Looking for new primary display

[John Reynolds]

So, turning the big 50 later this year and my Dell 3007 30" and its uneven backlighting and 8 years of wear 'n tear, is about ready for retirement. Thus I have the wife convinced that the stars have aligned and that a new display would be the perfect birthday gift for me in a few months. I hate to go smaller than 30" after almost an entire decade of use on one, yet I don't want 4K displays because I'm not a fan of multi-GPU configs and it takes that type of build to drive that resolution. Not looking for multiple panels either. This said, I thought I'd found the perfect replacement, the LG 34UM95 34" 21:9 ratio monitor. 3440x1440 resolution, which might not see a lot of support from game devs in the year 2014, but ultra wide panels are becoming more common so that should change. It's a bit expensive, $999 MSRP, but that's less than most 30" panels last time I checked.

And then LG goes and announces this: http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/18/lg-curved-display-ifa-2014/ The bastards. No idea on price or availability, I can hope it drives down the price on the 34UM95, but most likely that'll stay at $1k and they'll place the newer curved unit at $1.5k.

 

[RedVi]

If you're not completely sold on ultra wide then maybe consider the BenQ BL3200PT

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_bl3200pt.htm

A colleague of mine just bought one recently and it's a great looking monitor. I have a Dell U2713HM that I picked up mid last year in a sale. I have it calibrated (my work has an x-rite i1) and the BenQ looks great in comparison straight out of the box on the standard settings. The finish, osd buttons and look of the frame is also much nicer than my Dell.

 

[homerdog]

Since you have a geforce card are you looking at gsync? Right now there aren't any reasonably priced gsync displays, but hopefully this is soon to change. That's a feature I am very much looking forward to.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Damn, that link of yours John. It turned me on to the fact that LG's OLED TV's are starting to get rather affordable (3.3k USD).

But that led me to discover what I actually want to use for my computer display now.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/24/lg-4k-oled/

Mmmmmmm. 4k OLED screen. Unfortunately at 6.5-7.0k USD, it's not quite at the price point I want. But it sure is tempting to plonk down the cash for it. Of course, no clue if it'll be able to display 4k@60 hz. It is supposed to support HDMI 2.0 which means it should be able to handle 4k@60 hz assuming you have an output device that also supports HDMI 2.0.

Regards,
SB

 

[nutball]

I'm going through a similar process. My 3007 is also showing its age, and I'm also loathe to drop below 30" for a replacement.

Thing is I also have a Retina MacBook, so I know what 4K could look like (on OSX at least). I have a 16:9 display at work, and TBH 21:9 just doesn't appeal to me. Maybe if I spent my life playing driver in a WW2 tank simulator it would be different.

I'll probably end up going for a Dell U3014, but if I could trust the Windows GUI to cope with 4K I'd go 4K, with a decent panel (non-TN) and much costy.

 

[Grall]

Due to pixel wear, you're not going to want to use an OLED screen as a computer display, or possibly even gaming altogether (due to static HUDs etc). Or well, you could, but it doesn't seem advisable to me at least, especially considering the cost of these display devices currently.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Get a CRT, I hear they're coming back in vogue this year.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Due to pixel wear, you're not going to want to use an OLED screen as a computer display, or possibly even gaming altogether (due to static HUDs etc). Or well, you could, but it doesn't seem advisable to me at least, especially considering the cost of these display devices currently.

Meh, I'll take my chances. It can't be worse than plasma, and smartphones haven't seemed to have had problems with that in recent years. After seeing one in RL, there is no way I can ever spend the cash on an LCD monitor/TV ever again. And the power consumption is absolutely miniscule compared to LCD monitor/TVs.

Regards,
SB

 

[RudeCurve]

If cost was not a factor then OLED may be the best choice since you could sell it and buy a new one when the output has degraded to a point where it's obvious. All factors considered LCD is still the best option for many people like myself. I've also been looking for a second display to use in a dual monitor setup and have decide to get one of these.

 

[pcchen]

Meh, I'll take my chances. It can't be worse than plasma, and smartphones haven't seemed to have had problems with that in recent years. After seeing one in RL, there is no way I can ever spend the cash on an LCD monitor/TV ever again. And the power consumption is absolutely miniscule compared to LCD monitor/TVs.

Well, computer monitors are more likely to be used for much longer than smartphones. One of my LCD monitor has been used for nearly 10 years, and it still works.

Another (traditional) problem of OLED is that some color components (basically blue) tend to decay faster than other components, lead to color shift. I'm not sure about current status of this problem though.

 

[Rodéric]

I usually go there : http://www.digitalversus.com/lcd-monitor.html to find what's best for me.
The BenQ BL3200PT is the currently recommended one.

 

[John Reynolds]

That BenQ 32" is tempting, I read the TFT Central review of it awhile back. The PPI on that size of a display with 1440p res might be good for my aging eyes too, and that ratio won't have the lack of game support I'd undoubtedly see with the LG 21:9 display I linked upstream. Plus it's $650 at Amazon and Newegg.

Birthday's not until mid-Nov so I've got time to see what else hits the market. But I added the 3200PT to my Amazon wish list.

 

[Grall]

High-quality 144Hz WQHD ("1440P") screens is on the way now, courtesy of Taiwanese AU Optronics in the form of what can be described as near-IPS AHVA (which is an interesting acronym, from marketing spin point-of-view) panels.

Production of the panels is said by Swedish Sweclockers website to start in september, and will later be available for use by AUO affiliates such as Philips, Dell, Benq and others. Doesn't really help those looking for a new screen NOW, but if it's possible to hold out say, another six months or so, the wait might be worth it.

 

[Blazkowicz]

I would like OLED to get in the 24" to 28" range (or smaller). a 1920x1200 one would kick ass already, at 120Hz or better.
I'm still used to low res monitors anyway.

Get a CRT, I hear they're coming back in vogue this year.

Even if you jest, there once were "Samsung Slimfit" CRT TVs that were HD res, with HDMI plug and a relatively small depth. Though the smaller depth would worsen geometry and convergence. I've never seen one in person but maybe that could have made for an interesting desktop monitor if desktop variants had been made.

But that won't work out, instead I hear that typewriters are coming back

 

[PenguinJim]

That BenQ 32" is tempting, I read the TFT Central review of it awhile back. The PPI on that size of a display with 1440p res might be good for my aging eyes too, and that ratio won't have the lack of game support I'd undoubtedly see with the LG 21:9 display I linked upstream. Plus it's $650 at Amazon and Newegg.

Birthday's not until mid-Nov so I've got time to see what else hits the market. But I added the 3200PT to my Amazon wish list.

Do bear in mind that you'll be dropping down from 16:10 to 16:9. /o\ Is that something you could live with? IS IT?

 

[Blazkowicz]

16:9 is usually a shame, but this monitor gives more pixel height / physical height than almost any 16:10.

Thing is it's TV sized. With such a beast I'd wish the brightness can be turned down to something realistic while keeping high contrast and color accuracy.

 

[Lightman]

16:9 is usually a shame, but this monitor gives more pixel height / physical height than almost any 16:10.

Thing is it's TV sized. With such a beast I'd wish the brightness can be turned down to something realistic while keeping high contrast and color accuracy.

Last week I've moved from my old but great Belinea o.Display 4.1 24'' 16/10 screen to DGM IPS 27'' 16/9 sweetness (to be precise I've moved my Belinea to secondary screen position as it still is perfectly good screen for most things with amazing fully adjustable stand).

Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 is an improvement in every way. You get wider POV in games but not loose any vertical resolution as it increases from 1080 to 1440. I would never go to 1080 though! That's why I waited so long on my old screen to upgrade, because finding cheap 27'' was possible even 2 years ago, but finding cheap 1440p 27'' became possible only recently! (FYI I paid £250.00 inclusive VAT)

BTW that DGM have really good LG panel and colors are wonderful! Only complain I can have is weak black level resulting in so so contrast of around 600:1 Not a problem for gaming and really should be judged on personal level. I'm noticing it only when turning computer on as I have direct comparison to my excellent Samsung 55'' UE55ES8000 with black darker than dark hole

Link to DGM review for interested in finding out more: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dgm_ips-2701wph.htm

 

[PenguinJim]

I can't get over those ~$400 2560x1600 30" IPS screens from Korea. /o\ They seem to wipe the value floor with everything else. And they're 16:10!

I've got a 26.5" ASUS monitor that's over four years old and I really didn't expect it to last this long. (And also puts me in the terrible position of not being able to replace it with anything smaller - so no great 24" screen for me - or anything with a TV-oriented aspect ratio - so no 27" 16:9 displays - leaving me with one option standing way out above the others: 30" 2560x1600. But that's TOO big! Well, at least if my monitor holds out until the new year I'll have some curved options that may outweigh my (possibly exaggerated) hatred of 16:9)

 

[Grall]

Korean el cheapo displays are fairly terrible quality, both image-wise and build-wise. Creaky plastic, poor - if any - adjustment features, and so on. Some don't even seem to have on-screen menus, so no adjustments of any kind pretty much, maybe a rocker switch to adjust backlight intensity and an input selector, if it has more than one.

Bad image quality is worse than bad build quality - do you really want a bad monitor even if it's cheap? Better to save some more money and buy something decent if you're gonna drop several hundred bucks anyway IMO.

Also, as a gamer I really REALLY prefer 16:9 aspect - wider field of view does a lot to many games, shooters as well as open world/third person games and so on. When working, the relatively few additional lines of a 16:10 display doesn't make that big a diff. 1440P is already a really big upgrade over 1080P, for those making that switch.

 

[RedVi]

I came from a 24" 1920x1200 display to a 27" 2560x1440 and I do miss the better use of my vision for productivity and browsing. However, I moved the task bar to the left and this helps a lot once you get used to it.