why are 4k monitors so much more expensive than 4k TVs?

Associate
Joined
8 Sep 2014
Posts
372
Sadly depending on the manufacturer, some won't accept them back and it's the shops loss. Sure somebody from ocuk said once there is a skip full of smashed up high end monitors costing hunderds of pounds each

Of course they dont want them back there crap lol and they know this when they sell them pity they wernt put in skip after qc , oh wait there is no qc so lets ofload them to the consumer they wont suspect a thing.

cue evil corporate laugh ...... muhahaha :)
 
Associate
Joined
29 Aug 2004
Posts
2,381
Location
Alpha centauri
Regardless of why 4k monitors are so much more expensive than 4k TVs after using 4K screens 32in and 40in over the last three years I would never go back to 1440 or 1080 the extra sharpness and more screen space is a winner every time.
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
Regardless of why 4k monitors are so much more expensive than 4k TVs after using 4K screens 32in and 40in over the last three years I would never go back to 1440 or 1080 the extra sharpness and more screen space is a winner every time.

Yes, of course. And in future the only way to go is for screens with more pixels.
I do wonder, though, why not stating this a strategic goal and subsidising the market, or some type of necessary global policy in order to make them popular as fast as the manufacturers can.
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
It is so really annoying and frustrating. 4K monitors are extremely expensive. In comparison, 4K TV screens are relatively cheappish.
On the other hand, 1920x1080 monitors are dirty cheap, actually so cheap as being ****. As if they are consumables - today buy one for £70-£80, after 3 months buy a new one.
So, why are these so cheap? :confused: :eek: :( :rolleyes:
 
Associate
Joined
6 Dec 2007
Posts
1,368
Location
Cambridge
Production costs will be through the floor now, at a guess... 4K still isn't ready for mainstream desktops yet - Windows 10 hasn't nailed scaling (yet), HDR/Dolbyvision still hasn't been fought out, 10bit+ colour isn't well supported, you can only play UHD blu-rays on intel IGPs, the wrong HDCP is baked into half the 4K monitors on the market. And that's not to mention GPU performance!
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
Production costs will be through the floor now, at a guess... 4K still isn't ready for mainstream desktops yet - Windows 10 hasn't nailed scaling (yet), HDR/Dolbyvision still hasn't been fought out, 10bit+ colour isn't well supported, you can only play UHD blu-rays on intel IGPs, the wrong HDCP is baked into half the 4K monitors on the market. And that's not to mention GPU performance!

I am sure the Japanese began the research on 4K back in the late 90s. This is already 20 years ago, if you can imagine how large scale of time this is in the technology world.
There is something else that stops the availability now.
Imagine these 70-80 pounds monitors, this is their retail price, their production cost is probably 1/10th, max 1/5th of that.

There is information regarding the subject: Everybody Wants 4K: New Research Shows Massive UHD TV Sales Surge

New research and sales analysis out today has revealed that approximately one in every eight North American homes will own an Ultra HD/4K TV before the end of 2016.

According to a report by Strategy Analytics, this eye-catching figure - which equates to more than 11 million North American homes - is the result of rapidly falling prices for 4K TVs and increased availability that’s seen shipments of 4K TVs to the region this year surge by more than 70%.

The Strategy Analytics report also makes the point that North America’s penchant for very big TVs relative to other regions around the world has played a part in Ultra HD’s success there. More than 80% of Ultra HD TVs shipped in 2015 were 50-inch or bigger, at the same time that big-screen TVs which don’t have Ultra HD native resolutions have been becoming increasingly hard to find as manufacturers switch production over to the higher resolution format.

In fact, Strategy Analytics predicts that by 2020 all 40-inch and bigger TVs sold in North America will be Ultra HD - by which time, the report also suggests, almost half of all North American homes will own at least one Ultra HD TV.

The figures reported give North America the highest levels of Ultra HD TV ownership anywhere in the world - though the report also stresses that when it comes to shipments of Ultra HD TVs China is miles ahead of the pack, with as much as 25% of domestic shipments coming from such Chinese brands as TCL, Skyworth and Hisense.

Looking elsewhere around the globe, Strategy Analytics reports that the Western European UHD TV market also performed very nicely in 2015, shipping more than five million sets on the back of strong demand from Germany and the UK - two countries which became the first outside the USA and China to ship more than one million 4K TVs in a single a year.

So striking are the latest 4K sales and shipment figures, in fact, that the higher-resolution format now appears to be fully established in the mainstream, with the TV industry’s focus already shifting to ‘what’s next’.

“2160p resolution has almost become a given in the large screen TV market,” says David Watkins, Director of Strategy Analytics' Connected Home Devices service, “and attention is now turning to other attributes that fall under the Ultra HD umbrella such as high dynamic range [explained here], wide color gamut and high frame rates. A high proportion of mid to high-end Ultra HD TVs sold this year will support HDR which in combination with higher resolution and enhanced color representation will deliver a significant step change improvement to the TV viewing experience beyond resolution alone.”

At the same time, though, Strategy Analytics notes that while the hardware part of the UHD equation is essentially a done deal, the content part certainly isn’t there yet. As Strategy Analytics’ Connected Home Devices Analyst Chirag Upadhyay puts it: “"The uptake of Ultra HD bears many of the same hallmarks as the early days of "basic" HD in that TV manufacturers have been very quick to seed the market with the necessary displays but there is very little in the way of content in order to take advantage of the full potential of the technology.

"In the case of Ultra HD," Upadhyay continues, "streaming services such as Netflix NFLX +3.68% and Amazon are offering some Ultra HD programming but with less than 10 full time Ultra HD channels operating globally today, most consumers have to make do with generally less than impressive up-converted content.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...earch-shows-massive-sales-surge/#5d28418a28d8

And more via wikipedia:

In 2015, the 4K television market share increased as prices fell dramatically during 2014[2] and 2015. By 2020, more than half of U.S. households are expected to have 4K-capable TVs (2160p)[3], which would be a much faster adoption rate than that of Full HD (1080p).[4]

The first commercially available 4K camera for cinematographic purposes was the Dalsa Origin, released in 2003.[24][25] YouTube began supporting 4K for video uploads in 2010 as a result of leading manufacturers producing 4K cameras.[26] Users could view 4K video by selecting "Original" from the quality settings until December 2013, when the 2160p option appeared in the quality menu.[27] In November 2013, YouTube started to use the VP9 video compression standard, saying that it was more suitable for 4K than High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC); VP9 is being developed by Google which owns YouTube.[26]

The projection of movies at 4K resolution at cinemas began in 2011.[28] Sony was offering 4K projectors as early as 2004.[29] The first 4K home theaterprojector was released by Sony in 2012.[30]

Sony is one of the leading studios promoting UHDTV content, as of 2013 offering a little over 70 movie and television titles via digital download to a specialized player that stores and decodes the video. The large files (~40GB), distributed through consumer broadband connections, raise concerns about data caps.[31]

In 2014, Netflix began streaming House of Cards, Breaking Bad,[32] and "some nature documentaries" at 4K to compatible televisions with an HEVC decoder. Most 4K televisions sold in 2013 did not natively support HEVC, with most major manufacturers announcing support in 2014.[33] Amazon Studios began shooting their full-length original series and new pilots with 4K resolution in 2014.[34] They are now currently available though Amazon Video.[35]

In March 2016 the first players and discs for Ultra HD Blu-ray—a physical optical disc format supporting 4K resolution and HDR at 60 frames per second—were released.[36]

In 2016, Sony and Microsoft released the PlayStation 4 Pro and Xbox One S, respectively, both of which are video game consoles that support 4K streaming and gaming, although in most cases the resolution is upscaled to 4K; the Xbox One S also features an Ultra HD Blu-ray disc drive. On November 7, 2017 Microsoft released the Xbox One X, which is capable of native 4K streaming and gaming.[37]




Windows 10 scaling with 4K is just fine, come on!
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
30,921
Had no problems with scaling at 4k on windows 10.

IMO, 4k is massively over hyped though.

The panel type such as OLED and true HDR are FAR better than a higher resolution/PPI (1080P is still very good even on large displays as long as you sit the appropriate distance)
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Posts
6,558
Interesting to read the comments from a year and more ago where people were asserting that monitors were in most people's homes etc.

These days I can think of very few people I know that have a desktop PC at home, unless they game, and even those people tend to use consoles these days.

It's easy to forget on here that for the most part people can get their internet fix via tablets and laptops and very rarely need to have a PC unless they need the additional grunt for work or gaming.

I can only see the monitor market shrinking further compared to TVs and therefore the disparity in perceived value increasing.
 
Permabanned
Joined
2 Sep 2017
Posts
10,490
Interesting to read the comments from a year and more ago where people were asserting that monitors were in most people's homes etc.

These days I can think of very few people I know that have a desktop PC at home, unless they game, and even those people tend to use consoles these days.

It's easy to forget on here that for the most part people can get their internet fix via tablets and laptops and very rarely need to have a PC unless they need the additional grunt for work or gaming.

Home PC but what about corporate office and factory PCs that need new monitors?!
Let's torture their employees with antiquity screens and zero ergonomics functions, shall we?
 
Associate
Joined
29 Aug 2004
Posts
2,381
Location
Alpha centauri
Interesting to read the comments from a year and more ago where people were asserting that monitors were in most people's homes etc.

These days I can think of very few people I know that have a desktop PC at home, unless they game, and even those people tend to use consoles these days.

It's easy to forget on here that for the most part people can get their internet fix via tablets and laptops and very rarely need to have a PC unless they need the additional grunt for work or gaming.

I can only see the monitor market shrinking further compared to TVs and therefore the disparity in perceived value increasing.


How very true the only desktop pc I have is for gaming and laptops for anything else that said I do plug my laptops into 4K monitors when needed.
 
Back
Top Bottom