4 ms·

30Hz is a dealbreaker. I will keep my 1920x1200 until I can have a proper 4K display. I really am surprised there are people who can tolerate that refresh rate

by nsxwolf 13y ago

30Hz is a dealbreaker. I will keep my 1920x1200 until I can have a proper 4K display. I really am surprised there are people who can tolerate that refresh rate on a desktop.

silon3 13y ago
"Proper" includes 16:10 or even better (15:10 would be great)
- hatu 13y ago
  Honestly I hate this new trend of making displays wider and wider. I feel like 4:3 or something a little bit wider is great for programming. Right now my two widescreen displays waste space at the edges because it's just too far to look at. Putting some of that vertically would improve the use of screen real estate for work
  - vacri 13y ago
    4:3 is 16:12. 16:10 is 'a little bit wider' :)
- nileshtrivedi 13y ago
  Why would you care about the aspect ratio instead of vertical pixel count? I think wide-screens are okay as long as there is enough vertical space (to read code, articles etc.). The window manager is a software problem and can be fixed For eg, Ubuntu's Unity had some clever solutions to utilize wide-screens efficiently.
  - Zak 13y ago
    Assuming a sufficiently high pixel density, I think what most people care about most is physical height. Being too wide might make a display difficult to fit in to certain work spaces, but it's not nearly as big an issue with desktops as it is with laptops.
Scienz 13y ago
Especially if you're using your monitors for gaming and such, in addition to work. I was a bit disappointed at first, having just upgraded to 3x 27" 1920x1080 monitors, thinking I could have had 2x 39" 4Ks for about the same price. But 30Hz would basically eliminate gaming on them, much less Eyefinity/Nvidia Surround. With the 3x 27" set up you can easily move them between rooms when you're not using all three, too.
- dmm 13y ago
  The Seiki supports true 120Hz at 1920x1080.
  - FootballMuse 13y ago
    Advertised, but the 39" model does not deliver. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AClZklhqeA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AClZklhqeA Edit: Looks like crossflashing, may fix it. Testing now... http://www.avsforum.com/t/1482611/review-of-the-seiki-39-4k-display-se39uy04/30#post_24140094 http://www.avsforum.com/t/1482611/review-of-the-seiki-39-4k-...
    - dmm 13y ago
      Damn. That's weird it works on the 39" but not the 50".
vehementi 13y ago
I poisoned 60Hz accidentally when I bought a 120Hz gaming monitor. Now 60Hz mouse movement feels choppy and horrible.
mcv 13y ago
Yeah, I'd love to have such a big, high resolution display, but it has to meet some basic standards. I agree with the article that it's a waste to market that kind of resolution as a TV (why would a TV ever need that kind of resolution?), whereas a cheap, good quality high-res monitor could sell very well.

by nsxwolf 13y ago

30Hz is a dealbreaker. I will keep my 1920x1200 until I can have a proper 4K display. I really am surprised there are people who can tolerate that refresh rate on a desktop.

silon3 13y ago

"Proper" includes 16:10 or even better (15:10 would be great)

hatu 13y ago
Honestly I hate this new trend of making displays wider and wider. I feel like 4:3 or something a little bit wider is great for programming. Right now my two widescreen displays waste space at the edges because it's just too far to look at. Putting some of that vertically would improve the use of screen real estate for work
- vacri 13y ago
  4:3 is 16:12. 16:10 is 'a little bit wider' :)
nileshtrivedi 13y ago
Why would you care about the aspect ratio instead of vertical pixel count? I think wide-screens are okay as long as there is enough vertical space (to read code, articles etc.). The window manager is a software problem and can be fixed For eg, Ubuntu's Unity had some clever solutions to utilize wide-screens efficiently.
- Zak 13y ago
  Assuming a sufficiently high pixel density, I think what most people care about most is physical height. Being too wide might make a display difficult to fit in to certain work spaces, but it's not nearly as big an issue with desktops as it is with laptops.

Scienz 13y ago

Especially if you're using your monitors for gaming and such, in addition to work. I was a bit disappointed at first, having just upgraded to 3x 27" 1920x1080 monitors, thinking I could have had 2x 39" 4Ks for about the same price. But 30Hz would basically eliminate gaming on them, much less Eyefinity/Nvidia Surround. With the 3x 27" set up you can easily move them between rooms when you're not using all three, too.

dmm 13y ago
The Seiki supports true 120Hz at 1920x1080.
- FootballMuse 13y ago
  Advertised, but the 39" model does not deliver. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AClZklhqeA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AClZklhqeA Edit: Looks like crossflashing, may fix it. Testing now... http://www.avsforum.com/t/1482611/review-of-the-seiki-39-4k-display-se39uy04/30#post_24140094 http://www.avsforum.com/t/1482611/review-of-the-seiki-39-4k-...
  - dmm 13y ago
    Damn. That's weird it works on the 39" but not the 50".

vehementi 13y ago

I poisoned 60Hz accidentally when I bought a 120Hz gaming monitor. Now 60Hz mouse movement feels choppy and horrible.

mcv 13y ago

Yeah, I'd love to have such a big, high resolution display, but it has to meet some basic standards. I agree with the article that it's a waste to market that kind of resolution as a TV (why would a TV ever need that kind of resolution?), whereas a cheap, good quality high-res monitor could sell very well.