Is this the best 4k monitor for the price? Ips but 6ms response time.
what is that
how much is it gonna cost
where can I buy it
what does it compare to
have you been doing any reviews at all
ips does not necessarily have bad response time, even cheap ones
>>54909770
No. The LG one is better.
>>54909792
It's like $449 on Amazon for the 27 inch. At the price point it competes with the TN panel monitors by Samsung and Acer I think they have better response time like 1-3ms. I'm asking though not so smart on this stuff.
>>54909809
What lg one?
>>54909770
>6ms
fuck dat lagboi
>>54909809
this, would get the LG too (although, the samsung is even cheaper)
>>54909999
Thanks senpai
>>54909999
witnessed
>>54909999
Nice quads boi. How reliable are these panels? I thought Dell was the best monitor vendor due to their no dead pixel policy.
>IPS
I mean even the TN 99€ monitor poorfags will be like dude your monitor sucks when you show them any movie on it.
>Backlight Bleed
>IPS Glow
thanks Ill stick to my 144Hz TN, I, like any other normal people use my monitor from front, not from a 179 degree angle.
>>54910480
ewww those faded colors
>>54910480
>I, like any other normal people use my monitor from front, not from a 179 degree angle.
Yeah. With TN panels, you see color shift from the bottom to the top of the monitor even while sitting directly in front of it. Also they just generally look like ass compared to IPS or PVA.
>>54910480
>preferring TN over IPS
Nah way boi lol.
>>54909770
I bought this monitor around this time last year no ragrets I game on it erryday.
what about the 4k asus gsync monitor?
>>54910495
ewww no blacks
>>54910532
That's racist
>>54910506
>>54910502
>>54909770
>4k monitor for the price
buy korean monitor from ebay
>>54910351
dont have the monitor yet myself, but read great reviews and thinking about buying it.
allegedly, lg supplies applel with panels, so they must be of some quality. also it has freesync and the only con on most review sites is backlight bleeding.
>>54910728
I think that's a problem with edge lit ips displays same with the dell
>>54910615
Are they really trustworth? These are unbelievably cheap with free international shipping, there has to be a catch to this
If not then it's 4K galore
>>54910863
The worst case is you get dead pixels.
You won't even fucking see them on a 4k monitor though.
>>54910907
Are there any good Korean brand names like qnix?
>IPS
Trash
>>54910934
http://www.koreanmonitor.com/guide-2015/
I'm lazy just google for more specific shit.
Best 4k monitor is asus new 144hz 4k ips one.
>>54909770
>Ips
Literally a buzzword that means nothing.
Bought a X2483HSU at a comfy 160$ discount price. The AMVA+ display suits my needs perfectly, offering a nice middle ground between a TN and IPS panel. Gaming and watching movies feels just about right.
There is literally no reason to buy a 4k screen unless it's over 32 inches.
>>54910793
yeah, have IPS by dell right now and the backlight bleeding doesnt disturb me much.
>>54910986
lol, I have IPS and TN right next to each other. the TN has noticable colour shift if you dont position it well. but for gamers it is better and cheaper too
who the fuck cares about response time. are you playing video games at a competitive level?
>>54910994
>There is literally no reason to buy a 4k screen unless it's over 32 inches.
this, it is beyond me why dell made a 23,8 inch 4k monitor.
Dells 43" 4K just came out fyi.
Furthermore, if you want to have a 4k gaming experience, why not buy a decent Full 4k 40inch+ TV? It is much, much comfier that way.
>>54910907
Man these are so fucking cheap I can get a decent GPU without going past budget oh fuck baby
>>54911029
Preach it, brother
>>54911141
Most people don't have the desk space and might want to use the display for other purposes that 40" might be too big for
>>54911308
I got a shimian 1440p for 160 bucks last year. Shit works great, looks good and has nice viewing angles. The only issue I have is it has a really minor scratch on the bottom right of the screen that's literally impossible to see unless you lower your face to its level and look directly at it over some text.
Didn't think it was worth bitching about and am very satisfied with my purchase.
Fucking vesa mount too yo.
>>54911141
>33ms+ input lag
>comfy
>>54911556
you would literally deny 0 creeps in dota
>>54911773
>dota
Also nevermind vidya, that much lag is horrid for general desktop use even.
>>54911141
I have a 55 inch IPS tv and the input lag is horrendous just using desktop environment. TVs are simply not meant to be monitors, that's why they're called TVs not monitors ya dingus.
is aoc Q3277PQU ok for gaming?
>>54911044
>no reason to have more than 140dpi
only if you are blind or want to see each pixel
>>54912594
depends on the viewing distance. Of course I can see the pixels when I put my head 15 inches from the screen, the question is, why would I do that?
>>54912097
I've got a tv with a "gaming" mode that turns off all post processing. Makes the latency pritty much the same as a proper desktop display. But without that feature, its ungodly laggy.
>>54909999
>>54910351
got it a couple months ago and so far it's been pretty good.
no dead pixels or any other problems.
didn't even care about freesync that much when I bought it but it's actually a very nice feature too.
I'd only buy now if you need it though. prices are dropping pretty fast for 4k monitors. you can probably get the same model for 100$ less if you wait a couple months.
What about the curved lg monitors those any good?
>>54910571
>one of the monitors are literally broken
Google strikes again
So 27 inch 4k is bad
>>54914703
i would get a 27/28 4k, but if I could afford it I would go 32 inch.
>>54914889
What about those fucking weird ultra wide ones seems like it removes the need for more than one monitor
>>54914957
I already have a good primary monitor though, I would use it as a secondary, so no need for wide screen.
but again, if you have the money, the ultra wide curved monitors seem very immersive for gaming
>>54909770
>>54909809
>>54909854
>>54909958
>>54909999
>>54910160
>>54910304
>>54910351
>>54910480
>>54910495
>>54910502
>>54910506
>>54910508
>>54910531
>>54910532
>>54910550
>>54910571
>>54910615
>>54910728
>>54910793
>>54910863
>>54910907
>>54910934
>>54910947
>>54910953
>>54910972
>>54910986
>>54910994
>>54911023
>>54911029
>>54911044
>>54911056
>>54911141
>>54911308
>>54911399
>>54911556
>>54911773
>>54911860
>>54912097
>>54912287
>>54912594
>>54912661
>>54912825
>>54913042
>>54913589
>>54914036
>>54914703
>>54914889
>>54914957
>>54915092
>fucking 2016
>not buying the Dell P4317Q MASTER RACE
Get out of my /g/, plebs!
get a 4k inch tv
disable some settings that cause latency
enjoy 60fps
would you buy a 1080p 27" monitor?
>>54909999
>>54909770
Those LG ones have free-sync they're easily the best 27" 4K display to buy
>>54916541
I just got this. How fucked am I?
>tfw 144hz benq 2430t masterrace
>>54916591
this. scale 4k to 1080 so you get the same environment so you're not retardedly ignoring Fitts' Law, but sharper details. 4k at 27" doesn't make sense (just like 4k at 40" is retarded - that's just a fucking TV, you idiots).
4k -> 24" because that's roughly the size that the resolution 1/2 would be (1920x1080)
5k -> 27-30" because that's 2x of 2560x1440, which are the resolutions you tend to see at those screen sizes.
8k could be flat out doubling of 4k at 24" but i suspect that the cost would make that unreasonable. i don't know of monitors that would be (7680x4320)/2 (or 3840x2160), but maybe 30" will "reclaim" that since 27" is taking (2560x1440)*2 (for a while 30" monitors were that resolution).
>>54916688
"that's just a fucking TV, you idiots"
>what is ppi
>what is comfortable viewing
lurk more kid
>>54916779
if you're just viewing, then fitts' law doesn't play into this discussion at all. also, that's a TV.
>>54916799
>implying a monitor isn't a tv without a tuner or ROM for channels
>>54916847
honestly dude i know you're just trying to be funny but you're coming off as pedantic bordering on autistic.
>>54910571
>search for a specific term and get results
wow its fucking nothing
>>54914889
The point of a high PPI is to make the pixels small so (some) graphics and text look better.
Since your sitting distance remains the same at the desk, by increasing the monitor size you're just lowering the PPI.
27" at 4K is hard to read text comfortably, I have it scaled it 150% and thinks look good.
>>54916855
>emphasizes on monitors being different 200 times
>calls me pedantic / autistic
Makes me feel grateful for having self-awareness as an ability, it's overlooked but rare obviously
Found a cheap LG 27" IPS monitor for like $150.
It's probably not as good quality, but is it worth getting a cheapshit IPS panel?
iMac 5k, oh wait never mind. /g/ is just a bunch of children without income living in their momma's basement.
>>54916946
>It's probably not as good quality, but is it worth getting a cheapshit IPS panel?
what are you trying to accomplish ?
I dont know about you, but out of my entire PC the monitor usually lasts me the longest, are you sure you want to cheap on that ? unless you are totally fine getting something else/better in the near future.
>>54916910
>27" at 4K is hard to read text comfortably, I have it scaled it 150% and thinks look good.
not him, but i'm replying anyway.
150% sounds like the right setting, but "even" OS X (which has been pushing high pixel density displays more seriously than other operating systems for the longest, so it should be better than Windows and most Linux DEs for instance) doesn't handle scaling perfectly.
a while back i mocked up this really shitty sketch of what i'm talking about. basically if you're going to do scaling at all, you would (naturally) have some integral scaling going on. you *could* do it so that a 2x2 pixel configuration on a standard density display becomes 3x3, but thank fuck that's not happening right now.
so right now we're seeing 1x1 become 2x2 (that's what "retina" displays do), or occasionally 3x3. let's ignore the size of the monitor for a moment, but we'll come back to it later.
the problem with 3x3 is that you have to figure out interpolation for what was once a simple problem. if you had 1 pixel that was either on or off but now you have 2x2, then if a program doesn't know what to do with retina displays the operating system can just say "it's fine just pretend this 2x2 panel is 1 pixel" and everything fails in a non-chaotic way.
in a 3x3 configuration, the operating system has to work out what to do if images are provided to account for 2x2 panels, because now only the corner pixels are obvious, and all the rest are half (or less) in various other states. determining the right interpolated value becomes really messy, both taxing the processor (be it CPU or GPU) and resulting in a suboptimal outcome.
I don't think i have space to write about the LCD panel size, but [insert all the shit apple gave us about optimal viewing distances and whatnot]. that's kind of generally right, but it's more like a point of diminishing returns. more pixels will always be more detail, but not as much more detail as the previous step gave us.
Massdrop has this going, want to pull the trigger, but unsure whether 4k is a meme yet. Basically debating whether 4k 60hz is better or 1440p 144hz. I play video games occasionally, but don't think I'll be able to support 4k.
https://www.massdrop.com/buy/lg-27-4k-freesync-monitor-27ud68p-b
>>54916971
Well I just want to get rid of my 32" 720p TV, so I can have two 1080p mountable monitors, and get a dual mounting arm.
Basically I don't want to invest money in a 1080p panel, if in the end I won't be seeing better than 1080. I'll invest in a 1440p once I have a strong enough PC.
I'm glad we all agree that 24" is the best monitor size.
>>54917083
You could try not calling everything a meme, might help your retardation
>>54917100
If you're stuck at 1080p
>>54917100
Why would a 24" 1080p IPS be better than a 27?
More screen bigger tits
What do you guys think about the Acer S277HK? It's $407 on Amazon right now.
>>54917116
27" at 1080p the pixels are huge, unless you're blind of course.
>>54917150
Is this true? Because I was about to get a 27" 1080p
Currently own a 24" 1080p, and have no complaints about pixel density/size
>>54917100
well it's not that 24" is the best monitor size necessarily (i mean, i think it's pretty great, but i'm not willing to argue about it with someone), but that 4k scales from 1080p perfectly, and that size obviously suits 24" monitors (or maybe 22" monitors) best. nobody was pushing 27" 1080p monitors in 2013 or 2014, because we all knew that would be awful.
i imagine a 30" 8k display would be the endgame for me in terms of resolution. after that, i'd only be on the lookout for
- higher refresh rates (not because i game, but because mousing around at 30Hz is marginally less pleasant than mousing around at 60Hz and that's marginally less pleasant than at 120Hz, etc... even if you don't game)
- better color accuracy (because once we've hit a "plateau" for pixel density and refresh rates (where MUCH higher only yields marginally BETTER experience) we might as well focus on colors)
- ??? i don't know.
i imagine apple will find a way to make some criterion the obvious killer feature and everyone will jump on it. at the moment the only things i can think of as important to me are the pixel density, size, color, and refresh rates. maybe input lag as well, but at ~1-6ms we're already doing all right.
>>54917164
yeah it drops to 90 ppi
>>54917064
>that's kind of generally right, but it's more like a point of diminishing returns.
This is also true for interpolation though.
After you reach a high enough pixel density, having integer scaling factors doesn't matter anymore.
In your example, the border pixel that would have to be "split" in a non-integer scaling, it would be so small that it doesn't make a difference whether it takes one state or the other.
With high pixel densities, you can treat the surface as a continuum (instead of discrete pixels), and you can do any kind of weirdass scaling you like, just like drawing on a balloon and inflating/deflating at will. The sketch scales continuously, no need for integer scaling.
What are reliable monitor brands?
>>54917253
Dell
BenQ
Acer
LG
Samsung
Asus would be the riskiest I'd go since they're known to commonly have dead pixels and bad backlight bleed. However they have a very good rma service, so you can basically keep sending them back until you win the lottery and get a good one.
Honestly just don't go with a no name brand and you should be good.
>>54917198
wow, this is a genuinely insightful post. i'm honestly really grateful that you didn't descend into calling everyone a faggot or a retard.
you're correct on all counts, but i would counter by pointing out that we're not quite at a continuous pixel level yet (although we *are* approaching it), and perhaps more importantly the issue of interpolating adds a non-trivial amount of calculation to otherwise *really* trivial rendering problems.
going from a single pixel to 2x2 pixels with an image is really easy. rending 2x2 pixels as 3x3 requires a series of calculations that we can only obviate away so much.
maybe at some point video cards (or even integrated graphics) will be so competent at handling all this stuff that it won't matter how gnarly interpolation will be - they'll be able to handle everything on the fly without any issue - but at the moment we're barely keeping up with stuff. we don't, for instance, have it in the current tech to push 4k at 120Hz without seriously hacky solutions. 5k and 8k at 120Hz or higher are just not happening, and i suspect that we're going to struggle to do more than render desktops (facebook/youtube/videos) at these resolutions until another generation or two out. and this is assuming the best of video cable standards (right now there is absolutely no talk about a displayport standard that could give us 8k at 60Hz except by compression (albeit "visually lossless", which just means "good compression" - your call on what "good" means).
>>54917064
I understand what you're saying but if the PPI is high enough , then you won't notice the scaling 'errors' anyways since the individual pixels are so small to begin with
Like >>54917198
said
That is why I am generally against 40+ or larger 4K 'monitors' and then using it at native resolution. Those people have the same PPI as a 20" 1080p display, completely missing the point of high PPI but boasting about something few people these days care about which is screen real estate.
>>54917365
yeah, so i think he and you are generally right about it likely not being that noticeable (although for two problems:
1) i'm not confident enough to give it a shot, and
2) it's highly OS-dependent - if your operating system sucks at scaling to something as simple as 2x (as windows did for a long time), then scaling to 1.5x would be gruesome
but there's still the issue of the "cost" of interpolation. in OS X the best way they came up with to handle it was to render everything at 2x no matter what and then scale down to the screen, which means if you're displaying a 15" rMBP "as though it's 1920x1080" then it's actually rendering a 4k image and then downscaling to 2880x1800, which is pretty CPU-intensive but also the best way to simplify the problem.
i guess on a desktop this isn't that much of an issue. i have a few 4k monitors on my hackintosh and i never hear my GPU, so i guess if I ran it at some effective resolution that required interpolation, it might only spin up the fans a bit more.
i think i'm reasonably convinced that an interpolated screen is okay, but i still wouldn't prefer it. i like simple upgrade steps, and i worry about a long drawn out fight among display manufacturers trying to establish de facto standards when a simple doubling would be much easier (if slightly more expensive for them).
>>54909770
>27in 4k
might as well buy a 1440p screens since you're just going to upscale to shit anyway
>>54917365
>completely missing the point of high PPI but boasting about something few people these days care about which is screen real estate.
i bet you daily desktop screenshot threads also
