Pixel density too, tbh. Most windows desktop applications simply do not scale gracefully, and 4k results in uncomfortably small pixels for my tired old eyes
Anyone else unimpressed by monitor progress?
- Thread starter sports_brah
- Start date
Pixel density too, tbh. Most windows desktop applications simply do not scale gracefully, and 4k results in uncomfortably small pixels for my tired old eyes
Yeah below 4K in Windows typically the extra resolution = more screen estate once you hit 4K type resolutions the most beneficial use for most will be using the pixel density to increase the quality of text and icons, etc. i.e. having 256x256 pixel icon in the space normally filled by a 64x64 icon but Windows does a poor job of properly catering for that.
I don't get on with the resolution that well for gaming either - in stuff like racing games with a controller its great but in games where its used as screen estate I find it hard to find a compromise where I can effortlessly move the mouse over big distances of screen while still preserving precision in smaller fine movements.
I don't get on with the resolution that well for gaming either - in stuff like racing games with a controller its great but in games where its used as screen estate I find it hard to find a compromise where I can effortlessly move the mouse over big distances of screen while still preserving precision in smaller fine movements.
Permabanned
I went from 1920x1200 IPS to 1440p IPS recently, that was a really nice upgrade.
There isn't really anything else I need from a monitor, except maybe GSync.
But the implementations have a quality control dice roll which really isn't acceptable.
I am disappointed that there isn't more / better choice of GSync monitors yet.
That said, monitors generally are getting poorer in terms of build quality.
There isn't really anything else I need from a monitor, except maybe GSync.
But the implementations have a quality control dice roll which really isn't acceptable.
I am disappointed that there isn't more / better choice of GSync monitors yet.
That said, monitors generally are getting poorer in terms of build quality.
The 4k thing brings a problem with tv's.
Manufacturers are now going to consider 1080ptv's as budget tv's so in affect if you buy one I expect you will get a lower quality panel and no HDR, I have not seen any non 4k HDR tv's yet. If you want 10bit console supported HDR but dont care for 4k it seems tough luck, you gotta pay the 4k tv tax to get the HDR.
This hasnt been a problem so much in the PC monitor market, you can buy a high end 1080p monitor today e.g. if wanted. High end is not tied to high resolutions.
Aside from price, a big put off for me with gsync is the restrictions, first gen gsync was one display port only, second gen I believe has added a hdmi but still only one hdmi+DP. I expect any monitor I buy to have at least 3 inputs and to support at least 3 input technologies so I have flexibility. My benq has vga, dvi, hdmi and DP. Ironically out of the 4 its DP I am not using, as DP is an over complicated technology and it seems the DP software is buggy on my screen that DP gets stuck in sleep mode if the monitor is turned off.
Manufacturers are now going to consider 1080ptv's as budget tv's so in affect if you buy one I expect you will get a lower quality panel and no HDR, I have not seen any non 4k HDR tv's yet. If you want 10bit console supported HDR but dont care for 4k it seems tough luck, you gotta pay the 4k tv tax to get the HDR.
This hasnt been a problem so much in the PC monitor market, you can buy a high end 1080p monitor today e.g. if wanted. High end is not tied to high resolutions.
Aside from price, a big put off for me with gsync is the restrictions, first gen gsync was one display port only, second gen I believe has added a hdmi but still only one hdmi+DP. I expect any monitor I buy to have at least 3 inputs and to support at least 3 input technologies so I have flexibility. My benq has vga, dvi, hdmi and DP. Ironically out of the 4 its DP I am not using, as DP is an over complicated technology and it seems the DP software is buggy on my screen that DP gets stuck in sleep mode if the monitor is turned off.
Associate
I'm in the same boat; I'd like more desktop 'real estate' than my 1920x1080 (heck, I used to have a 1920x1200 which was fantastic; sadly it broke) but don't need 4K and don't want the associated faff with HiDPI support. I care much more about good colour accuracy and wide gamut, but hate that this seems to preclude adaptive sync support. I'm not going to shell out twice to get both.
I used to be absolutely against curvature, but I can find a monitor that ticks my other boxes I would give one a go - it's acceptable on a screen meant for a single user, but stupid for things like living room TVs.
The manufacturers seem to mainly be going after the gamers market by making their monitors as gaudy and cheesy looking as possible. I'd wish they'd go back to competing by adding useful features like USB hubs, particularly with KVM support - yes you can have a separate KVM, but it's either expensive (due to the technical requirements of modern display interface connectivity) or not integrated with switching monitor inputs. I see BenQ and Dell do this with a few of their monitors, but the choice is so scarce.
And yes to independent reviews - particularly as it sounds like quality control is absolutely pants these days.
Associate
It was a surprise to me too when looking into GSync; it initially sounded pretty good, but when it came to actual implementations it seems like they only cared about one or two use cases. If you've been using PCs for a while you'll have multiple machines you'll want to hook up, and having unnecessary (and not exactly widely known) restrictions on inputs is offputting.
Associate
I don't know the details of DP to judge, but I think complexity is acceptable when supported by suitable levels of testing and certification. Heh.
yeah I said over complex because the bug on my benq has arised from that complexity.
DP ports go to sleep when no signal is transmitted, on my particular monitor if you turn off the monitor, and then turn it on again with DP in use, then you get a no input signal error. To awake it I have to manually unplug the cable from the gpu and then plug it back in. Or reboot the system.
If it happens when in the bios the trick with the gpu doesnt work and only a reboot wakes it up. Never had this kind of issue on dvi,hdmi, vga before but those ports dont have the sleep functionality.
Funny enough my monitor was reviewed on a monitor review site, I asked did they do such a simple test of turning the monitor on and off when using DP, as odd such a simple bug not found on a review.
That's fair... deliver unto me all the other things, and I'll try to put up with a curve. I'm not convinced they're good for doing graphics work though because "straight" depends on your perspective... That said, definitely not on a 32" 16:9 as seems to be the fashion with the few 144Hz models out there. Curves are definitely the territory of ultrawidescreen only - otherwise surely it should ALSO curve top to bottom, and that would be barmy :/ Feels like a massive fad to me, tbh, something added "because we can" rather than because it has any benefit.
Associate
Wow - that sucks
It's almost as if no-one tests these things with real world use cases. I'd hate to think about getting a multi-host set-up (whether external KVM switch or not) working with that going on, but it shouldn't be up to users or prospective customers to discover these problems. It would be nice if there was a greater standard of professionalism in the realm of monitor testing, but I can't see that happening without money or industry support.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 2,332
Quality control is dog dirt at the moment.
I bought an AOC G-sync monitor. It was a 24", 144Hz TN panel. Everything was hunky dory until it literally went a month out of warranty and got 2 dead pixels
I spot stuff like that straight away, right in the centre of the screen too, then a few days later a whole row of pixels just went and I had a blue stripe from top to bottom of the screen.
Now I'm loathe to spend another £400 on a monitor that can drop dead at any time. You don't get that kind of failure rates on TVs so why on monitors. I've had a couple of monitors recently and a few of them have suffered dead or stuck pixels.
I bought an AOC G-sync monitor. It was a 24", 144Hz TN panel. Everything was hunky dory until it literally went a month out of warranty and got 2 dead pixels
I spot stuff like that straight away, right in the centre of the screen too, then a few days later a whole row of pixels just went and I had a blue stripe from top to bottom of the screen.
Now I'm loathe to spend another £400 on a monitor that can drop dead at any time. You don't get that kind of failure rates on TVs so why on monitors. I've had a couple of monitors recently and a few of them have suffered dead or stuck pixels.
Associate
Talking of which - I recall Wendell of Level1Techs seems to be trying to start some sort of checklist for monitor testing; I'm not sure if this'll go anywhere, but it's worth checking out (and adding your own ideas to). I've suggested chrcoluk's scenario as a possible test to add; if more monitor reviewers could be persuaded to adopt this we might benefit from better quality reviews.
Associate
Ouch
You don't have thrips (thunderflies) hanging around (or in) your monitor, do you? That's another thing; it really shouldn't be possible for insects to penetrate critical components of a display, especially when they're not cheap.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 2,332
No idea. I just had to Google them haha. I'm not aware of anything like that but I'd done a lot of work in the old house and wondered if dust had penetrated into the monitor.
Associate
Those look good, please come back and tell us what you think.
Soldato
Soldato
Seriously unimpressed with the lack of progress. I've got a dell 2408wfp and an HP lp2475w both from around 2008 and I can't find anything available that betters what they can do for similar money to what they originally cost. Seems monitors these days cost more and give you less. My old displays have minimal backlight bleed, the IPS has very low glow and they are both wide gamut. Thus far all I can get to replace them is an equivalent panel which uses LED illumination for more money and seemingly a greater chance of defects. If I want wide gamut, I can't have adaptive sync, nor a higher refresh rate and god forbid I want something with no defects.
Seems that these manufacturers have made a lot of progress over the last 9 years.
Seems that these manufacturers have made a lot of progress over the last 9 years.
Last edited:
Wow - that sucks
It's almost as if no-one tests these things with real world use cases. I'd hate to think about getting a multi-host set-up (whether external KVM switch or not) working with that going on, but it shouldn't be up to users or prospective customers to discover these problems. It would be nice if there was a greater standard of professionalism in the realm of monitor testing, but I can't see that happening without money or industry support.
especially bad on monitors, because a bug on gpu e.g. easily fixed by driver, but there is no easy way to flash monitor firmware.