• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

4K (4096x2160) Displays - any available for us USA end-users?

I

Idontcare

Elite Member
I have been seeing lots of prototype news for 4K (4096x2160) and so-called 2160p (3840x2160) displays but most of them seem to be limited release for Japan markets, and on the order of >$10,000 for them as well.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGHP_enUS450US450&q=4k+lcd+display

Does anyone have any sort of rough idea when these displays will be available in USA markets? Are we looking at another 5 yrs? 1 yr?

I currently use 2x24" LCD's so my workspace is already 3840 pixels wide, but it is only 1200 pixels tall. Would love to replace my dual LCD's with a single 48-55" display that has the same width in pixel count but has even more pixels for height (I do a lot of programming and I really hate the inconvenience of scrolling up and down to keep the current subroutine loaded in my brain-ram).

Can today's video cards drive a 4K display?
 
Last edited:
Looks like the 7900s can do 4096x2160 via DP and 4096x3112 via HDMI while the other cards at stock can't reach that resolution per Nvidia and AMD websites (580/590/6970/6990 = 2560x1600).
 
Even if they do become available, 2560 panels are still expensive, so I doubt they will be consumer-oriented for a long while after initial launch, if ever. Which is a shame.
 
According to AVS Forums (and CES 2012), 4K displays will hit the US around late 2H 2012, but only in large sizes (60+) and very high prices. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=40

http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/30/sharp-showcases-4k-lcd-tv-3840%C3%972160-resolution-to-sell-it-2012/

Based on the articles I have read, 4K computer monitors are not due out until 2013 at the earliest. And most likely will still be LCD.

I am more excited about the OLED revolution, but these will only be 1080p at first. So a 4K OLED display is what I am waiting for....probably 2015.
 
Last edited:
cantholdanymore said:
This is sick
http://www.eizo.com/na/products/duravision/fdh3601/index.html
Click to expand...

Dang! And their graphics showcase exactly why I want this:

resolution.gif


fullhdx4.jpg


I tried putting my 1920x1200 LCD's in portrait mode but it was an awful mess with the line-wrap on my code, made keeping the algorithm's straight in my head even more challenging.

I turned off line-wrap and then I had to scroll all the time. Up-down scrolling is preferable to left-right scrolling, so my screens are back to their landscape profile.

Too bad about that $36k pricetage 🙁
 
In the meantime, why not get 2 30 inch 1440p monitors? Cost a lot less than 2160p for the next few years.
 
Edrick said:
In the meantime, why not get 2 30 inch 1440p monitors? Cost a lot less than 2160p for the next few years.
Click to expand...

That is probably what will happen, although the "more of less cheaper" route is not always a great substitute.

Taking that approach, with eyefinity I could buy 6 really dirt-cheap LCD's and technically do even better than a 2x30" setup.

ATI-Eyefinity-3x2-Windows-Desktop.jpg


:hmm:...not that I'm against that...it just doesn't solve my current pet-peave which is work-area for displaying lines of code.

I suppose what I should do is vertically stack my screens instead of putting them side-by-side?

red-wall-custom-1.jpg


I could use something like this to get the job done:

resize
 
Idontcare said:
I suppose what I should do is vertically stack my screens instead of putting them side-by-side?
Click to expand...

For coding, it is the only way to go ever since the 16:9 and 16:10 revolution took place. I have been looking at vertical stands for some time now and just waiting for the wife to let me double up my U2412M.

At work, they wont allow me to stack vertically, so I am stuck with (2) 23 inch displays side by side.
 
Idontcare said:
Too bad about that $36k pricetage 🙁
Click to expand...

True, but it is EIZO and very new tech. Both of which == high price.

Remember when a 1920x1200 24" LCD was beyond the reach of most mortals, and now people say stuff like "It's not even worth looking at a video card upgrade if you only game at 1200p."?

I'm actually quite content to know my upgrade path years ahead of time. 🙂

Edit: some more pics to drool over while we wait...

http://pcper.com/news/Displays/EIZO-DuraVision-FDH3601-4k-x-2k-Display-and-We-Want-It

...and a video review in German.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,8...Das-25000-Euro-LCD-im-Hands-on-Test/LCD/Test/

LOL@ the box that thing comes in (on a pallet)... Not gonna sneak that purchase by the missus!
 
Last edited:
I too really want to see displays like this come down in price. It's sort of absurd how pixel density has remained roughly the same for ages on desktop PCs but tablets and phones have raced ahead. You can get a 4.5" phone with the same resolution as a 13" Macbook!

I'm waiting for that 4096x2160 resolution to show up in a 24" panel... and for Windows and OS X to implement resolution-independent UI sizing.

At least OS X seems to be making some progress in this direction; 10.6 added the capabilities for some resizing, 10.7 expanded on it, even 10.7.3 added some higher resolution cursors than can be displayed on current Mac LCD panels. None of it is really used right now, mind you, but I'm still holding out for the "Retina display" Macbook Pro refresh that's been rumoured.
 
to make it worst my goddam iphone have higher pixel density than my LCD monitor. we need to stop all this HDTV crap, and give use higher pixel density
 
Probably a good thing it's not affordable yet. I don't think that video cards are even close to being able run at these resolutions with decent frame rates.
 
Idontcare said:
Taking that approach, with eyefinity I could buy 6 really dirt-cheap LCD's and technically do even better than a 2x30" setup.

ATI-Eyefinity-3x2-Windows-Desktop.jpg


:hmm:...not that I'm against that...it just doesn't solve my current pet-peave which is work-area for displaying lines of code.
Click to expand...

No, you really can't do that with dirt cheap monitors, as TN panel viewing angles do not play nicely with that kind of setup.
 
Snowshredder102 said:
Probably a good thing it's not affordable yet. I don't think that video cards are even close to being able run at these resolutions with decent frame rates.
Click to expand...

I would much rather have the resolution there for my windows desktop and just run games at half resolution. Pixel doubling by running a 4096x2160 monitor at 2048x1080 (odd aspect ratio...) would look just fine. I had a 30" monitor for a little while that I ended up returning. The 2560x1600 resolution was too high for my video card, 1280x800 looked surprisingly OK in games while maintaining the excellent desktop area of 2560x1600.
 
Looking at those pics, I came to 3 conclusions.

1. Some people take their FPS games way too seriously.
2. I now want 4 panels instead 2.
3. I want to trade in my 902 case for a 1200. 🙂
 
Does Eyefinity support an upside-down T shaped configuration for video games? Like ▄█▄?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top