5 ms·

I dont understand how you can get a 40 inch 4k TV for $350 but a 32 inch 4k display is $900. Seems the 32 inch space prices are way too high.

by rb808 10y ago

ogsharkman 10y ago
This has confused me too, maybe it has to do with the size of the relative markets?
bardworx 10y ago
Manny different reasons, including: - monitors have better refresh rate and color accuracy - tvs don't have sleep functions and won't wake up with your computer. - tvs that cost $350 don't have have refresh rate, contract etc. Monitors are more expensive because the have to be more detailed in color reproduction, accuracy, etc.
rwmj 10y ago
I'm using a 55" 4K TV as a monitor and it works fine at full resolution, so my advice is just buy a TV for this.
- vldx 10y ago
  Honest question, how do you work on 55" display?
  - rwmj 10y ago
    By mainly having the work windows in the center, and email/chat in peripheral vision. See my setup here: https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/new-standing-desk-set-up/ https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/new-standing-desk-set-...
abhorrence 10y ago
The pixel density on the 32 inch is mich higher, perhaps this leads to larger manufacturing cost? That seems unlikely to explain the entire gap however.
mikestew 10y ago
You're looking at it from the point of view of "but the one over there is bigger". The manufacturer's point of view is "we sell a lot more 40" TVs than we do 32" monitors, so we're going to manufacture the shit out of 40" panels", something something economies of scale. Same reason we suffered with 27" monitors at 1080 for so long: because LG and the like were selling literal boatloads of 1080 panels to put in TVs. If you wanted something out of band like a 1440 panel, well, get your checkbook out. Oh, and does that 4K TV do 60fps at 4K? (Honest question, I have no idea if they do or not. Though I would assume so.)
- satysin 10y ago
  My Samsung TV does 2160p60+HDR and looks fucking incredible. I would use it as my main monitor if it were a little smaller.
- jdmichal 10y ago
  If you ever want a good place to answer your last question, I found rtings to be indespensible when I was shopping for a new TV last year. The "supported resolutions" section answers your question, and there's lots of other good information: http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x850c#comparison_200 http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x850c#comparison_200
  - ethbro 10y ago
    On the other monitor / panel side, if anyone isn't aware of it, TFT Central is amazing. http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
chris11 10y ago
Don't pc monitors usually have higher standards? And some 4k tvs can be bad. For instance, a few tv manufacturers are making rgbw 4k tvs, which are tvs where 25% of the pixels are white and don't produce color. And also I think that a 4k monitor is more of a premium item. I think the assumption is that if you are buying a 4k monitor you can usually afford to spend money than someone buying a 4k tv.
- ghostly_s 10y ago
  An RGBW panel has R,G,B and W subpixels. The white is there to increase overall brightness. You can't count your subpixels and call it 4k (although oddly you can count three-thousand...something and call that 4k.). Or are you criticizing the decreased color fidelity that accompanies those higher brightness levels?
  - chris11 10y ago
    Alright, I wasn't quite accurate on the specifics. But I'm criticizing the decreased color fidelity. I don't know how much a RGBW subpixel panel increases brightness, but I really don't think it's worth 25% of the panel losing the ability to display color.
    - ghostly_s 10y ago
      I still think you're making a false equivalency between pixels and sub-pixels. If you look at a microscopic view of an LCD, it is not a seamless field of sub-pixels--substantial surface area is non-emitting black borders between them, but the eye merges the sub-pixels (and pixels, if sufficiently high density) into a unified light source. Adding white emitters does not inherently mean you are getting "less color" -- many factors influence the blending that you perceive. It does, presumably, mean that colors at the highest brightness levels are less saturated, but that may mean you are getting additional, less-accurate color space, without sacrificing the accuracy of the color space you already had. I have no idea if RGBW displays on the market actually have these characteristics, but your dismissal is based on a misunderstanding of the optical properties at play.
glasz 10y ago
ever tried a 40" 4k tv? anything below 1500 bucks is utter shit. you've gotta be lucky to get decent panel even for above 1500€. the tv market is one giant shit show designed to sell you all the crap falling from production lines. i spent weeks looking at and testing tv sets. reading reviews. watching videos. in the end i returned everything and gave up.
- matwood 10y ago
  Not only that, but then you have the panel lottery. Same TV model ends up using different panels. One version is amazing and the other version is crap, and it is is hard to know which until you get the TV out of the box.

I dont understand how you can get a 40 inch 4k TV for $350 but a 32 inch 4k display is $900. Seems the 32 inch space prices are way too high.

by rb808 10y ago

I dont understand how you can get a 40 inch 4k TV for $350 but a 32 inch 4k display is $900. Seems the 32 inch space prices are way too high.

ogsharkman 10y ago

This has confused me too, maybe it has to do with the size of the relative markets?

bardworx 10y ago

Manny different reasons, including: - monitors have better refresh rate and color accuracy - tvs don't have sleep functions and won't wake up with your computer. - tvs that cost $350 don't have have refresh rate, contract etc. Monitors are more expensive because the have to be more detailed in color reproduction, accuracy, etc.

rwmj 10y ago

I'm using a 55" 4K TV as a monitor and it works fine at full resolution, so my advice is just buy a TV for this.

vldx 10y ago
Honest question, how do you work on 55" display?
- rwmj 10y ago
  By mainly having the work windows in the center, and email/chat in peripheral vision. See my setup here: https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/new-standing-desk-set-up/ https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/new-standing-desk-set-...

abhorrence 10y ago

The pixel density on the 32 inch is mich higher, perhaps this leads to larger manufacturing cost? That seems unlikely to explain the entire gap however.

mikestew 10y ago

You're looking at it from the point of view of "but the one over there is bigger". The manufacturer's point of view is "we sell a lot more 40" TVs than we do 32" monitors, so we're going to manufacture the shit out of 40" panels", something something economies of scale. Same reason we suffered with 27" monitors at 1080 for so long: because LG and the like were selling literal boatloads of 1080 panels to put in TVs. If you wanted something out of band like a 1440 panel, well, get your checkbook out. Oh, and does that 4K TV do 60fps at 4K? (Honest question, I have no idea if they do or not. Though I would assume so.)

satysin 10y ago
My Samsung TV does 2160p60+HDR and looks fucking incredible. I would use it as my main monitor if it were a little smaller.
jdmichal 10y ago
If you ever want a good place to answer your last question, I found rtings to be indespensible when I was shopping for a new TV last year. The "supported resolutions" section answers your question, and there's lots of other good information: http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x850c#comparison_200 http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x850c#comparison_200
- ethbro 10y ago
  On the other monitor / panel side, if anyone isn't aware of it, TFT Central is amazing. http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/

chris11 10y ago

Don't pc monitors usually have higher standards? And some 4k tvs can be bad. For instance, a few tv manufacturers are making rgbw 4k tvs, which are tvs where 25% of the pixels are white and don't produce color. And also I think that a 4k monitor is more of a premium item. I think the assumption is that if you are buying a 4k monitor you can usually afford to spend money than someone buying a 4k tv.

ghostly_s 10y ago
An RGBW panel has R,G,B and W subpixels. The white is there to increase overall brightness. You can't count your subpixels and call it 4k (although oddly you can count three-thousand...something and call that 4k.). Or are you criticizing the decreased color fidelity that accompanies those higher brightness levels?
- chris11 10y ago
  Alright, I wasn't quite accurate on the specifics. But I'm criticizing the decreased color fidelity. I don't know how much a RGBW subpixel panel increases brightness, but I really don't think it's worth 25% of the panel losing the ability to display color.
  - ghostly_s 10y ago
    I still think you're making a false equivalency between pixels and sub-pixels. If you look at a microscopic view of an LCD, it is not a seamless field of sub-pixels--substantial surface area is non-emitting black borders between them, but the eye merges the sub-pixels (and pixels, if sufficiently high density) into a unified light source. Adding white emitters does not inherently mean you are getting "less color" -- many factors influence the blending that you perceive. It does, presumably, mean that colors at the highest brightness levels are less saturated, but that may mean you are getting additional, less-accurate color space, without sacrificing the accuracy of the color space you already had. I have no idea if RGBW displays on the market actually have these characteristics, but your dismissal is based on a misunderstanding of the optical properties at play.

glasz 10y ago

ever tried a 40" 4k tv? anything below 1500 bucks is utter shit. you've gotta be lucky to get decent panel even for above 1500€. the tv market is one giant shit show designed to sell you all the crap falling from production lines. i spent weeks looking at and testing tv sets. reading reviews. watching videos. in the end i returned everything and gave up.

matwood 10y ago
Not only that, but then you have the panel lottery. Same TV model ends up using different panels. One version is amazing and the other version is crap, and it is is hard to know which until you get the TV out of the box.