Recommend a 32" 4K monitor for SLI Titan X

[Lil'John]

Title states it all but to clarify setup:
CPU is 3930K
RAM is 32GB
GPUs are two Titan X in SLI

Current setup is three 23.6" 1080Ps on end using NVidia Surround for effective resolution 3240x1920 at ~44". Two are going to wife's computer and third is slated for another use.

My goal is to run a 32" 4K monitor on the left for gaming/primary monitor and a "small" 19" (1440x900) on the right for monitoring, watching netflix, etc.

Any recommendations?

I won't say cost is no issue but rather get a decent quality monitor.

 

[alcoholbob]

Benq 3201ph or Acer b326hk. If you prefer matte there's the Samsung UD970.

 

[lavaheadache]

How many screens are there that actually fit your requirements?

 

[RussianSensation]

Benq 3201ph or Acer b326hk.

I think these are great choice. I believe they use the same panel but the Acer is about $120 less or so. Perhaps BenQ has a slightly better case build quality and adjustment on the panel?

 

[Eric1987]

After having my 28 inch 4k monitor its hard to imagine much bigger. 28 inch seems perfect.

 

[Jacky60]

Don't mess about with a puny 32inch, I just got this and I love it http://www.trustedreviews.com/philips-brilliance-bdm4065uc-review.

 

[myocardia]

Don't mess about with a puny 32inch, I just got this and I love it http://www.trustedreviews.com/philips-brilliance-bdm4065uc-review.

Congrats, you are the first person on the planet to call a 32" monitor puny.

 

[thetuna]

After having my 28 inch 4k monitor its hard to imagine much bigger. 28 inch seems perfect.

This is a personal choice that depends quite a bit on your eyesight.
Years ago I switched from a 19" 1440x900 (89 ppi) to a 27" 2560x1440 (109 ppi).
I first though the resolution was too high; but after a month I don't know how I lived without it.

Recently I switched to 31.5" 3840x2160 (140 ppi). This was harder to get used to. I think this density is the limit of my eyesight without scaling.

For gaming I'm sticking to 2560x1440 since I don't have SLI Titan X like OP

 

[therealnickdanger]

But seriously consider the following:

Vizio P502ui-B1. Not the P502ui-B1E.

50" VA panel with 64 local dimming zones, HDMI 2.0 w/HDCP 2.2, a TRUE 120Hz 1080p input/output game mode (tested on blurbusters). So you can do 4K60 or 1080p120. Looks beautiful after calibration, inky blacks and nearly perfect saturation. All the built-in apps do H.265 4K streaming from online services over the built-in 802.11AC connection. Did I mention you can pick one up off Amazon right now for $800?

 

[Minerva]

The Acer is a great panel for the money.
It does not have adjustments that would satisfy a pro user however.

None of the recommended monitors are 4K monitors either.

For a 4K (4096x2160) display, my personal favorite is the LG 31MU97. Technically it's 31".

I went from a Dell 3014 (2560x1600) and the difference was huge!

You will need a decent DP cable to run at 4096x2160 at 60Hz. The included one barely works. Anything longer requires a decent cable (http://www.dvigear.com/cables-dp-hr.html) but gets the job done.

If 31" isn't big enough there's always the Eizo FDH3601.

p.s. before considering a TV compromise display make sure it can do true 4:4:4 at the resolution and refresh you want! I use this to test:

http://cdn.avsforum.com/b/b4/b4a44044_vbattach208609.png

If it's not compliant, the blue text will be all messed up.

However, anyone with decent peepers will know immediately when using it especially with text. It won't be crisp at all! Also they look far better with cleartype disabled UNLESS you're using scaling.

p.s. 2, LOL at 50", that's way too big for a desktop. Neck strain city there.
VA panels are OK for gaming and TV I suppose. Their color accuracy isn't good at all and the viewing angles, ugh. I'll take some IPS glow/spill over the shortcomings of VA any day of the week!

 

[Lil'John]

How many screens are there that actually fit your requirements?

If this was for me, I'm sure there are dozens of monitors that will meet my requirements. But I'd rather start on a narrower field.

After having my 28 inch 4k monitor its hard to imagine much bigger. 28 inch seems perfect.

The 23.6" monitors I'm currently using are a tad too small even when I was running a pair of them(still running a pair at work)

The effective 44" of three on end is way too much. Even if I discount the bezels between monitors.

I figure 32" is a good comprimise. I may head to the local geek shop to compare 28" and 32".

The Acer is a great panel for the money.
It does not have adjustments that would satisfy a pro user however.

None of the recommended monitors are 4K monitors either.
<snip>

With all the "specs" that are considered 4k, 100 or so isn't much of an issue

p.s. before considering a TV compromise display make sure it can do true 4:4:4 at the resolution and refresh you want! I use this to test:<snip>

I wasn't considering a TV at all. The research I have done so far has led me to believe it is "hit and miss" on getting one that works well with computers.

 

[RussianSensation]

After having my 28 inch 4k monitor its hard to imagine much bigger. 28 inch seems perfect.

What's a good quality IPS/AVA 4K 28" panel though? Also, the issue with 4K on a smaller size like 24-28" is it would be much harder to do things outside of video/gaming. With poor Windows 8.1 scaling, you'll probably have to revert to viewing web pages at 125-150% and the same for Excel/Word.

I use a 37" and to me 28" is small. I think once you use a 32-40" 4K monitor, you will not want to go back to a 28" one.

---

"The Philips has practical elements that go beyond its sheer size. The 40-inch screen and 3840 x 2160 resolution means this screen has a ppi of 110 &#8211; a more manageable level than the 163ppi and 138ppi densities found on 4K screens with 27-inch and 32-inch diagonals.

In fact, the Philips' ppi is more akin to the density levels found on 27-inch and 32-inch screens with resolutions of 2560 x 1440.

The ppi level means this screen doesn&#8217;t have the pure sharpness of smaller 4K panels, but it is more practical. Icons and text are sharp and rendered at manageable sizes, so there&#8217;s less need to squint at impossibly tiny features or use Windows 8.1&#8217;s scaling options make the panel usable."
http://www.trustedreviews.com/philips-brilliance-bdm4065uc-review#rkymXGzHQlYXVLlV.99

 

[RussianSensation]

VA panels are OK for gaming and TV I suppose. Their color accuracy isn't good at all and the viewing angles, ugh. I'll take some IPS glow/spill over the shortcomings of VA any day of the week!

Imo it's not as clear cut because VA smokes IPS in terms of black levels and contrast ratio. Those 2 aspects greatly contribute to improved IQ in movies/TV viewing and games.

For example, from that Phillips review:

"The Brilliance kicked off with decent performance straight out of the box. Its brightness level of 258 nits is a tad lower than many of its rivals, but it&#8217;s beefed up by a brilliant black level of 0.05 nits &#8211; that&#8217;s lower than every other screen we&#8217;ve tested in this category, and it contributes to a stonking contrast ratio of 5160:1.

That figure means that dark tones are incredibly deep, and that black level means that colours have plenty of punch elsewhere too. The stunning contrast also ensures good depth and variation throughout the entire range, with subtle shades detectable even in the lightest tones."

The review also states the screen has good viewing angles.

For $900 on EBay, this is a strong contender for sure.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Philips-406...474?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item339c6c9f5a

 

[Minerva]

Imo it's not as clear cut because VA smokes IPS in terms of black levels and contrast ratio. Those 2 aspects greatly contribute to improved IQ in movies/TV viewing and games.

For example, from that Phillips review:

"The Brilliance kicked off with decent performance straight out of the box. Its brightness level of 258 nits is a tad lower than many of its rivals, but it&#8217;s beefed up by a brilliant black level of 0.05 nits &#8211; that&#8217;s lower than every other screen we&#8217;ve tested in this category, and it contributes to a stonking contrast ratio of 5160:1.

That figure means that dark tones are incredibly deep, and that black level means that colours have plenty of punch elsewhere too. The stunning contrast also ensures good depth and variation throughout the entire range, with subtle shades detectable even in the lightest tones."

The review also states the screen has good viewing angles.

For $900 on EBay, this is a strong contender for sure.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Philips-406...474?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item339c6c9f5a

I'm just going by what my eyes see in my office here. I buy and sell a lot of monitors. Nothing has the color accuracy of IPS, period. What good are dark blacks if your colors are not accurately represented?

The Amazon description has this warning as well:

"*Caution: This monitor has huge pixels, and 4~6 DEAD PIXELS are NORMAL from manufacturer.
Display "

That would drive me crazy.

I just sent back a LS34E790CNS last week. Was really disappointed after reading all the rave reviews about it. Looked washed out and text was fuzzy. Simply unacceptable! I would have tried another to rule out a defective sample but I didn't care for the curved screen. Of course I look at architectural drawings so the distortion is a deal breaker. I did watch movies on it and the wide experience was nice but the colors looked almost cartoonish and when things faded to dark there was terrible artifacts that simply don't exist on my high end IPS displays. (NEC, Dell, Eizo)

I did try a Samsung 40" UHD TV but it's not 4:4:4 60Hz 2160P capable over HDMI. That panel is VA and it looked incredible. Watched a few episodes of House of Cards at 4K and it was just amazing. No complaints about that panel and black levels were the best I've seen on a non plasma set! I wanted to keep it on my desk but the fact that it does not function as a proper monitor was a deal breaker.

Not to worry as pretty soon we should have lots of choices. But right now there's just a few. The Dell 5K panel is amazing but it's too small. I'd love to see it in 36" or larger format.

The Acer and LG 4K display would be fine for the OP.
If they don't require a display that has "pro" features than the Acer is very good. It even has a magnetic base that holds paper clips, but keep those credit cards away!

 

[InfiniteLurker]

None of the recommended monitors are 4K monitors either.

For a 4K (4096x2160) display, my personal favorite is the LG 31MU97. Technically it's 31".

I went from a Dell 3014 (2560x1600) and the difference was huge!

I have the LG 31MU97-B as well, came from pretty much the same (a Dell 3007WFP-HC), and agree completely. The difference was huge, and I love this monitor thus far. I was close to going with the LG 34UC97, but I did not want to lose any vertical resolution.

 

[tential]

Don't mess about with a puny 32inch, I just got this and I love it http://www.trustedreviews.com/philips-brilliance-bdm4065uc-review.

Mmmmm you know what I like. Bigger the better!

I just wish they'd bring Gsync/Freesync to HDTVs. I know this is the billionth time I've said it I just can't help it. This tech needs to be in more products!

 

[x3sphere]

But seriously consider the following:

Vizio P502ui-B1. Not the P502ui-B1E.

50" VA panel with 64 local dimming zones, HDMI 2.0 w/HDCP 2.2, a TRUE 120Hz 1080p input/output game mode (tested on blurbusters). So you can do 4K60 or 1080p120. Looks beautiful after calibration, inky blacks and nearly perfect saturation. All the built-in apps do H.265 4K streaming from online services over the built-in 802.11AC connection. Did I mention you can pick one up off Amazon right now for $800?

It doesn't do 4:4:4 chroma though, that's the only reason those Vizio's don't get much love. Hopefully the 2015 sets do. 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 is fine for general content consumption, but you really need 4:4:4 for an optimal desktop experience otherwise text will look very blurry.

 

[Jacky60]

If you can afford it the Phillips 4065 really is worth a look. I've a Samsung 27inch 4k and a Dell 2713H 2560/1440 and they both look tiny in comparison. For gaming it has to be experienced to be believed. I haven't a single dead pixel I've seen no ghosting and it's by far and away the best monitor I've ever owned.

 

[Techhog]

None of the recommended monitors are 4K monitors either.

For a 4K (4096x2160) display, my personal favorite is the LG 31MU97. Technically it's 31".

You just had to be that guy, didn't you?

 

[Socio]

But seriously consider the following:

Vizio P502ui-B1. Not the P502ui-B1E.

50" VA panel with 64 local dimming zones, HDMI 2.0 w/HDCP 2.2, a TRUE 120Hz 1080p input/output game mode (tested on blurbusters). So you can do 4K60 or 1080p120. Looks beautiful after calibration, inky blacks and nearly perfect saturation. All the built-in apps do H.265 4K streaming from online services over the built-in 802.11AC connection. Did I mention you can pick one up off Amazon right now for $800?

Wow I really like that idea 4k60 for movies, videos, desktop etc.. and 1080p120 for gaming in one monitor

But 50 inch is just too big, anyone know if there is anything like that in the 32 inch range?