24" 4K monitors 2014 pre-sightings

[skipsneeky2]

I've spent the last month or two trying to decide between a 27" and 29" monitor for gaming, and then this news comes along about 3 days before I was going tp make my final choice.

Yup, technology is a great thing and while i spent half this week eyeballing 1440p panels and this bomb from dell dropped and suddenly poof excitement for a 1440p is gone lol.

Luckily its gonna be a industry standard unlike 1440p/1600p so prices will continue to drop, i know i can wait and save for a year or two.:thumbsup: Maybe get a whole of a lot more for the same $1,000 at least or at get the same panel for much less but either way it works.🙂

 

[Wag]

The 28" display for $1k sounds interesting but I already have the Dell 27" display that cost me around that price. Isn't Asus supposed to be putting out a 39" 4k display in the >$1k range sometime early next year?

 

[Bateluer]

Luckily its gonna be a industry standard unlike 1440p/1600p

1440/1600 are industry standard resolutions.

 

[Ajay]

1440/1600 are industry standard resolutions.

Only for the computer monitor industry. I think skipsneeky2 was referring to the general display market, which is dominated by TVs; where HD (1080) is standard and 4K will be, eventually.

 

[blackened23]

Only for the computer monitor industry. I think skipsneeky2 was referring to the general display market, which is dominated by TVs; where HD (1080) is standard and 4K will be, eventually.

This. 4k will become affordable MUCH more quickly than 1440 or 1600p because it is also a UHDTV standard. It won't make waves this year, but I can see 4k becoming the norm at retail in 2 years or so. That means, 4k will be the norm for PC screens in 1-2 years as well, with significantly lower prices.

Think of how cheap 1080p screens are now. Three years from now, that will be 4k - all because it is a TV standard.

 

[Pariah]

Think of how cheap 1080p screens are now. Three years from now, that will be 4k - all because it is a TV standard.

Unlikely. As the technology continues to improve, the less the general public seems to care as what they have is good enough. How well did the successors to the CD do? People chose worse quality downloadable content instead. Bluray and HD-DVD has been met with only slightly less apathy. The public is clearly more interested in online streaming technologies which again are inferior in quality. It's going to be quite a while before we see streaming 4k video. I know Netflix is already starting, but CEO stated that it would take about 15mbps to stream it, adding that if you have a 50mbps connection you'll be fine. How many people have 50mbps services in their area and how many are interested in paying for it? Average US connection is about 7.5mbps today.

The really high resolution of 4k also means it will only be useful on larger screens, which will also keep the prices high. A sub 30" 4k TV would be pointless.

Should also be noted that the first 1080 broadcast in the US was in 1996. It took a bit longer than 3 years for 1080 screens to reach their current commodity levels.

 

[Lonyo]

Unlikely. As the technology continues to improve, the less the general public seems to care as what they have is good enough. How well did the successors to the CD do? People chose worse quality downloadable content instead. Bluray and HD-DVD has been met with only slightly less apathy. The public is clearly more interested in online streaming technologies which again are inferior in quality. It's going to be quite a while before we see streaming 4k video. I know Netflix is already starting, but CEO stated that it would take about 15mbps to stream it, adding that if you have a 50mbps connection you'll be fine. How many people have 50mbps services in their area and how many are interested in paying for it? Average US connection is about 7.5mbps today.

The really high resolution of 4k also means it will only be useful on larger screens, which will also keep the prices high. A sub 30" 4k TV would be pointless.

Should also be noted that the first 1080 broadcast in the US was in 1996. It took a bit longer than 3 years for 1080 screens to reach their current commodity levels.

We have phones with higher resolutions than most laptops, and tablets with higher resolutions than most monitors/TVs/laptops.

The problem is 4k means it's *currently* mainly useful on larger displays, but eventually when developers catch up to Windows 8, resolution dependence will go away and you will have decent scaling, meaning the benefits of higher PPI can be obtained on a smaller display, like with the "retina" Macbooks and phones/tablets.

There is nothing unreachable about affordable high res displays for many purposes, they just aren't being used in most products yet for whatever reason, even as an expensive toy.

 

[zebrax2]

I wonder how long it would take korean monitor manufacturers to get their hands on the lower grade panels so that we could have more affordable options. I personally feel like the availability of korean 27" 2560x1440 monitors had a huge impact in the pricing of other 27" monitors