure you'll get the occasional idiot that saves up for a lifetime to buy something but these aren't like a 2080ti which is pretty affordable with 3 months of saving on minimum wage and living on noodles.

The only way I'm getting one of these is if my wife dies or I get hit by a car but not killed.
 
bemaniac said:
The tiny 120hz uhd gsync screens are £2500. The 43" will easily be £5000 and the 65" easily £7500+
Click to expand...

If that is the case then they obviously want just sales in the triple figures....worldwide! That's a tiny amount, and I expect the 144/98hz UHD monitors to at least sold in the thousands.
 
bemaniac said:
We'd all love the existing ones but can't buy them.
Click to expand...

Yes and no, being non-DSC compatible puts a VERY big dent in them imo and halves the value in my mind. Just feels like 2016 tech being passed off as the latest and greatest. It's got a 144hz capable 4k panel, whoop-de-do but it's got so many flaws that they're just not worth it.
 
JediFragger said:
Yes and no, being non-DSC compatible puts a VERY big dent in them imo and halves the value in my mind. Just feels like 2016 tech being passed off as the latest and greatest. It's got a 144hz capable 4k panel, whoop-de-do but it's got so many flaws that they're just not worth it.
Click to expand...

As you can see from my sig I've settled for the best 2 screens for hdr and backlighting for under a grand each. I don't like getting ripped off.
 
We need monitor tech to move along, no improvements for so long, 1440p/165hz is the best we can get and even those all have nasty characteristics with backlight bleed, you have to get lucky with all of them!
 
JediFragger said:
If that is the case then they obviously want just sales in the triple figures....worldwide! That's a tiny amount, and I expect the 144/98hz UHD monitors to at least sold in the thousands.
Click to expand...

I think manufacturers have cottoned on to the fact that there is a niche group of wealthy PC enthusiasts who really don't care how much something costs and for whom the word 'value' does not exist in their vocabulary. Expensive items have always existed of course, nothing new there, but it does feel like that gap is widening and prices at the top end are being pushed higher and higher, as they've realised there really is no limit to what these people will pay. Just look at the 4K 144Hz monitors, Nvidia's 20xx, the Intel 9-series... it's all getting rather absurd, but they will sell enough to make big profits. It's not about units sold, it's about profit per unit. The funny (and disturbing) thing is that you see people defending it left right and centre, taking any criticism directed at these companies almost as a personal insult against them for buying it! All very peculiar. I don't see this trend ceasing anytime soon either, so I really won't be surprised if these BFG monitors end up with astronomically high 4-figure price tags. :rolleyes:
 
I realised something with the 43" when looking at other 43" 4K panels in general... they are all 104 PPI... the same as what the 43" BFGD will be. This is quite a difference from the 137 PPI of a 32" 4K panel or 163 PPI of a 27" which anyone already at 4K on PC will be accustomed to. The 65" is far worse at a measly 68 PPI, but in this instance I think it's less of an issue as very few people will be sitting 3 feet away from a 65" screen and will instead most likely be using it in a living room setting. However, the 43" is far more likely to take the place of a PC monitor, therefore it's worth considering for someone coming from 4K @ 27" or 32" that there could be a noticeable drop in sharpness if they're viewing from the same distance.

I have a 32" 4K panel myself (137 PPI) and certainly noticed the difference coming from my X34 which was 109 PPI. Going back to that would not go unnoticed, that's for sure. Our experience with any given resolution ultimately comes down to PPI at the end of the day (and the distance you sit from it), as that will be the determining factor for the detail/sharpness you see in the image.

Looking at a 38" UW monitor though, such as the recently announced and rather tasty looking LG 38GL950G, that will actually have a higher 110 PPI than 4K at 43", AND be easier to drive. I suspect it will come in cheaper than the BFGD also. Of course, these aren't necessarily comparable monitors... VA + FALD HDR 1000 vs IPS and it would seem no HDR... but at 43" you have less pixels in the same area, yet the whole thing is going to be more demanding on your GPU.

Food for thought anyway...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom