Want to get New Monitor... QHD or 4k??

[radeson]

Well,
The title about sums it up. I have had the itch to get a new monitor for awhile. Right now i am on a 40" 1080p phillips tv. It looks good to me and I like a bigger screen. With that being said, I know I will love the qhd or 4k monitors, but I know very little about them.

I need some advice and guidance on this. And also any info about the difference. I want something bigger. Maybe 32" +... I dont like the possibility of having sub 60 fps so i think the QHD sounds good. I dont know.... AHHHH..... Where to start....

 

[mfenn]

The most common size for a QHD panel is 27". There are some 32" models, but not a ton. The biggest 4K (3840x2160) monitor on Newegg is 28". If you want something bigger than 32", then you would have to look at TVs instead of monitors. TV's don't typically do the MST tiling modes necessary to get 60 Hz.

That being said, I can't really recommend 4K for PC use right now. There's just too many compromises with the desktop experience and of course not being able to run a 60 Hz is a killer.

 

[Murloc]

that big? You have to get a TV, with all the problems it entails.

Anyway I guess it's too early for 4K gaming, except for particular games which would work fine with AMD cards. Also you'd have to compromise on other stuff just for the resolution.

As far as QHD monitors go, I'm keeping my 1080p 24'' TN panel for a few months or a year because right now there's adaptive sync coming out, 120 Hz IPS panels coming out, and there's a bunch of FUD about nvidia support for it, and we don't know if G-sync is gonna fail or fall in price and that's all there is on the market right now, coupled with TN panels and gaming monitors rife with quality problems such as the asus swift.
Honestly, I wouldn't want to buy a monitor now and skip out on adaptive sync because of a few months. A monitor is something that lasts many years and although I've never seen it, adaptive sync is quite disruptive on paper.

 

[Gunbuster]

AFAIK AMD drivers are still derpy about 4k and pixel clocks. If you go 4K you might have some fun in store fiddling with drivers to get it working.

 

[mnewsham]

you have 4x r9-290 4GB cards, to be perfectly honest that just isn't enough VRAM for 4k gaming, could you run games at 4k 60hz? Yes. But you will be at the limit of your VRAM fairly quickly and will potentially need to keep the textures at a lower quality. If you had gotten say 3x r9-290x 8GB ($420*3= $1260) instead of 4x R9-290 ($300*4=$1200) then you probably would be fine for 4k, or at least better off. 8GB VRAM would be MUCH better for 4k, you have multiple high end cards so the pure GPU power isn't as much of the issue, its the VRAM required for that high resolution.

I'd just stick with QHD at this point as you should have the VRAM for most games (But even still that 4GB VRAM will limit you with certain games at QHD resolution, however much less so than 4k res would)

 

[radeson]

you have 4x r9-290 4GB cards, to be perfectly honest that just isn't enough VRAM for 4k gaming, could you run games at 4k 60hz? Yes. But you will be at the limit of your VRAM fairly quickly and will potentially need to keep the textures at a lower quality. If you had gotten say 3x r9-290x 8GB ($420*3= $1260) instead of 4x R9-290 ($300*4=$1200) then you probably would be fine for 4k, or at least better off. 8GB VRAM would be MUCH better for 4k, you have multiple high end cards so the pure GPU power isn't as much of the issue, its the VRAM required for that high resolution.

I'd just stick with QHD at this point as you should have the VRAM for most games (But even still that 4GB VRAM will limit you with certain games at QHD resolution, however much less so than 4k res would)

Yeah I got these cards before the big 8 gig ones came out. Right now Im thinking about upgrading, but i def want to wait to see what AMD is gonna throw out in the next couple of months. Theres talk of the " '390x' ".... we'll see. I dont think im gonna go with AMD this time though bc these cards are remnants of my former AMD system and I just cant stand AMD anymore. After switching from AMD's fastest chip to INTEL's fastest chip its easy to see AMD just plain SUCKS. Idont care who you are and what you say I have experienced both sides and AMD is just terrible if the 9590 black edition is the best they got.

Anyways enough of that. I think I will wait to upgrade monitors. But i might upgrade my video cards and seriously take 4k into consideration when doing so. I def want to upgrade when all the bugs get worked out. But I dont want to untill there are cards out that can handle 60-120hz with ultra settings on 4k. For now, my 1080p 40" tv is awesome to me, but it could be a little clearer. And Im sure if I switched to QHD or 4k and switched back there would be a big difference. Thanks for the input everyone.

 

[Twitch03]

How far from the screen do you sit?

Also I doubt we will see 60fps with 4k monitors anytime soon.

 

[Gunbuster]

Also I doubt we will see 60fps with 4k monitors anytime soon.

We have 60fps with 4K monitors right now.

 

[Olivier Duff]

I really think 4K is not worth it for now, maybe in a few years if GPU technology is sufficiently improved. I prefer 2560 x 1440, I think it's the sweet spot.

 

[MrTeal]

I'm looking forward to the new generation on 4k TVs with HDMI2.0 that can do 60Hz as a work monitor for CAD and programming. Apparently a 60Hz Seiki is supposed to be coming out quite soon, but I haven't heard much recent information on them. The 40" range seems just about perfect as you could get a reasonable PPI that works without scaling, but also a massive amount of screen real estate.

Does anyone know of a reasonably priced ~40" 4k monitor/TVs available that do 60Hz?

 

[mnewsham]

I'm looking forward to the new generation on 4k TVs with HDMI2.0 that can do 60Hz as a work monitor for CAD and programming. Apparently a 60Hz Seiki is supposed to be coming out quite soon, but I haven't heard much recent information on them. The 40" range seems just about perfect as you could get a reasonable PPI that works without scaling, but also a massive amount of screen real estate.

Does anyone know of a reasonably priced ~40" 4k monitor/TVs available that do 60Hz?

If it's for CAD and programming do you really need 60Hz for anything? If all it is is programming, CAD, web browsing, and general office work, 30Hz should be just fine. You wouldnt want to game or watch movies on it, but for work purpose 30Hz is more than fine. I know of two programmers who have the 40" Seiki 4k 30hz because they use it solely for work, and when they are on sale they are dirt cheap (compared to other 4ks that is)

 

[MrTeal]

If it's for CAD and programming do you really need 60Hz for anything? If all it is is programming, CAD, web browsing, and general office work, 30Hz should be just fine. You wouldnt want to game or watch movies on it, but for work purpose 30Hz is more than fine. I know of two programmers who have the 40" Seiki 4k 30hz because they use it solely for work, and when they are on sale they are dirt cheap (compared to other 4ks that is)

Honestly I don't think it would be a big problem, but I have heard several people complain about 30Hz even with productivity apps. I tend to go quite awhile between monitor updates so it would be nice to wait a month or two if possible and get one that runs 2.0

 

[mnewsham]

Honestly I don't think it would be a big problem, but I have heard several people complain about 30Hz even with productivity apps. I tend to go quite awhile between monitor updates so it would be nice to wait a month or two if possible and get one that runs 2.0

I dont expect they will be nearly as cheap as the 30hz ones, but I may be surprised. I would expect $800 price tag minimum for 40"+ 60hz 4k.

Who knows though, just have to wait and see.

 

[MrTeal]

I dont expect they will be nearly as cheap as the 30hz ones, but I may be surprised. I would expect $800 price tag minimum for 40"+ 60hz 4k.

Who knows though, just have to wait and see.

You could be right, Seiki might use their recent success to up their margins. I'm hoping they stay relatively reasonable though. The Samsung HU6900 is apparently 60Hz and 4:4:4 for $800, so I would hope a Seiki is more in the $500 range.

 

[mnewsham]

You could be right, Seiki might use their recent success to up their margins. I'm hoping they stay relatively reasonable though. The Samsung HU6900 is apparently 60Hz and 4:4:4 for $800, so I would hope a Seiki is more in the $500 range.

I am sending the TV back after learning the Samsung 6000/7000 series cannot push 4:4:4 color to the panel, despite receiving the appropriate signal. This is apparently not a software problem, but an intentional limitation within the TV. Changing to "UHD Color" only "Optimizes the TV for incoming 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 50/60p signals" - optimizes, not displays. The LG 49" 8500 series finally offers true 4:4:4 @ 60Hz - but you have to step up to $1200 and 49".

Looks like it might have issues with actually displaying 4:4:4 at 4k 60hz.

 

[mfenn]

If it's for CAD and programming do you really need 60Hz for anything? If all it is is programming, CAD, web browsing, and general office work, 30Hz should be just fine. You wouldnt want to game or watch movies on it, but for work purpose 30Hz is more than fine. I know of two programmers who have the 40" Seiki 4k 30hz because they use it solely for work, and when they are on sale they are dirt cheap (compared to other 4ks that is)

Have you used a 30 Hz screen for typical desktop computing before? It's pretty miserable since your eyes have been used to 60 Hz since forever.

 

[Twitch03]

We have 60fps with 4K monitors right now.

I meant from the GPU side, they're not fast enough yet.

 

[Gunbuster]

I meant from the GPU side, they're not fast enough yet.

Actual benchmarks say otherwise: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...x_980_sli_4k_video_card_review/3#.VOta1fnF9Uo

 

[Twitch03]

Actual benchmarks say otherwise: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...x_980_sli_4k_video_card_review/3#.VOta1fnF9Uo

Because 2 games had an avg fps over 60? Where the rest were in the 40-50 range? In an SLI setup sucking 500-700 watts.

 

[Gunbuster]

Because 2 games had an avg fps over 60? Where the rest were in the 40-50 range? In an SLI setup sucking 500-700 watts.

Now you get to change the rules and say oh too much power, oh too expensive, oh SLI. Please, it's doable and those benchmarks are at ultra settings with AA turned on. You could drop settings just a little and be 60FPS or above easily. You could also go 3X SLI or crossfire and be on easy street.

I'm happy at 1080p myself, but saying 4k 60FPS is impossible is a load of FUD and you should walk back your initial statement instead of trying to qualify it after the fact.

Your last sentence is a borderline attack. You made your point perfectly well without resorting to that. Please keep it to the facts of the argument in the future.

mfenn
General Hardware Moderator