>Before the end of this year a 35" HDR 200hz VA panel

whats wrong with oled monitors? my laptop has oled its absolutely fantastic.
why would you want that instead?

>>61187124

Because of the incredibly fast response and 3440x1440 is much easier to drive than 4K

And it's for having on your desk

Why not just buy a monitor arm?

File: 1497025935956.jpg (29KB, 630x662px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 630x662px

>>61187102
that's a stupidly stupidly large monitor
(and ultrawide a shit)

>>61187186
i never noticed any slowness from oled. they should just make more oled monitors, at least to have the fucking choice.

>>61187102
>gsync
Enjoy that premium.

>>61187374
I am going to if I get this monitor, these xGam3rx designs are really stupid

>>61187390
35"~ is not that large at all for a desk, you sit about 1m away from it and it's perfect

>>61187102
>3440x1440
Not even once

>>61187471
Why not?

>Having a monitor over 27"
24" is perfect, wish there was 25", but there isn't.
Why isn't there 25" or 26" screens?
>200hz
>Not 240 or 180

>>61187124
>whats wrong with oled monitors
They're superior in every way to anything else.
Sadly the average human is too dumb to care about PQ, hence why both Plasma and OLED are RIP
And if lucky, we'll get equivalent PQ in around 10 years of LCD gimmick upon gimmick "improvements"

>>61187484
24" is perfect? fucking how?

have you heard of proper large desks and sitting further than 20 cm away from your screen

>>61187481
>Why not?
Retarded format
Black Bars from watching anything non kino.
Dual monitor setup is infinitely superior and much cheaper.
3440x1440 is above human max FOV->wasted pixels in gaming

>>61187440
My monitor is 27" and that's already more than necessary. Spend your neetbux on things that are worth it.

>>61187124

is there a 34"+ 200hz 3440x1440 oled around anywhere??? huh??

do you see it anywhere my friend???

they are only in 4k, 60hz and laggy as shit

File: 1496613977462.jpg (8KB, 275x183px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 275x183px

>>61187484
>2017
>24"

>>61187527
I have 23" and sit about 35 or 40 cm away from it (I want a 26")
Sorry for your nearsightedness grandpa

>>61187539
>Black Bars from watching anything non kino.

as opposed to literally nothing or your wall behind your screen.. it's a VA panel, so black color is as black as it gets, you don't notice any bars

>3440x1440 is above human max FOV->wasted pixels in gaming

sit further away dummy

>>61187548
>27" and that's already more than necessary

Even normies have 50" now as standard for a screen.

You fat autists are still stuck in the 90s with ur shitty tiny monitors you cram your face up to to see shit on your dumb "gaming" chairs.

>>61187574
>it's a VA panel, so black color is as black as it gets
No it isn't. VA is shit.
>sit further away dummy
So I can see shit behind it above and below the monitor, making the experience even shittier?

>>61187539
>FOV
>pixels
>Having a connection

>>61187567
>2017
>23"

lmao fucking how

some brazilian tier battlestation?

>>61187663
It's 3 years old and I'm still poor

>>61187124
B U R N I N
U
R
N

I
N

>>61187675
Treat yourself with at least 27" and 120hz when you get the chance bro

File: 1498380844990.jpg (44KB, 450x488px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 450x488px

>>61187660
are u the 23" 15yo retard from above?

FOV= % of the screen you can actually see in focus=% of pixels rendered laterally on the screen for no reason as you can't see them.

Unless as the other guy said you sit father back, thereby ruining vertical FOV.

It's like talking to chimps I swear.

File: 1455891929353.png (643KB, 1022x731px) Image search: [Google]

643KB, 1022x731px

>>61187598
This is insane, not everything has to be supersized. Do you shovel cash at everything you do like this? Do you have large format printers, medium format cameras, electrostatic amps, and a diamond encrusted mobile phone too?

It's all so fickle, so pointless. It won't fill the hole, anon. You're still going to die a virgin.

>>61187484
>Why isn't there 25" or 26" screens?
Dell makes UltraSharp monitors that are 25" with 2560 x 1440 resolution.
Only bad thing is you can't get them with a higher refresh rate than 60hz

>>61187549
but they should make more, you know at least give choices.

>1440
>Gsync
>""""Ultra""""wide

Why not just come out of the closet already?

>>61187711
>This is insane, not everything has to be supersized
You know CINEMA has had large screens since 80 years ago right?
The only reason home setups couldn't is bc of tech limitations with CRT and then LCD/Plasma affordability.

>retarded gibberish

>It's all so fickle, so pointless. It won't fill the hole, anon. You're still going to die a virgin.
I'm not the poorfag neckbeard with a tiny screen and gaming chair rotting away at his "battlestation".
I'm a normie and am arguing for normal stuff.
You're just retarded.

>>61187737
t. 24" 1080p user stuck in early 2000s

>>61187711
if it's all so pointless then why the fuck would you rather have something inferior when you could have something objectively better and more fun

who the fuck would, if they could get one for free, pick a tiny 1080p shit over a large ultrawide

File: 1498601432835.jpg (35KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 300x300px

>>61187750
Wow, you're getting very worked up over justifying yourself anon. You should lie down and take a chill pill.

File: LG_43ud790_b_screen_layout.png (26KB, 650x450px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 650x450px

>>61187752
40 inch 4k illegal alien actually.

Keep half-stepping for shit tier displays though.

File: serveimage.jpg (72KB, 1000x1033px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1000x1033px

>>61187752
>early 2000s

>>61187845
standard BTFO child response

go back to whatever shithole you crawled out from /r9k/ mayhaps?

File: cat jpg.jpg (79KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 600x800px

Oh god, I cant believe that someone unironically using <27' in 2017.

Also, ultrawide is a meme. 1440p vertical? Are you kidding me?

>>61187860
yeah have fun with that 60hz beast right up into your face at your desk! i prefer something fast and responsive

>>61187877
1:1 aspect ratio master race

>bent

Into the trash it goes.

>>61187860
O I want to buy that model actually, how is it? Any ghosting?

>>61187908
>60hz beast

le my literal new gimmick renders the standard since forever now completely worthless lel
kys

>>61187982
how the fuck is something objectively superior and nicer on the eyes a gimmick

jesus christ lmao

>>61187908
Enjoy looking at your content squinting through a parascope.

>>61187918
It ghosts on solid black text on white backgrounds when you scroll super fast through content. Beyond that? It's damn near perfection. There are a few minor issues, but that's more to do with technical limitations than anything else.

File: main-qimg-b810cffe41af2facfeca10c818aa47c8.gif (8KB, 472x267px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 472x267px

>>61187539
>3440x1440 is above human max FOV
u wot m8?

>>61188026
35" 3440x1440 is not small whatsoever, it's perfectly sized

what is with these fucking RETARDED stands

no, really, what the fuck is that

something they found off the floor of a factory?

>>61188006
>how the fuck is something objectively superior and nicer on the eyes a gimmick

It's not per se.

It becomes a gimmick when:

>you need to tradeoff size/price for it
>you act as if anything non including said gimmick is utterly horrible shit you can't fathom having used for 20 years prior bc you're a retarded child

All these techs/gimmicks are incremental relatively small upgrayds, same as HDR, 4k, etc. Nice yes, but not end of the world relevant.

Essentially memes.

>>61188074
to be honest once you've used 120hz+ for a while going back to 60hz fucking hurts

also no, high refresh rate is not expensive anymore, it's not 2010 any longer

>>61188026
>There are a few minor issues

Like what? Dark corners?

>>61188033
>u wot m8?
FOV=/=Focused FOV

Very narrow vertical size means you're forced to sit VERY CLOSE if you wanna keep any kinda semblance of immersion/not see shit behind it. Hence the wasted horizontal pixelage.

>>61188111
do you realize this "too large for eyes fov" is a really retarded excuse for being a negative thing about ultrawide monitors

ever heard of people having two or even three monitors horizontally? for productive purposes?

christ some of the posts here are really stupid

>>61188094
>also no, high refresh rate is not expensive anymore, it's not 2010 any longer

have you even read or comprehend my very post?

>>you need to tradeoff SIZE/price for it

Find me a 60hz+ BIG screen that's not retarded expensive

>>61188136
what do you consider retarded expensive?

>>61188131
>"too large for eyes fov" is a really retarded excuse for being a negative thing about ultrawide monitors

We're not talking productivity, but general use case and gaming /media.

>implying 3 monitors sorround setups aren't also retarded?

>>61188149
>what do you consider retarded expensive?
You tell me, you're the one that claimed they were
"not expensive anymore, it's not 2010 any longer"

Take your best shot champ

>>61188153
>but general use case and gaming /media.
heard of VR? you don't need the entire fucking screen focused perfectly to have a good time playing a game on it, having your peripheral filled is good too

>>61188102
Like viewing angles, it doesn't have 10-bit HDR which really helps the contrast. The screen is so large, that even though it is a nice IPS, the viewing angles could be just a bit better. There is next to no light bleed.

For the money though, and the fact I can hook up multiple devices to it for split screen work with one mouse and keyboard, it is a god send.

>>61188172
i can find several 2560x1440 24-32" 120hz+ TN/IPS monitors for between $300-500

is that retarded expensive?

>>61188038
For you.

It's vertical height is similar to what, 24-27'? I'll take much more screen real estate that is usable, versus placebo peripheral immersion.

>i can't afford or use more resolution there it is objectively bad: the thread

The only issue with that monitor is the price. I'm sorry, but I'm just not paying $2000 for an LCD monitor. I could accept that as an early adopter tax for a real breakthrough like OLED, but at the end of the day this is just a nice VA panel with HDR.

>>61188203
>you don't need the entire fucking screen focused perfectly to have a good time playing a game on it

Hence why they're wasted pixels. You're essentially paying for the physical monitor to render them on, and the CPU/GPU power to render them, for naught, since you can't even see them.

That was the entire point. It's not bad per se, and if you wanna do it go ahead.

But let's not pretend it's "good" or "optimal" or a selling point.

>>61188237
> 2560x1440 24-32" 120hz+ TN/IPS monitors for between $300-500

Post a DECENT 32" 120hz IPS (no TN shit)

And keeping in mind you can get a 55" IPS 4k HDR screen for around 650$

>>61188284
A good TN is better than a bad IPS.

>>61188255
>i can't afford or use more resolution there it is objectively bad: the thread

Yea that's how consumer electronics works dipshit.

Price is always a factor.

If your retarded logic was correct, why the fuck not make threads about 12,000$ monitors that no one except I can afford and then just mock everyone posting on them bc "lel poorfag"

>>61188315
that doesn't make something bad

>>61188309
>A good TN is better than a bad IPS
Translation: I was pulling stuff out of my arse and they're expensive as hell apart from chinkshit tn ones

>>61188322
>that doesn't make something bad
It makes it a bad deal and irrelevant.
Now go away

>>61188284
The Samsung CHG70, although that's a VA panel. Better colors than IPS with Quantum Dot and drastically better contrast though.

It's $699 though, so he is full of shit.

>>61188309
No way. I've had a "good TN"(my brother's Dell G-Sync thing, whatever the model number is) next to a $100 Acer 6 bit+FRC IPS. Acer looked way better.

>>61188330
it's true though
new TN panels are as good or better than older IPS panels
the only bad thing with TN being the viewing angles

>>61187102
>still no oled
yeah I'll stick with my crt for now

>>61188094
>going back to 60hz fucking hurts

Movies are 24fps and tv is 30fps

>mouse cursor is not an argument

File: p03w7w6r.jpg (70KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1280x720px

>>61188210
Yeah I guess you can't expect it to be perfect for that price. Probably going to order one next week, getting sick of my current replacement TN shit.

>>61188361
>new TN panels are as good or better than older IPS panels
Yes but older IPS panels sucked ass, espcially the black levels were pathetic.
Image depth basically non existent.

File: desktop.jpg (276KB, 2270x1277px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 2270x1277px

Whats wrong with 23 and 24 inch monitors? I really like mine, no problems with them.
I have an Acer GN246HL and an AOC2343. I spend like 14 or so hours a day in my web browser and play games some times. Haven't found any movies or TV shows that are watchable to me in a long time so I don't consume much video but when I do it seems fine. Don't have a television either.

>>61188578
nice brazilian setup there bro

>>61188683
I'm so deeply insulted I am not sure how to respond.
I quit my favorite game because the number of Brazilians in the LFG system was larger than the number of Americans which of course resulted in the game not being playable.
If I want 27 inches I need 1440p because 1080p isn't enough which means I have to spend a pile of money because I'm never going back to 60hz on my main monitor which means I basically need a 1080ti.
That's a ton of fucking money for 3 inches.

>>61188578
Nothing, any dual monitor setup is better than any curveshit

>>61188720
i literally just meant those desks. you don't got ikea or some equivalent there? get some neat proper desk(s), without built in drawers like you've got there, that is bad for posture and ergonomics

>>61188758
What's wrong with them? No, no ikea. We only have walmart really.

>>61188720
it's shit bro.
Maybe if you didn't fall for the Hetz gimmick you could have a nice big screen, instead you got that favela setupid with shitty microscopic horrible TN panels

>>61188388
What do you even use for a GPU though? Jewish vendors quit putting RAMDACs on cards several years ago (i.e., not even DVI-I), and nobody makes DP -> VGA dongles with non-shit bandwidth.

>>61188803
I don't know how it's a gimmick when the game feels multiple times smoother when I drag it from the 60hz to the 144hz. It's like a breath of fresh air, like you forgot you had prime95 going when you opened the game and then close it. 60hz is just way too low.

>>61187102
That sounds interesting, but I'd still rather have a ~43" UHD @ 120 Hz SDR/96 Hz HDR.
Vertical workspace is just too valuable to give up for the ultrawide (= ultrashort) gaymen meme.

>1440p in 2017
fucking hell
give me nice 2160p screens, why is the market still dominated by 1080p?
if you need a lower resolution for gayming you could just set the resolution to 1440/1080p when playing a game

>>61188838
>Bunch of autism

Ok, enjoy your favela station then

>>61187484
>>61187548
You're comparing 16:9 screen sizes and 21:9 screen sizes. If you're gonna do that, compare vertical height, not diagonal.

>>61187102
>Future is finally here
A fucking computer screen is a future now?

>>61188889
Everytime I've tried a non-native resolution on any device it is completely unusable.
I have a 1080p laptop but it's 13.3" so I don't need the 1080p in WoW. Every single other resolution is blurry trash.
Same goes for my desktop monitors.
I think it's because you end up with multiple pixels acting as one pixel which would change their shape.

>>61188444
Not the guy you're responding too but I was in the
>TN
camp as well, up until I got memed into buying the Dell S2716DG. If you're sitting in front of it, you will barely notice any difference from an IPS panel. Even the viewing angles have improved drastically so that you really have to move out of the frame in order to notice the shift. All in all I don't regret purchasing this panel at all and I was using a $300 24'' IPS Asus monitor from 2015.

>>61187102

>ultrawide
>1440 vertical pixels

Retarded.

File: check.jpg (121KB, 481x378px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 481x378px

I tried out the new LG x1600 UW last week, it still felt too short. x1800 would probably be better.

The money they ask for it is retarded however, 160 pixel more is NOT worth the double price.

>>61188900
No, but dubs are

>>61187484
I have a 4k 32'' and it's fucking awesome. might get the one in op as primary and put the 32'' as secondary. we will see

>>61187102
>3440x1440
>looks curved
I'll be waiting for those 4K 144Hz screens with local dimming instead.

Why do they make 27' 1080p monitors? That doesn't even make sense, the DPI is abysmal and everything is going to look pixelated as hell.

>>61189096
>tfw currently using a 27'' 1080p monitor
It's alright from the distance I use it, certainly could be worse.

>>61189096
>Why do they make 27' 1080p monitors
How underage are you?
If you mean STILL then because of cost

Are there any 4K 120hz screens that don't require me to sell my kidneys?

Hey isn't that monitor the one our boi Jay-Z has in his setup
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ksimC6uM6I&t=152s

They look bad irl

>>61189188
I don't think there are any at all, not yet at least.

>>61187102
>Almost no games support 3440x1440

Feels bad man I just want a 3440x1440 60hz Oled HDR G-Sync monitor.

>>61189188
no

>>61189421
Split screen, left vidya, right >>>/v/

>>61187102
Only $4999 right? While the freesync version is half the price?

I'm mostly interested in 4K displays with 4 digital inputs and picture in picture so I can use it easily as an 8k displays, freesync 2 with HDR might be neat as well

>200hz
>gsync
>>>/v/

>>61189475
i'm estimating between $1k - $1.5k

>>61189482
what? what does high refresh rate have to do with that?

>>61189547
Dumb /v/ermin.

>>61189482
High refresh rates make everything look smoother, not just games. Regular desktop usage is better on a high refresh rate monitor, also you get quality of life improvements such as less motion blur and ghosting due to various features such as overdrive and strobing.

>>61189644
>Regular desktop usage is better on a high refresh rate monitor

muh mouse cursor

>>61188744
Are you 12? Just because dual 1080p monitors are the only thing you can afford doesn't mean they're good. Have fun with your fucking 1" of bezel right in the middle of your vision.

>>61188822
GTX 780 right now, runs everything just fine at 120+ hz. Might upgrade to a 980Ti eventually.

>VA

Wake me up when they have IPS doing that.

>>61189748
if i'm correctly informed the literal same monitor/panel will be available but with IPS instead of VA

>>61187102

You are officially retarded if you shell out for this without reading reviews first.
The previous high refresh ultrawide VA panels are hopeless for 200hz. The Z35 was shot down hard by the TFT-Central review, in which they settle at only 120hz for the panel to keep up.

Samsung's newer panels are faster, but there are no 200hz ones yet for a reason

>>61188822
>>61189747
That said though, even the 780's DAC has too little bandwidth to run this tube at max resolution.

>>61189783
obviously i will read about it and watch whatever videos there are about it, it's not like i fucking preorder this shit

>>61189783
Why do you want 200fps of your eyes can only see 23.9fps?

>>61189748
VA panels shit on IPS these days. IPS has basically no contrast and VA has caught up in terms of color gamut coverage. Even non-quantum dot VA's are achieving better color than the AHVA IPS panels common in competing monitors.

...all this and more than three times the contrast ratio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2AGMFXAx90

>>61189686
muh literally everything?
maybe you should go back to those green text on black background monitors if all you do is type text

>>61189846
so the monitor in OP should be good?

File: HMnK3mo.png (572KB, 867x806px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 867x806px

>>61189724
>are you 12
>coming from a bentfag

Computers aren't just for gaymin and watching tranformers

>>61189853
>muh literally everything?
Meaning your mouse cursor and your dragged windows basically.

Please don't be the retard that everytime says 24fps video looks better at 144 hz

>>61189858
If you've got the cash for it, it will probably be the best thing we get before OLED monitors hit the mainstream. That could be some time though(even though we do actually have them now, so it's not a nebulous thing anymore), so it might be worth it.

>>61189893
they don't, but is all you do watch videos and do spreadsheet simulations?

>>61189932
>, but is all you do watch videos and do spreadsheet simulations?

Yes keep on avoiding saying WHAT is actually better for.
We can play this game all day

>>61189880
>A bezel in the center of your field of view is great for productivity.

>>61189950
everything that moves
it just looks better and smoother

stop making excuses now, you being so poor you can't even afford a $200 high refresh rate screen doesn't make them bad or a waste of money

>>61189970
>everything that moves
>Meaning your mouse cursor and your dragged windows basically.

>$200 high refresh rate screen doesn't make them bad or a waste of money

Except it's 3 times that for a decent size but ok.

>>61190008
>cursor
>windows
>browsing
>any sort of production software (modelling, audio/video editing etc)
>even fucking doing boring excel shit is more appealing

yeah pretty much everything
and lmao no you don't have to spend $600 for even a 120hz 1440p, more like $400

>>61189950
You can notice the difference even just scrolling black on white text. It also makes moving text more readable thanks to less motion blur. Unless you get a super expensive ULMB Gsync monitor it won't look as good as a CRT still, but it's the best you can get with LCD for now. 60Hz just isn't high enough for computer monitors, I wish 75Hz was the default considering CRT's usually ran at that rate.

>>61189952
It actually is, because you can keep the content on one monitor and the tools on the other. Even better, the content isn't fucking bent.

are there actually any professional 4k 120 hz monitors yet?

>>61190040
>>61190051
All I hear is a lot of autism and exaggeration.
It's the PPIfags all over again, only this time it's even worse.

>60Hz just isn't high enough for computer monitors

Yea, how did people manage for the last 18 years?

>>61190099
>how did people manage for the last 18 years?

>we should never strive to for anything and just manage with what we have until the earth fucking dies

>>61190074
>I can't wrap my brain around the idea of logical separation of applications vs physical separation.
>I don't understand how perspective works.

>>61190089
Define "professional".

Acer and Asus have models coming out later in the year, but they're super expensive. I wouldn't consider them "professional" monitors either, they're gaming monitors targeted towards that demographic. You probably won't see something like that out of a real professional monitor for some time as graphics work doesn't require high refresh.

>>61190074
You do know they make flat variants with the same specs? You literally just pick what you prefer

>VA Panel
>Shows a video game
kek you don't want to play video games on a VA panel

File: AG322QCX-blur.png (1MB, 1794x1525px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1794x1525px

>>61190170
Pixel response times are fine now. Still some problems with ghosting, but they're very minor at high refresh these days.

VA on bottom.

>>61190118
>we should never strive to for anything and just manage with what we have until the earth fucking dies

This is your autism talking again.
YOU said "60hz is simply not enough" implying it's subpar, while having been the standard for the last 18years minimum.

Nobody is saying higher freq shouldn't exist or any of the sort, it's just the excuses you autists come up with are kinda pathetic and can be summarized with "muh mouse cursor"


When high hz monitors will be as cheap as regular ones then everybody will switch, with or without your neckbeard attempts at proselytism

>>61190099
>Yea, how did people manage for the last 18 years?
Come on now, mid 2000's to early 2010's were the dark ages of monitors. Shitty TN garbage with horrible colors vs.expensive IPS panels that can't into blacks and have massive input lag. We're still stuck paying hundreds of dollars extra just to get close to the quality of a $30 CRT monitor.

>>61187102
>3440x1440
>future
Are you fucking shitting me bro?

>>61190217
>60hz is simply not enough
i never wrote this anywhere so i'll do it now, no it isn't enough
120hz will become standard within 3 years and even normies will get onto the fad

>When high hz monitors will be as cheap as regular ones

they already are
infact, they are even cheaper than good quality 60hz ones

>>61190163
Where's the 3080x1600 flat one?

>>61190217
appeal to tradition is really bad. even more so because the whole cinema fags do the same with muh 24 fps.

>>61190254
there is also a 1600p coming dunno if the specs will be as ridiculous though can't find it again

>>61190228
I hear yea brother, I hate LCD technology with a passion

>>61190249
>they already are
>infact, they are even cheaper than good quality 60hz ones

Here's more of the delusion we talked about.
No they're not.

>>61190217
>YOU said "60hz is simply not enough" implying it's subpar, while having been the standard for the last 18years minimum.
Because it is subpar. Just because something is standard doesn't mean it's good. Especially with cinema and console games, 24fps and 30fps is terrible but it's still used because muh treadition. Compare 60Hz to 120Hz and 60 doesn't look very smooth at all.

>>61190296
but it literally is. a decent quality 120hz TN is cheaper than a good quality (for color work) 60hz IPS.

>>61187102
VA cuck

>>61187124
Oled is the best technology we currently have, there is nothing wrong with.

>>61190327
>but it literally is. a decent quality 120hz TN is cheaper than a good quality (for color work) 60hz IPS.

Right because the panel is much cheaper.
Are you retarded?

>>61190296
You just have to hunt for bargains. For $400 at Microcenter I got a 1440p/144Hz IPS Acer with Freesync. If you go TN or 1080p you can find stuff dirt cheap.

>>61190306
>Especially with cinema and console games, 24fps and 30fps is terrible but it's still used because muh treadition

Being this clueless

>>61190343
enjoy you shitty contrast and BLB with IPS and enjoy your burn in with OLED retard

>>61190348
no are you? which one do you think the normie will buy?

120hz or higher is rapidly becoming standard

>>61190361
I know where the 24fps standard comes from, everything is digital now though so only the most delusional filmcuck would defend movies in 24fps. James Cameron is right, film needs to move on to higher refresh rates.

>>61190383
>120hz or higher is rapidly becoming standard
Notice how the Hertzfag quickly moves the goalpost in its proselytizing effort.

First it was "it's the same price get one pls"
Then "yea it's not the same but TN ones are"
Now it's "lalalala my fav tech WILL become standard! In your face hater"

And so on so forth rambling away no better then the average loonixcuck

>>61190503
have fun with your 60hz TN from 2008 buddy

>>61190549
>60hz TN from 2008 buddy
You mean 60hz 50" OLED from 2017?

File: 618952_20141027151126_080_0001.jpg (56KB, 700x483px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 700x483px

>>61187102
>tfw 40" 4k VA monitor overclocked to 72hz

>>61190596
how the fuck do you have that at a desk? who would want that as a normal desk monitor?

>>61190655
>how the fuck do you have that at a desk?
It's called distance anon. Space is 3d.
>who would want that as a normal desk monitor?
People with taste

>>61190369
Yeah instead I better use VA which has inferior picture quality, but hey no burn in and its still shitty contrast and picture quality as well as shit viewing angles.

What fucking pleb you are. Educate yourself, once you experience oled monitor you cant go back.

>>61190669
>once you experience oled monitor you cant go back.
True.
LCDcucks on suicide watch

>>61187124
>>61187726
Dell tried. $3k for an imperfect display is what they could do, and they only did one production run before EOLing it.
Maybe they'll try again in another year or two.

>>61187102
My 65$ dell monitor has yet to fail me.

>>61190596
So 120Hz is a meme to you but you have a fucking OLED TV-sized beast at your desk? You fell for three memes.

>>61190745
>120Hz is a meme
it's not worthless no, but it's not worth to sacrifice size, PQ and price for it.

>You fell for three memes
What meames would those be?
PQ=not a meme
Size=not a meme
Super MLL=not a meme

>>61190711
Oled monitors are available on many high end notebooks/laptops. If dell cant do it that means they are incompetent, because other companies are managing just fine

>>61190807
I think expectations and usage patterns are different for laptops. Also the markets are different; an OLED would be priced like a very high end monitor, so if it can't measure up in terms of the features that those monitors have (i.e., color accuracy for content creation, refresh rate for gaming), they won't do well. They also need volume to bring the cost down, but that's harder to get in the high end monitor market, vs. integrating the display into a laptop.

>>61187102
>VA
not worth a piece of shit

>>61187102
>Ultra meme
>into_the_trash.jpg

>>61187102
Wait, it is projecting that fucking red logo? TOP KEK

>>61191067
RGB logo, please.

>>61187186
>Because of the incredibly fast response
maybe in terms of refresh and lack of lag but VA actually has relatively slow pixel shift from bright to dark. I'm sure on these expensive monitors it's not too noticeable but I've used VA panels that were otherwise amazing which were ruined by extreme amounts of smear, like even dragging windows smear across the screen. the higher the contrast between elements, the worse the smear.

>>61191067
No, it's a red sticker you put on your desk

>>61187504
>Plasma and OLED are RIP
OLED TVs are definitely not RIP and there are some good phones and ultrabooks with them. Plasma is indeed RIP, but if you live in a bigger city/town the old ones are cheap as fuck now. where I live it's not hard to get a fucking Kuro for <$500 if you hunt/wait a bit.

>consumers wants every TV to be a few hundred dollars
>tank every other measure of quality for muh 4k and tack on smart bullshit

this is why you buy used or shell out for OLED.

other than images and games whats the point of anything higher than 1080p?
Movies are 1080p

>>61190807
>because other companies are managing just fine
I read LG pretty much has a monopoly on a certain manufacturing process which makes making OLED panels much easier, though I think it only works with big panels. the smaller ones come from samsung and sony I think? and 99% are not desktop monitor sized, which is why desktop OLED monitors are so expensive.

>>61192128
this reply is this entire thread

>>61187696
burn-in is a non-issue on any modern monitor. you can solve it in software through various methods like pixel shifting. plus no modern display I know burn in things permanently, you just have to do a wipe a few times if you get burn in from leaving a static UI element on for hours.

>>61187124
We're just not quite there yet on price/production. Dell took a shot at it but the monitor was $3500. Also people willing to spend $1000 on a monitor are wanting higher refresh rates and I think the Dell model was only 60hz. In a couple of years maybe.

I'm with you though. I'd like a 1440 OLED monitor at 120hz for $1k

>>61188391
>Movies are 24fps and tv is 30fps
>not smoothing your video playback to 60hz and beyond

>>61188343
>It makes it a bad deal
how is it a "bad deal"? you pay more and get more. if you have the attitude that some piece of tech always has to be a certain price you're just encouraging a race towards the bottom where everything is cheap but terrible. a couple years ago most of the high-end monitors where not mature enough to justify the very high price, but now those prices have come down and the features have gotten better and more accessible generally.

>>61188803
>Hetz gimmick
speed and combining that with better looking panels at higher resolutions is the best advancement in monitors we've had in years. a bigger monitor doesn't add anything that something like a big TV or projector doesn't do better. why buy a big, slow monitor when I could just buy a TV that is probably still slow, but probably looks better and is even bigger? it's hard to appreciate the benefit of a physically bigger screen unless it's quite big and you sit further away. getting a monitor that is a few inches bigger is nothing like the sense of scale you get from going to small monitor to a big TV or a projector screen.

File: ahleeee~.jpg (33KB, 400x289px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 400x289px

>>61188822
triple crossfire/SLI with old cards and overkill CPU

where are the crt defender fags? this type of thread used to attract all of them

>>61188889
>if you need a lower resolution for gayming you could just set the resolution to 1440/1080p when playing a game
so stretching or having black bars around a smaller window in which you play the game? not thanks.

for gaming if you care about FPS and monitor speed above all 1080p is still the best unless you want to really break the bank. if you need more real-estate for work just add more cheap monitors on the sides.

>>61188928
>gaming laptop with great specs
>4k screen or some shit
>30 FPS

it feels so self-defeating. given the option I actually go with the lower resolutions when possible. as long as it's not 768p @ 17" it's fine, and I get better FPS. I don't need the real-estate on a laptop where I'm mostly doing casual stuff, and I don't buy into the smooth edges meme. stupidly high-res screens on small devices also kill battery life and drive up cost. plus you have to scale video, and because it's not a desktop you probably can't use the intensive scalers needed to make lower-res video actually look good on a high-end monitor.

>>61187102
>200hz
>pictured game can only hit 120 on a fucking 1080ti

>>61190217
>implying it's subpar
it is. the par has been raised for several years now. 60hz is no longer par, thus those monitors are sub-par cheap shit now. that's how it works.

>>61192603
>what is gsync

>>61192603
>no other games exist ever on earth
>it's illegal to play them
>what is desktop

>>61192650
>what is 200hz

>>61192656
>advertising a game that can't even take advantage of your hardware's capabilities

lmao

>>61192674
well what the fuck do you propose they show on their ad instead you advertising genius? fucking pong?

>>61189748
the only advantage IPS has now is extreme viewing angles you would never use in a monitor setting. viewing angles and toning down color grading have improved on other panel types to the point where it's negligible viewed straight on. IPS has contrast and backlight problems still. it's hard to argue color anymore when good TN and VA and other panel typed do just as well if not better.

>>61187539
>Dual monitor setup is infinitely superior
>having a double bezel right in the middle of your face
Why? Triple monitor setup or ultra-wide is king.

>>61192674
>>61192702
they should have put skyrim on it

>>61192674
Putting CS:GO on low settings doesn't look as impressive.

>>61192702
Anything other than that garbage

File: IPS vs Quantum Dot - IPS vs VA - (ENG SUB) Samsung CFG70 vs Asus PG297Q - Quantu_2017-07-02_17-25-14.jpg (23KB, 1283x718px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 1283x718px

I didn't expect to see much of a difference from a monitor being filmed by a camera which is then encoded by youtube which is being displayed on my crappy monitor but damn.

File: 1483410068801.png (484KB, 850x973px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 850x973px

too bad its ultrawide and curved
Would love 200hz but this is too big for me

>>61192782
there are flat 240hz 27" panels though? and they are pretty cheap

>>61190684
so your desk is just a big TV stand? ok.

why not have the TV in it's proper place with a couch or something in addition to a good monitor where you can actually sit at your desk?

File: Wide2.jpg (1021KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 1800x1200px

>>61188238
about a 28 inch 16:9 in terms of height

>>61190602
does it ghost/smear a bunch?

I think I remember seeing that monitor a year or two ago but I held off cause it was like $800.

File: IMG_3503.jpg (271KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1600x1200px

>>61192507
I have a nice one, but waiting for warm-up and modern cards not supporting the high refresh and resolutions the monitor is capable of made me try triple LCD. now I don't want to go back. it's much less practical to do multiple CRT and I will never go back to single-monitor. if I can find a context and space to only use it for some games I might fire it up again.

>>61192928
also, speed and colors were the main advantage, remember this was in the dark age when you had one or the other in flat panels, they've pretty much caught up now. CRT still doesn't have fixed resolution and no screen door but that's about the only advantage left.

>>61192928
>modern cards not supporting the high refresh
>we literally have 240hz 1080p panels
>crts were outclassed by tn panels around 2008~ in terms of motion blur and refresh rates

you fell for the meme hardcore my dude. feel bad for u

File: IMG_20170702_154424-01.jpg (4MB, 3480x4640px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3480x4640px

>>61192839
I bought it for $1100 from South korea long before it was officially released in the US. There's virtually no smearing/ghosting unless SmartResponse is turned on.

Color and contrast is great imo, and somehow I seem to be the only person who can get this monitor above 64hz

>>61192978
>>crts were outclassed by tn panels around 2008~ in terms of motion blur and refresh rates
the first flat screen that even approached CRT were the first 1080p monitors with both high refresh and controllable ULMB back-lighting, and even then it took time to get the colors as good and everything in sync. that sure as hell wasn't 2008 unless my sense of time is totally fucked. the first 120-144hz TN monitors were not nearly as good, and still in the realm of obvious compromise since despite the refresh being higher they still ghosted in various ways, caused eye strain, had poor colors, and were very expensive. also QC issues out the ass, which admittedly still seems a problems though it's not as bad today. that pic was from 2007 or earlier BTW. that monitor was $70.

>>61187102
>Only downside is the stupid stand

I think you missed the part about being curved and ultrashort.

what we need is UHD monitors that can run at higher Hz in lower resolutions (including letterbox mode) for the autistically inclined.

>>61193111
there is a flat variant, what do you mean by ultrashort?

also you can run any arbitrary resolution in any refresh rate?

>>61188391

they're also recorded with analog blur.

in a decade or so 60fps screen media will be normal. because it's far, far sexier to look at.

the time will come that 1000fps will be normal, and 240fps will look like shit.

>>61192995
nice. too high res for gaming though, plus no freesync and the like. at the time I thought it would make a great TV, and it still would, but I got a big plasma instead.

I'm currently looking at the gaming-oriented "successor" to that one for my next upgrade. it's the one in >>61192772. right now I don't feel like paying the cost and FPS premium to go higher than 1080p for games. I would rather have the higher FPS and lower cost. I'll move on when the monitors like the one in OP are <$500 an a single card can get high FPS consistently.

>>61187527
>>61187567
>cm
Ugh, just use freedom units already.

>>61193190
(((24"))) isn't even that, it's usually 23.6" like 20-22" is really 21.something most of the time.

>>61193210
because they count the bezel right?

>>61193358
no, I think it has to do with not wanting to confuse consumers, and also keep monitors within the same size category in terms of a monitor lineup from a company. so if a company has a bunch of "24" inch monitors but some have slightly smaller or larger pixel size because most don't actually make the panels, they just round up. usually they provide the actual pixel size as well as the exact size of the bezels for people who want them for multi-monitor.

>>61192081
No, it's not
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Fi_CSF-Nedo&t=4m25s

>>61193594
*woosh*

>>61192507
Well, i'm read only in this kind of threads for quite a while.
Had enough pointless arguments with retarded LCD monkeys already.
CRT is the only way you can get low-persistence high refresh rate display with good colors for cheap anyway.
I'm using 3 displays right now. Main display in the middle is CRT and 2 LCD on the sides. Works pretty well for me.

>>61194079
>CRT is the only way you can get low-persistence high refresh rate display with good colors for cheap anyway.

did you wake up from a fucking coma just now or something

>>61194092
>for cheap
>FOR CHEAP
Learn to read, faggot.

>>61190074
This fucking moron. You don't center yourself between your two monitors you sit centered in front of either or and put the other off to the side at an angle.
Also 144hz is objectively more awesome than you fags itt

>>61194164
>other off to the side at an angle.
but then you have an non centered setup and there is no symmetry and one side is completely empty

File: IMG_20170627_134039_01-1001x1392.jpg (291KB, 1001x1392px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1001x1392px

>>61187124
>tfw watching Chinese cartoons on my OLED 4k TV
Feels good

>>61187102
120hz 45" 5K VA panel when

>>61194223
fitting subs

>>61194223
>glorifying upscaling
Call me when chinks start drawing in at least 1080p.

>>61194186
If you play games or focus on anything for an extended period of time you want it centered directly in front of you and your keyboard. Coming from a fag that played wow 16 hours a day for 7 years and now plays Google chrome 16 hours a day, just try it. I cant imagine why the fuck you would choose to center two bezels in front of your face so neither monitor is directly infront of you

>>61194223
lol.
>$3k TV
>sitting on a $30 ikea shelf, not even a wall mount

>>61194305
no i wouldn't want that, i mean that is the drawback with just two monitors and why i would prefer an ultrawide, that way you have your shit centered and nearly as much space as two monitors

File: IMG_20170627_185332_01_01-1856x1392.jpg (260KB, 1856x1392px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1856x1392px

>>61194287
LG does a really good job of up scaling. Also played Overwatch on it, looks amazing.
>>61194308
I got it for $2200AUD ($1700USD). The TV is curved too, would look weird wall mounted. Also, I made that shelf.

>>61187102
>gsync
In the bin it goes

>>61194332
fix your settings cunt, don't you see that amount of blue?

it should be more towards red/brown

>>61194339
that exact same monitor will be available without gsync too.. whatever it is you have against it

>>61194245
You might as well give up.
HMDs with better pixel-per-arc will come out sooner.

>>61194332
>would look weird
It will look really weird when a kid or dog knocks it off that shelf onto the floor.

>>61193606
>I was just pretending!

>>61194358
That's just because of my shitty camera.
>>61194390
Good thing I live by myself :^)

>>61189133
this is true. i have a 27 inch 1080p matte ips not too bad u get use to it after a while, plus the IPS has really nice colors.

>>61194448
>That's just because of my shitty camera.
no, it's not because of your phone, it's because there really is too much blue
just FUCKING FIX IT

>>61187102
How hard is to make a fucking 42 inch TV with like 120hz

How's this any different than other ultra wide like LG?

>>61194473
>implying he can fix it
Do you expect him to actually use color calibration tools? lol
Let him be. He thinks that it looks 'MAZING anyway.

>>61194513
all you have to do is google the model number and use the typical warm color setup, it looks better and makes it way less eye straining

How is the Samsung g70? Does it have problems with backlight bleed or ghosting. I really need to upgrade from my shitty tn

>good goy tax

If Nvidia really wanted to end AMD they would embrace Freesync

>>61194568
>presets are acceptable
You are stupid too.
You either use color calibration tools, like a normal human being, or just use settings that look nice, like a retarded monkey.
If you don't give a fuck about correct color representation and have no dignity, you might as well use setting you just subjectively like.

>>61194473
I'm telling you mate, it's fine. I bet you're the kind of person who'll spend $100 on a HDMI cable.

>>61194661
how do you go about getting "color calibration tools" then??? and yes presets are much better than using default setup or shitty blue glow

>>61194701
but even the cheapest 4k60hz capable hdmi cable is like nearing $100.. especially if they have to be long

File: hdmi.png (150KB, 1176x693px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1176x693px

>>61194709
lol what?

>>61193152
>what do you mean by ultrashort?

probably that "ultrawide" is a bullshit marketing term to imply that the screens are somehow wider variants of normal displays (e.g., 2560x1080 vs 1920x1080) and not equally if not more-so really shorter variants of other, larger resolutions (2560x1440 vs 2560x1080 or 3840x2160 vs 3440x1440).

that shit'll probably cost more than your system

so which is better, ultrawide 1080 or 1440p?

I'm caught in a crossroads and both type of monitor are sitting around in my price range and I'm not sure which would be more worth it

Both are definitely an upgrade from the shit-tastic 1080p monitor i'm using now

>>61194331
its not a drawback though man. I have two different monitors, one is better than the other. That's my primary monitor. Everything is done on it and the second monitor is used primarily for communications and music as well as tasks that simply wont fit on the one monitor, like say comparing things.
Stop thinking of them as two monitors acting as one, which is the only train of thought that could lead to you being so dumb as to sit between them, you have your primary monitor and your auxiliary monitor even if they're the SAME model.

When are the new monitors coming out with HDR, local dimming? Local dimming is probably the most important for me. My TV has local dimming zones and it makes a huge difference. Or I can just buy a u3415w for $290. I'm using a u2515h right now.

>>61195160
Ultrawide 1080p monitors are just 1440p monitors with the top cut off...

>>61194661
lol. I like how hard this has triggered you, Anon.

>>61195183
Does the lack of vertical resolution make a big difference in the quality of the image?

>>61187102
>ultrawide
>35"
>TN
>gsync

nah, i'll pass

>>61194332
>>61194223
Looks small as shit. 60" should be the minimum.

>>61195211
it says VA right there you nut

>>61195261
Fuck, I need to read shit more carefully. Either way, a 35" ultrawide display with gsync is gonna be fuckhuge and super expensive.

>>61195325
yes it's going to be fuckhuge which will be awesome. i hope it's close around $1k, if it's anywhere near $2k they can go fuck themselves

there is also going to be a non gsync variant so that should be cheaper

>>61187598
>>61187598
yeah 50" screens that have the worst fucking quality there is.

I'll chill with my IPS screen

>>61195160
1080p is shit, whether it's wide or not. I literally bought my own monitor to use at work because they had shit 1080p screens.

>>61195325
>>61195376
It's also got full array local dimming, so I really wouldn't expect it to be less than $1500.

>>61195414
fuc

File: 1498956413767.gif (469KB, 512x807px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 512x807px

>>61195240
>Buying oversized, shitty TVs
I'd rather spend my money on quality

>>61187102
I still prefer 4 small sized lenovo or dell monitors in a square. Better for programming, video watching, and even gaming.

>>61195414
Damn. Guess it's pointless to upgrade now when fald screens are coming out soon. Wonder how long until Dell comes out with ultrasharps with fald. Then again they still don't have freesync and 75hz when LG does. They even use LG panels

File: 1340277372169.jpg (124KB, 665x717px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 665x717px

>>61195718
>gaming
>4 monitors in a square
>crosshair in the middle

>>61187102
Ultrashorts are garbage.
Cut out your eyes if your taste is that bad.

>>61187124
OLED turn yellow and burn in.

>>61195912
>OLED turn yellow and burn in.
Source? Never heard this before

>>61195912
>ultrashort
You're an idiot. 90% of users are running 1920x1080. Any of the common 'ultrashort' monitors are an upgrade from that. The 34" 21:9 monitors at 1440p are close to ideal IMO. You could argue UHD at 32" or UHD at 28" is better, but I don't see it being a clear advantage overall myself. Each has it's stronger points but both are good.

File: 102l2co.jpg (304KB, 1024x685px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1024x685px

>>61194092
I mean he's right, monitors that truly rival the best CRTs are the best LCDs, which cost $500 at the very minimum, with the top of the top approaching 1k or going beyond that. not that I would toss my LCD and go out and hunt for a CRT, but if you have access to buy a cheap and nice trinitron, it is a unique display worth paying a bit for if only for PC gaming or emulation. I wouldn't pay over $100 for one though unless you know it's one of the best of the best like an FW-900 or similar on good condition. also be prepared to lift over 100lbs.

>>61195164
so you're looking at 2 bezels meeting or you have just one angled to the side? imo if you want real real-estate go ultrawide or triple monitor. double is just dumb, you either stare at bezels or you have an uneven "line" of screen real-estate. it's not like an aux monitor is expensive. if you don't have one laying around (I have like 7 monitors laying around), just get a cheapo from CL or something. if it's just displaying a web page or other window you're not looking at all the time there is no need for it to look good. I just got a pretty good looking 1080p asus TN for $20.

File: 1329595301171.jpg (25KB, 556x496px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 556x496px

>>61194332
>LG does a really good job of up scaling
wait wait wait hol up bro, you're not even doing the up-scaling yourself in software, you're letting the TV DO IT!?

you need to up your anime game and get on those neural upscalers with smoothmotion you baka

>tfw watching anime/movies on a pioneer kuro

I don't even have to upscale, I have a 720p plasma as well if I want.

>>61194367
will it be $100 less? because that's what they goysync premium usually is.

>>61196955
>the best CRTs
>22.5 inches
>aperture grille lines
>ionizing radiation into your face
>shitty color gamut
>blurry pixels
GTFO poorfag

>>61194661
yeah lemme just go out and buy a calibration tool for a few hundred cause I'm producing content on my TV. just having the TV not hue'd in one direction and getting the brightness and contrast right for the room should be good enough for casual viewing. besides, OLEDs have very nice colors that "pop" from looking a bit oversaturated but they're usually not the most accurate even when set up right.

>>61187102
Probably giinna cost $2000.
I'll stick with my x34 for another couple years.

>>61197084
so only bigass screens are good? it has about the same amount of detail density of most "great" LCDs. same for color range if both are set up right. grille lines are less noticeable than screen door effect that's fucking everywhere not just in one tiny barely visible line yet people are fine with that. looking at glowing phosphor dots is more pleasing than looking at a physical pixel structure. an LCD will always look like what it is: light filtered through tiny boxes. why do you think people like plasmas, OLEDs, and non-LCD projectors for watching media? a big reason is that visual effect is significantly lessened compared to a conventional LCD.

>poorfag

if you were so rich you could afford something better than a plain old LCD.

>>61197206
>only bigass screens are good
Yeah 24-30 inches are about right for a typical viewing distance. 22.5 inches is something that might be good for a budget screen today.

>same for color range
Nope. Many LCD monitors support Adobe RGB. CRT never has and never will.

>light filtered through tiny boxes
Sounds like you understand how LCD works. Whether that physical reality is any guarantee of a certain 'look' does not follow. Citation please.

>screen door
If you prefer the blurriness of CRT why not just state that?

>one line
Have you ever used an aperture grille CRT? lol

>why do you think people like [random list of technologies we're not discussing]
eh? totally irrelevant

>>61187427
>$200 module included in the price of a monitor that will probably cost $2000
>when you've spent probably $1000 to buy an nvidia card that can actually drive such a resolution at 144 fps
>this is a concern

this isn't for poorfags.

>>61187598
This. I run my laptop through a 60in Sharp Aquos via hdmi at 1080p and love it that way. That plus a wireless keyboard with a trackpad is maximum couch comfy

>>61192717
and triple mon setups have issues like weird ass stretching on the flanks, games not really being made to cater for it, dropping to the lowest refresh rate if your panels aren't all the same, etc.

I've been there done that and tri monitor gaming is shit. Only good for working on big documents and shit, not at all acceptable for gaming.

>>61197565
>60"
>1080p
>from a laptop

why are you even in this thread? This product is not for you.

File: 1496122997528.png (143KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 501x585px

>>61187102
>gsync

good goyim, keep paying those Nvidia royalites

>>61197579
I didn't say it's my battlestation setup. But the media stuff I do with my home network and occasional couch shitposting is perfect with the living room setup I described

>>61197600
You're not funny.

>>61197622
Humor wasn't his goal

How is VA compared to IPS and TN?

File: crt vs lcd.png (504KB, 810x548px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 810x548px

>>61197276
>typical viewing distance
the "right size" is subjective. you can sit as close or far as you want you know? bigger=better really only applies when watching media away from the desk imo.

>>61197276
>Many LCD monitors support Adobe RGB
yeah, I'm not arguing that the best LCD you can possibly buy would be worse for production. I'm saying on average, even for displays which are advertised as having "good" color reproduction, a really good CRT will have as good or better colors. obviously if color is your work you would get something with the biggest technical coverage, but that's not the same as casual use and your average consumer is not buying production LCDs, the imperceptibility of color range starts to diminish after a point, contrast is more noticeable to the average viewer.

>guarantee of a certain 'look'
again it's subjective to a great degree, like neutral in audio, what produces the most "lifelike" image? it's not just color range and geometry or even contrast, it's how each point of light is presented. personally I think with most LCD tech you're looking at too much of the pixel structure; it's not just the screen door but the various other layers LCDs have and the way the back-lighting works, which in most cases is kind of poor. CRTs don't have this, and on OLED, plasma, and on good projectors this effect is much less, they look more like CRTs. I think that's a big reason why people into movies prefer them.

>Have you ever used an aperture grille CRT? lol
yes I used an FW-900 for a good number of years and before that I used a diamondtron. I also used Trinitron TVs, the widescreen ones that came out before CRT died and before that 4:3.

>$200 module
yeah, if only there was something that did the same thing but didn't cost a $200 premium- oh wait...

>>61197693
not as good viewing angles and lack of color grading as TN, but good enough viewed straight on. colors can be as good, contrast is much better, as are black levels. not as prone to backlight bleed which most IPS panels have, especially in darker scenes. I would say it's generally better when done right, and better for gaming and media. for color accurate work or if you plan on looking at your monitor at an extreme angle IPS is still worth it, but only if it's a really good one. your average IPS is no longer amazing compared to other panel types which have caught up considerably.

>>61187484
34" ultrawide is the same height as a 27" 16:9

>>61196863
Easy enough to search. The blue subpixels in OLED generally age/degrade much faster than the green or red resulting in the display slowly shifting to a more yellow tint as it ages.

i use 21.5' and 17' monitors and they're good lol

File: lc32hg70qqnxza-gallery2-0606.jpg (49KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 800x600px

>>61187102
>gsync
>waste of space ultrawide
>200hz when your chinkshit laptop will never push anything over 15fps
lmaoing @ ur lyfe senpai

http://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/32--chg70-gaming-monitor-with-quantum-dot-lc32hg70qqnxza/

>gaymur shit
____

>>61198178
You arent fair bro.
A VA panel can cover above of 90% Adobe RGB have fairly good gamut and absolutely sufficent viewing angles while havng a way better contrast and blacks than IPS can have as well as much quicker response and being mch cheaper.

They do vary in quality from TN tier to content creation tier.
Im qute happy about my AMVA panel.

>>61199994
is there an ultrawide of this that has the same vertical size?

>>61200398
Smaller vertical size, but ultra-ultrawide 32:9 aspect ratio with HDR, 1ms response time, OLED, 144Hz, etc.

http://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gaming-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/

>>61200626
That's an LCD mate, not OLED

>>61200679
Sorry, assumed that the crystals worked similar to OLED as being the display itself rather than backlit by LEDs similar to LCD.

>>61200626
too bad, would love such a big ultrawide, hope they make them soon

>>61200737
A new version of DisplayPort that supports frame rates and resolutions of that size may need to be standard before they start producing panels that huge. HDMI does have the bandwidth required but doesn't allow for communication between monitor and GPU that is required for FreeSync.

>>61200801
i meant for 3440x1440 res
dunno if that would look bad though
37-40" ultrawide with that res?

>>61187102
The lowest specs I'll upgrade my U2414H to are
>OLED
>27" for 16:9, higher for anything wider
>4K
>144Hz
>flicker free
>less than 8ms average input lag (response time + signal processing)
>maximum of 5mm bezels all around the display (perfectly doable with oled)
>true 10 bit color depth
>under $800 in europe

We keep getting the same shit over and over and over again, wrapped in a different package.
The only IPS panels that do over 120hz (btw there's only one, everybody uses that panel) is a shitty mess with horrible backlight bleed.

There is no display right now that's not a compromise.
TN and VA's color shift looks horrible even on high end displays.

The only OLED monitor costs a fortune, 60hz and has a horrible over 30ms input lag. Yep, that is 2 frames of fucking LAG.

>>61201044
>true 10 bit color depth

would you even be able to use this though?

but yeah fast oleds will be great

>>61201108
You're right, I'm willing to let 10bit go, I literally cannot see any banding with my 6-bit+FRC display.

>>61201167
>I literally cannot see any banding with my 6-bit+FRC display.
fuck you're blind.

>>61201108
>would you even be able to use this though?
Upcoming Radeon Crimson update for gayming Vega includes injecting HDR10 into older games.

>>61201044
HP ZR24w here, which is similar
I've been waiting for
>QLED. Maybe OLED if the warranty covers screen degradation and is 4+ years

>~$1200 max
>16:10 or 5:3 is ideal, but might settle for 16:9 since 16:10 is dead
><=1ms response tme
>HDR10 with >98% of DCI-P3 coverage
>greater than 120 DPI
>general good quality

It's fucked because I have this little spot, it's not too noticeable but stil, that looks like it has some humidity damage in the upper edge. I really ought to get a new monitor, but they currently all suck.
I might end up just getting that Samsung 4K HDR10 Freesync2 one.
The 1440p one is 32", which is way too fucking low pixel density. That's a TV.

>>61202441
>fuck you're blind.
>oh look a 10 bit display look how deep the red is, it's beautiful
In sRGB color space you literally cannot see the difference between 8 and 10 bit color.
But I go ahead and make the assumption that you wouldn't even notice it in adobe rgb, because you're a dumb fuck

>>61202555
>QLED
That's literally just a word to confuse consumers, not a technology. It's regular TN, samsung is just fucking with us.
><=1ms response time
Instead of response time, you should probably look at average lag the display has. You can have 0.1ms response time, and 30ms signal processing, which makes it horrible.
>120DPI
Again, you should rather look at PPD. DPI is a bad indicator.
http://phrogz.net/tmp/ScreenDens2In.html