28” Asus 4K monitor has single tile, $649 price tag

Remember the PB287Q monitor Asus introduced in January? The 28" 4K display was supposed to arrive in the second quarter and sell for $799. Units are expected to be on shelves the week of May 12, and it turns out the price will be much lower than expected. We’re told the PB287Q will sell for just $649 stateside.

Apart from its affordable price tag, the PB287Q has several other appealing attributes. Perhaps the most crucial among them is support for 4K resolutions at 60Hz via DisplayPort’s Single-Stream Transport (SST) mode. Most 4K monitors are dual-tile designs that combine two video signals using DisplayPort’s Multi-Stream Transport capability. The PB287Q serves up its 3840×2160 resolution as a single tile, so it should avoid the compatibility quirks associated with dual-tile setups.

According to the official product page, the PB287Q is capable of displaying 1.07 billion colors. It’s based on an 8-bit TN panel, Asus says, and dithering pushes the bit depth into 10-bit territory. Some may be tempted to write off the PB287Q due to its TN roots, but that would be unwise, because the picture quality is excellent. To my eyes, the colors look nearly as good as those produced by Asus’ 31.5" PQ321Q, which is based on IGZO tech and sells for $2,999. The viewing angles are surprisingly good, as well. Check out this picture I snapped at a recent Asus press event:

The colors look a little washed out, but the angle is also pretty extreme. This is an entirely different class of TN technology than we’re used to seeing in cheap notebooks and monitors.

Unlike some other budget 4K monitors, the PB287Q doesn’t skimp on extras. The stand offers height, swivel, and tilt adjustment. The screen can also pivot to a portrait orientation, and there’s a VESA-compatible mounting bracket on the back. Video inputs include one DisplayPort 1.2, one HDMI 1.4, and one HDMI port infused with MHL goodness. 4K input over HDMI is limited to 30Hz, which is a drag, but there’s a neat picture-in-picture capability with floating and side-by-side options.

We’ve seen several affordable 4K monitors announced so far this year, and the PB287Q appears to be among the best. It’s not the only new 4K display Asus is cooking up, either. Higher-end models are due later this year, according to the company, and they won’t be based on TN tech.

Comments closed
    • Bauxite
    • 6 years ago

    It is the end of the “week of may 12th” and these did not show up anywhere, not even preorders from any of the reputable places I checked.

    You can use various search tools and ask for [b<]exact[/b<] matches of "PB287Q" and google, amazon et al give you links to "PB278Q" which is not a freaking exact match! I hate how everyone hides database query engines behind stupid "helpful" interpretive front ends, I completely understand the need to sanitize input but manipulating the value itself is not acceptable.

      • Bauxite
      • 6 years ago

      none this week either, not even preorders, paper launch 🙁

    • WaltC
    • 6 years ago

    Great news, guys! I love to see TR out front with this kind of splendidly useful news.

    The bash against TN panels is fairly inexplicable to me–I mean, I use them exclusively as desktop RGB computer monitors, and not as a movie screen for the living room (where I have a much larger than 28″ TV which frankly sucks as a computer monitor but is absolutely gorgeous when running Blu-Ray, or SuperHiDef Netflix movies, etc.–much superior to my RGB monitors in that capacity)

    My point is that used as a desktop monitor–the way all *real men* compute(TM), btw–I don’t have to worry much about TN viewing angles–I adjust my deeply cushioned Real Man(TM) computer chair, and adjust the angle of my Real Man(TM) desktop computer screen–and all is well…!

    I recently got an in-depth look (and use of) a brand-new HP 28″ 1920×1080 IPS panel monitor, and I got to see and use it right alongside a HannsG H7281 28″ 1920×1200 TN panel. The HP cost around ~$251 shipped from Amazon (before sales tax), and the HannsG cost ~$230 shipped from NewEgg. Both monitors had HDMI, DVI, and VGA inputs, and I used both with HDMI, of course, and both monitors have a similar .30-.31 dot pitch.

    The HP IPS was very bright and crisp, but being absolutely forthright, here, I had no trouble reaching a very similar if not identical color gamma ramp and white balance levels with the HannsG TN. I was a bit surprised by that actually, but there it is. Additionally, I could plainly see that the *same Windows desktop* rendered on both monitors (2d, of course) was noticeably sharper on the 1920×1200 TN than on the 1920×1080 IPS–ie, the screen icons were less stair-stepped and just generally looked slightly cleaner on the TN. Some people like to say that you cannot see any difference between 1920×1200 and 1920×1080, but I could certainly see it here (and being the Windows desktop it was *not* a matter of aspect ratios…;))

    Perhaps the HP was not truly representative of IPS panels in general, but nevertheless I had no choice but to conclude that the HannsG was the monitor I would prefer having between the two…! The experience was kind of eye-opening for me–reading so much negative press regarding TN vs. IPS. The actual qualitative difference, imo, boils down to viewing angles, the IPS providing a much wider field of view, so to speak, and setting up a TN computing monitor for the best static viewing angle possible is not difficult with a TN.

      • Krogoth
      • 6 years ago

      It is from videophiles who are still reliving memories from 1990s when TNs were really that *bad*. They haven’t touch or use a TN since then and think nothing has changed.

    • Jakubgt
    • 6 years ago

    I’ll wait for the Korean 4k IPS panels to pop up on eBay

    • mcnasty72@gmail.com
    • 6 years ago

    Not dropping that kind of cash on a TN panel. Period.

    • Jigar
    • 6 years ago

    I personally cannot go below 42″ Inch TV which i use as monitor.

      • Laykun
      • 6 years ago

      That must be quite difficult to look at when it’s 3ft from your face.

        • Jigar
        • 6 years ago

        Before i installed it, i had the same feeling as yours, trust me it feels as if you in a theater – when all the lights are off.

        I normally play Mass effect series, Just cause 2, Saints 3, NFS series kind of game and they look amazing.

        EDIT: I would also like to add that i didn’t find pixel block or any such kind of issues while playing games.

          • Laykun
          • 6 years ago

          I hope it’s atleast 4k resolution. Pixels aren’t really supposed to be the size of your fist.

          • Chrispy_
          • 6 years ago

          Agreed. 60″ screen and I’m maybe 7-8 feet away. It could easily be a projector giving me a 100″ image at this distance and it wouldn’t be too big.

          People pay LOTSA MONEY to see stuff in a cinema and apart from being deafened and overcharged for popcorn, the only real benefit is a huge screen that fills your filed of view

        • Buzzard44
        • 6 years ago

        Jigar is right – it’s actually not difficult. I used a 42″ 1080p TV as a monitor from 2009-2013, putting it on my computer desk as if it were a smaller monitor.

        Sure the pixels are bigger, but it gives pretty immersive effect. I loved it.

        Try it before you bash it – it ain’t bad.

          • PoisonJam
          • 6 years ago

          Great for gaming, I’d agree. But if you want to do anything productive with it it’s not ideal (personal first-hand experience).

      • The Wanderer
      • 6 years ago

      42 square inches would be a pretty small screen…

      More seriously, last I checked most TVs could only handle resolutions up to 1080p at most. I find that actual resolution is at least as important as display size – and that PPI can be comparably important to either one. Yes, I value my 30″ monitor, but if it could only handle (the equivalent of) 1080p at that size, the low PPI would make it unpleasant for me to look at; 1080p at 42″ would be considerably worse.

      • PoisonJam
      • 6 years ago

      Pretty damn awful DPI on a 42″ TV, even if it’s 4k.

        • Chrispy_
        • 6 years ago

        I don’t understand your comment; its the exact same DPI as 1080p on a 21″ monitor, and that’s a higher DPI than average (22″ monitors used to be 1680x 1050 before 24″ became the mainstream 1080p option)

        Do you mean that all normal desktop monitors have “pretty damn awful DPI”?

    • mcnabney
    • 6 years ago

    At the time I am writing this I.S.T.’s post was rated -33. And for posting a fairly honest opinion and not trolling.

    In my book a -33 is the equivalent of being shouted down. Has the tripled voting power of backers turned Tech Report comments toxic?

      • Voldenuit
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<]Has the tripled voting power of backers turned Tech Report comments toxic?[/quote<] Yeah, I'm not a fan of the triple vote system, it seems as if it can be abused too easily in either direction.

        • Amazing Mr. X
        • 6 years ago

        I think it would be better if we saw where the votes were coming from, like with the Disqus commenting system. We’re just assuming here that the multiple down votes are all from a smaller group of users, but if we could see the breakdown of users to votes maybe we’d have a different opinion.

        I don’t know, I just think the issue is transparency.

        Even people with the capacity to +3 a comment don’t really have any actual voice if no other person knows it was all from them. It’s just hard to tell how many people actually agree or disagree anymore. It’s all muddied, and without a breakdown I don’t think it’s actually being muddied for any real purpose.

      • I.S.T.
      • 6 years ago

      I don’t feel shouted down, FWIW. Given that upvotes and downvotes ultimately have no real value…

      Now, if TR ever adopts a hide posts globally based off of low votes system, then yes, it’ll be shouting down.

        • Klimax
        • 6 years ago

        And for best example how it can go see Ars Technica. (Spoiler: Badly. Enforcing group view and eliminating quite bit of contrary opinions and so on. Idiotic idea stemming from idea that community is mature and thus not doing stupidities like that. Proven wrong in few hours after institution of “hiding posts”)

          • Bauxite
          • 6 years ago

          Ars comments were already pretty far on the scale of being a benchmark example of an echo chamber, but yeah the hiding feature put the nail in the coffin.

      • Airmantharp
      • 6 years ago

      He said, ‘I do not understand…’

      And the TR community responded, ‘you must not be very bright’.

        • Wirko
        • 6 years ago

        We’ve never made an agreement on what a up/downvote actually means. Is it just ‘I agree’ or ‘I do not agree’, or is it ‘Best post ever, you are a genius!’ or ‘Go away, you idiot!’ ?

      • oldDummy
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<]...Has the tripled voting power of backers turned Tech Report comments toxic?[/quote<] maybe. more toxic is a better description. ps- first time i used three votes. +

      • anotherengineer
      • 6 years ago

      Indeed.

      I find the snide and inconsiderate remarks more worrisome than the down votes.

      Someone could have politely and professionally pointed out that this was new tech, and high 4k resolution and that’s why the cost is so high compared to your run of the mill monitor.

      No one knows where the person lives or what his or her income is, and maybe they are still learning about the tech world.

      I know politeness, common courtesy and professionalism for some reason don’t exist on the internet, but seeing more and more almost rude comments on the Tech Report is why I haven’t subscribed. Hopefully the admins will do a better job promoting politeness and courtesy, while dealing with the chide comments here in the future.

        • mcnabney
        • 6 years ago

        Actually 4k is pretty old tech. Consumer 4k is over a decade old now. Display manufacturing has really slowed down development and left us at 768p on laptops and 1080p on the desktop for a long time. Look what smart phones have done. From VGA to 1080p in seven years.

      • puppetworx
      • 6 years ago

      The votes arent toxic, though some of the comments are. Characterizing someone as degenerate because they’re not American middle class is pretty stereotypical middle class American behavior…(irony intended).

      • jihadjoe
      • 6 years ago

      Actually, commenters went like:

      “lol! what a poor. get a job.”

      • Chrispy_
      • 6 years ago

      It just means his opinion isn’t popular. I sometimes post unfortunate or ugly truths and they get downvoted. If people didn’t have different opinions the discussion would be pretty dull anyway.

      In this case, people don’t agree with him because it’s affordable to most people. More concerning are the spiteful and rude comments of people hiding behind internet anonymity, but that’s just normal for some people who lose all sense of decency when their browser pops up a comments box; I wouldn’t ever take it personally….

        • mcnabney
        • 6 years ago

        $650 for a display is not affordable to most people – most desktop monitors sold are for less than $200. It is still squarely a niche product, but in 6 months they will be at $400 or less.

      • Shambles
      • 6 years ago

      Yup, the triple voting system only makes the hive-mind worse. If you want to have an effective community filtering system you make the votes invisible and hide the comments that fall below a certain ratio of good votes:bad votes. As it currently stands it’s just a shallow reddit-style popularity club that leads to people making posts not to add content but to re-enforce the views of most of the users.

      • BooTs
      • 6 years ago

      To be fair, his comment is pretty useless.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 6 years ago

      I triple + voted him. It works both ways. I completely agree that $650 is a buttload of cash, ignoring the hidden question of how much you have to spend on a PC to play at that resolution.

      • PixelArmy
      • 6 years ago

      This assumes the comments weren’t toxic before the 3x thumbs up/down…

    • JosiahBradley
    • 6 years ago

    The problem I have with TN isn’t the horizontal view shift, but the vertical. This becomes extremely important when mounting in Portrait mode. How does this display handle a portrait orientation, is the viewing angle good enough for 3×1 portrait eyefinity? I’m serious as I really would like to get a proper portrait setup for work as I work with web pages and vertical space is a lot more important than width. It also helps when coding to be able to read longer files. 2,000$ isn’t bad for 24 Mega pixels if I can see all of them from the side. I’ll totally go TN at this price point if it’s good.

    • marvelous
    • 6 years ago

    There’s crappy IPS panel as well. This Acer 23″ IPS panel I have is pretty bad when it comes to ghosting especially fast paced games. TN panels have their draw backs when viewing in angles but if you sit on your desk 100% of the time at direct view it’s not a problem.

    • CampinCarl
    • 6 years ago

    This seems right up my alley. I have a 22″ Acer I’ve had for…good lord, almost 6 years. It’s a really solid TN panel, and this looks like a really good upgrade from this 1680×1050 job.

    Does anyone know how well these will downscale to 2K? I doubt my 7950 would run EVERY game I play (incl. BF4) at “4K”.

      • Voldenuit
      • 6 years ago

      I’ve had to downgrade to 2K on a few games on my 1440p + GTX 760, and the main issue I’ve come across is moire/aliasing artifacts on fine, high contrast structures (like screen doors, telephone wires etc). Other than that, it looks pretty good, even though the 43% scaling from 2.5K to 2K is a relatively nasty one.

      Going from 4K to 2K should be much nicer, although you still might get moire, and fine sharp lines can always be a problem with downscaling.

    • humannn
    • 6 years ago

    Nice job Asus, but I’m really looking more for something around 32″ – 40″ on my desk, since 4k would produce tiny text at stock settings and Windows hasn’t yet perfected text resizing. My ideal solution… a beautiful, peripheral-encompassing 40″ 4k monitor.

    • TwoEars
    • 6 years ago

    I like gaming.

    And I like gaming at native resolution.

    And I like gaming at 60Hz or more.

    For that simple reason I will stay away from 4k for the foreseeable future.

      • ptsant
      • 6 years ago

      You’re right. Although this is certainly a desirable monitor, the $1000 crossfire setup needed to properly game on it is an important cost. I’m not that passionate about pixel density, although I do see the point. I’d rather get the EIZO PVA gaming monitor that does 120Hz + strobe (FG2421) I think. 28″ high-res choppiness is not an optimal experience…

    • moose17145
    • 6 years ago

    Affordable, has a proper stand, vesa mount, and supports 60hz via DP 1.2, and a 8 bit panel…. you have my attention and my interest…

    • Laykun
    • 6 years ago

    Cant wait to see a decent review of these monitors. My biggest problem with TN panels is colour gamut and uniformity across the screen. But I’ll take your word on how good this monitor looks and I’ll reserve my judgement till I see a review, I just can’t believe that you can get a quality display of that size and resolution at that price, at least not yet.

    • Voldenuit
    • 6 years ago

    There are good TNs and bad TNs.

    I’ve got two bad TNs at home (dumpster finds) serving as secondary displays to a 14″ 1200p (E-IPS) rig and a 27″ 1440p (AHVA) rig. They’re adequate.

    But I have seen (and used) good TN monitors before as well.

    Glad to hear the ASUS sounds like it’s a good TN, probably better than any of the TNs I’ve used before.

    And you know, there are good IPS and bad IPS displays, too.

      • chuckula
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<]There are good TNs and bad TNs.[/quote<] BUT I THOUGHT ALL TNs WERE BAD!

        • Tumbleweed
        • 6 years ago

        || There are good TNs and bad TNs.

        | BUT I THOUGHT ALL TNs WERE BAD!

        All TNs go to Heaven.

        • Derfer
        • 6 years ago

        There are TNs that are better than others, and there are some bad IPS out there that people compare them to and think the TN doesn’t look so bad in comparison. Then there are the LG 27″ grade IPS panels that blow every TN you’ve ever seen out of the water.

      • Airmantharp
      • 6 years ago

      Same here- I use crappy TNs as extra displays while working or gaming- stuff like web pages, media streams, other apps, etc. They’re ugly, but I don’t need Ventrilo or Pandora to be pretty.

      • davidbowser
      • 6 years ago

      Ditto. I’ve got two cheep TN panels running at 1600×900 bracketing my 27 inch 2560×1440 IPS panel.

      It’s pretty easy to tell the difference, but I spend so much time on the center panel that I don’t mind and the side panels are for ancillary stuff (email, text editing, IM, RSS, etc.).

      This Asus sounds like what I was waiting for to pair with a new rig.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 6 years ago

    If only they’d stop making TN displays, then IPS displays would go down in price because that’d be all that was made.

    When you have TN defenders trying even in the articles talking about the new announcements to defend the technology, what can we expect but more TN displays?

    There’s just no reason in 2014 we should have any kind of TN display being made. Anything TN can do, IPS can do better. Cost wouldn’t even favor TN so much if more IPS displays were being made in their place.

    As long as there are people willing to say, “Well, guyz, I looked at it and it’s not THAT bad, not really, I mean, I didn’t think so in show lighting… it’s pretty good, really…” because they daydream of having 4K displays all up in the house, then there’ll be companies gleefully making these horrible TN panels.

    We have a responsibility to future generations to rid ourselves of TN displays so that our children’s children can know a world without washed out color and ridiculous viewing angles.

      • morphine
      • 6 years ago

      Oh look, someone else that doesn’t believe that good TN panels are actually a thing.

      • f0d
      • 6 years ago

      if only they’d stop making IPS displays, then OLED displays would go down in price because that’d be all that was made……………

        • Buzzard44
        • 6 years ago

        Yeah, all these stupid people keep pushing HDDs and SSDs are keeping up the price of my memristors!

        Seriously though, I’m debating whether to give the OP -2 for ridiculous logic and +1 for good troll, or -1 for ridiculous logic and +2 for good troll…

        • jihadjoe
        • 6 years ago

        If only they’d stop making Toyota Corollas, then Porsche 911s would come down in price!

      • ptsant
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<] If only they'd stop making TN displays, then IPS displays would go down in price because that'd be all that was made. [/quote<] News flash: they keep making them because many people don't care or are very price-sensitive.

        • Krogoth
        • 6 years ago

        TNs are also faster than IPS and *PVA.

        The FPS-junkies perfer TNs as the closest substitute for CRTs of old.

      • Krogoth
      • 6 years ago

      Either a clever satire or a deluded fanboy downvoting the opposing side. Poe’s law at work.

    • boskone
    • 6 years ago

    Looks like a really good entry-level 4k monitor. Buy one of these, then if it proves desireable a non-TN display in a year or two when prices have come down.

    • Chrispy_
    • 6 years ago

    In my experience the horizontal viewing angles of TN are generally okay because all that happens is a contrast loss as everything gets brighter; worst case scenario – the picture looks correct but just more washed out. Quite often, even on really nasty TN panels, the horizontal angles are fine.

    It’s the vertical angles that can ruin a display. The worst offenders on laptops sometimes have vertical viewing angles so small that you can’t even find the sweet spot. In order to avoid gamma inversion (bottom image in [url=http://cdn.cnet.com.au/story_media/339341421/benq-xl2420t-viewing-angles.jpg<]this example[/url<]) you may have to tilt the screen such that the bottom half of the picture is so badly washed out it looks like the top image in that same example. Those photos only show a sweet spot because the camera is so far away. At normal sitting distance the angle between the top and bottom of the screen can be much bigger than the "sweet spot" angle of a particularly bad TN panel.

      • chuckula
      • 6 years ago

      This.

      The vertical angle issue, especially when viewing in an upward angle toward the panel is a big killer.

      • Laykun
      • 6 years ago

      The verticle viewing angle generally seems to ruin the colour uniformity for me. A grey at the bottom of the screen is generally quite a lot darker than a grey at the top of the screen.

      • meerkt
      • 6 years ago

      The graphics people of Microsoft, who, being graphics people, all have non-TN monitors, never tested Win8’s colors on TNs. Particularly not laptop TNs. The result: scrollbar thumbs — medium grey squares on light grey squares, no borders — can be almost invisible depending on your specific viewing angle.

      They should have a look at the above photo. Or better, test on TNs.

      (Or better, reinstate UI color configuration.)

        • Chrispy_
        • 6 years ago

        Oh god yeah. I’d stopped moaning about 8’s graphical flaws but they’ve still done nothing to address the fact that the flat UI style is both an ergonomic failure and unchangable.

        • Wirko
        • 6 years ago

        All those deficiencies are bad enough on my good old S-PVA, so yeah.

        I’ve said that before and will say it again, even if in vain: parts of screen that have different functions should be easy to distinguish. It’s that simple.

      • Corion
      • 6 years ago

      Can’t they just rotate the panel construction? In my experience most people are generally horizontally centered but with varying vertical angles. I think I’d rather have the ability to tilt the screen than to pivot it sideways.

        • Chrispy_
        • 6 years ago

        Sadly the widescreen nature would make that a disaster by increasing the required viewing angles even more.

          • Corion
          • 6 years ago

          Eew. good point.

    • invinciblegod
    • 6 years ago

    I don’t get why pc monitors all have the same pedestrian look (barring apple). I mean, TV’s come in all manors of unique shapes and styles and some are really beautiful. Is it because the TV is meant to also be furniture? Why can’t computer monitors be the same? Does making it beautiful increase its cost to apple display levels (I doubt it)?

      • PadawanTrainer
      • 6 years ago

      I’m not sure what else can be done to “beautify” it other than do something with the bezel, which will increase bezel size, which is no good.

      Besides most of us rather have the manufacturers put that money into better panels as is evidenced by every comment section in which a TN panel is reviewed…

    • Spotpuff
    • 6 years ago

    I was right with them up until “TN panel” :T

    I know TN is cheap and affordable and great for whatever but the newer IPS panels look great and are pretty cheap (even if they’re 6 bit) and 8 bit IPS panels aren’t that much more.

      • NeelyCam
      • 6 years ago

      I wanted a Porsche 911 until I was told its engine has only 6 cylinders. I mean, wtf you can get an 8-cylinder Mustang for, like, so much cheaper!

        • anotherengineer
        • 6 years ago

        pffffff 8 cylinders pffff

        12 or bust 😉

        [url<]http://www.astonmartin.com/cars/the-vantage-range/v12-vantage-roadster[/url<]

        • ptsant
        • 6 years ago

        The problem with the 911 is that the engine is mounted on the rear. This is such an obvious design flaw that the car manages to handle well despite engine placement and not thanks to it. The Cayman is a much, much better design (engine on the middle, suspensions etc) but is always limited in performance compared with the 911 for purely marketing reasons.

        By the way, the keep doing 6-cylinder probably for the same reason. A huge, naturally aspirated V12 would be very hard to fit in the rear and would completely destroy the weight distribution.

      • Airmantharp
      • 6 years ago

      Call back when the IPS, single-tile, 4k 28″ panels hit $649 🙂

      • funko
      • 6 years ago

      the cheap IPS, to my eyes, can be pretty bad, sometimes worse than TNs in the same price range in terms of edge sharpness, and eye fatigue and color reproduction. they may retain an advantage in contrast though, but not enough to make up for their deficiencies in the lowprice ranges. the nicer IPS displays are usually double the price or more of the midrange TNs displays, so each tech seems to be filling in a different price segment

    • Nikiaf
    • 6 years ago

    I’m not so bothered by the TN panel (I guess having lived with low-quality TN panels exclusively has reduced my snobbiness in this regard) but I’m not a huge fan of having a 28″ monitor. I would really prefer if they could reduce the panel size to 24″; which I know exists, but so far we’re only seeing such panels in the over $1000 category.

      • cjyoda78
      • 6 years ago

      isn’t that way more pixels than necessary for such a small screen?

        • Tumbleweed
        • 6 years ago

        Necessary for what? Depends on what you’re using it for, as with all things.

          • Ninjitsu
          • 6 years ago

          Sir, there is one pixel too many on this screen! I CAN SEE JAGGIES NOW

        • keltor
        • 6 years ago

        Your eye is limited to 1 minute of arc for 20/20 vision. Nyquist frequency suggests we need 30 secs of arc for 20/20 vision to remove aliasing. So our ability to see pixels on a normal monitor at normal viewing distances is around 300 PPI, so we would stop needing pixels at 600 PPI.

        At 24″ monitor @ 4k resolutions is around 183 PPI (At least the Dell UP2414Q is), it just over 1/2 way to even our visual limits.

        (The magic 24″ resolution is 12550×7060, though I would expect the resolution will be closer to 15360×8640 since it’s a clean 8x multiple of 1920×1080.)

          • ptsant
          • 6 years ago

          Interesting calculation. Then again, the limits of vision are derived from pretty extreme situations: black on white, plain center of the visual field and maximum attention. I can see pixels on my 1920×1200, but I have to [b<]look[/b<] for them. In the end, the perceptible benefit from 150ppi to 300ppi to 600ppi would probably be minimal, with the exception of very particular use cases (CAD/CAM with wireframe models, medical imaging and stuff like that). I'm almost certain that in a gaming session, most people wouldn't notice the difference from 150ppi to 300ppi unless specifically told to look for it.

      • Airmantharp
      • 6 years ago

      I love the size of my 30″ monitor, and I love that it has four million pixels to display whatever I’m doing. It’s great for Photoshop *and* for games.

    • danny e.
    • 6 years ago

    Not sure how others feel about the new article ads but I actually like them. It’s nice to see a quick price check for products related to the article.

      • Billstevens
      • 6 years ago

      AdBlock…, or are you referring to the latest stuff pane?

      • derFunkenstein
      • 6 years ago

      I agree. Not that I’m in the market for a huge monitor, but like at the bottom of that hot deal SSD post there’s other SSDs there for context.

    • I.S.T.
    • 6 years ago

    I do not understand how people can call a 649 dollar plus shipping fees and possible sales tax monitor affordable. That’s an insane cost.

      • chuckula
      • 6 years ago

      Look, if you’re starving in a third world country I suppose it’s expensive but for a product that typically lasts a minimum of 5 years (my current monitor is now over 7 and running fine) and that is pushing high-end technology, these things are a bargain.

        • invinciblegod
        • 6 years ago

        Well, it’s not really a “bargain” for people who don’t need it. Most people are just fine with a $300 1440p monitor or $125 for a good 1080p monitor. Compared to those, this is expensive. Don’t forget, you also need the adjacent hardware for it to work (dp capable videocard or high end laptop).

          • Ninjitsu
          • 6 years ago

          [quote<]Well, it's not really a "bargain" for people who don't need it.[/quote<] If they don't need it, they shouldn't really be bothered...let those who do need it subsidize the cost till it's needed...

          • smilingcrow
          • 6 years ago

          “or $125 for a good 1080p monitor.”

          Show me a good 1080P monitor for $125!

            • Waco
            • 6 years ago

            My wife has a trio of HP IPS 23″ panels that cost just over $120 each, shipped, mid last-year. They’re pretty damn nice for the cost.

          • Pwnstar
          • 6 years ago

          Nothing is a bargain for someone who doesn’t need it. They save way more money by not buying in the first place.

      • PadawanTrainer
      • 6 years ago

      Have you found cheaper 4k panels?

      • trek205
      • 6 years ago

      no its not insane at all if you actually pay attention to the context and use some common sense.

      • yokem55
      • 6 years ago

      My existing monitor is a Samsung 23″ 1680×1050 unit from 7 years ago and cost $400 at purchase. It still works perfectly. For something that I will be looking at for the next 7+ years, I for one don’t mind spending that kind of money.

      • ludi
      • 6 years ago

      Spoiled, are we? Back in the good old days of CRTs, that was the [i<]lower[/i<] end of what pro-grade 19-21" CRTs cost. In 1999 dollars. Now we can get a 28-inch, 4k, 10-bit, flat-screen monitor for that kind of money and suddenly it's unaffordable? Great, so buy one of the dozens of 20-32 inch IPS LCDs that support 2k resolutions for $150-400. By the way, how much did you spend on your PC's core components?

        • I.S.T.
        • 6 years ago

        No, I just make 8K a year due to being disabled and also being poor all of my life. The idea of any one non-essential item costing that much and being called affordable is crap, pure and simple.

          • cobalt
          • 6 years ago

          That’s unfortunate, and while I understand what you’re saying, I think it’s pretty clear what was intended in this context. If we follow your logic, you wouldn’t call a brand-new Ferrari for sale for $649 affordable either, but I think most people would disagree with you.

          • Klimax
          • 6 years ago

          Sorry, but that is completely misses things. May be it is not affordable for you, but you have never ever been target market, so your affordability is completely irrelevant and never was.

          It is just complaint for complaint sake and nothing more. Or troll…

      • Vaughn
      • 6 years ago

      Get a better job dude or don’t buy one until you move out of your parents house.
      Monitor last 5-10 years and easily outlast most of the components in a PC,
      that is the one item you don’t go cheap on as you are looking at it for most of the day.

      I have friends that will drop 4k on rims and tires for their car $650 bucks is a bargin considering the cost of other 4k monitors.

      Maybe its time for you to find another hobby….

        • I.S.T.
        • 6 years ago

        Did not see this until someone pointed it out above.

        Try being physically crippled and unable to get an education due to that. It’s a real drain on your resources.

          • Klimax
          • 6 years ago

          And? You are not required to have this monitor, so your complaint is completely nonsensical.

            • I.S.T.
            • 6 years ago

            He was telling me to get a better job. That is what I was objecting to. I’m crippled. I can’t get [i<]a[/i<] job let alone a better one.

          • d0g_p00p
          • 6 years ago

          How does a physical disability stop you from getting a better education? Even if you cannot physically move you are able to use a computer and there are several resources online education wise for disabled people. Even if you are not getting accrued credit for a college degree that should not stop you from learning and bettering yourself by using online only learning resources.

            • I.S.T.
            • 6 years ago

            Well, can’t really earn the cash to get an education in something that will actually land me a job. Free online learning doesn’t really work for that, otherwise the higher learning system would have been destroyed years ago. As for bettering yourself with reading: I do that all the time.

            • d0g_p00p
            • 6 years ago

            Word. I was not trying to diss you just what was wondering what was up with that comment. What I mean with online learning for example are things like downloading the Cisco CNE virtual lab and using online resources + books either on your computer or store bought, etc things like that.

            Again no disrespect I was just curious

      • grantmeaname
      • 6 years ago

      I don’t know. I think a crap computer with a good monitor and decent keyboard can still provide an excellent end-user experience. If you’re gonna splurge on any part of the computer, doesn’t it make sense that it’s the part you actually interact with?

        • Chrispy_
        • 6 years ago

        Yeah. I don’t even think about the cost of peripherals. Gas-lift VESA screen arms, quality keyboard/mouse/screen and more on my chair and desk than most people spend on their whole PC.

        Yet I spend hours sometimes mulling over trivial, inexpensive things like whether a 500GB SSD is $0.06/GB cheaper than a 250GB SSD.

      • Billstevens
      • 6 years ago

      I know you can get a big screen TV for this price, but dropping below the $1,000 dollar mark has pretty much always been the thresh hold for saying a computer monitor is “affordable”.

      Certainly this still isn’t cheap, but its still generally affordable without having save up too much money. Cheap monitors are under $300 dollars.

        • Deanjo
        • 6 years ago

        Some of us remember paying $500 for a 14″ CGA monitor.

        • Meadows
        • 6 years ago

        “Thresh hold”? My god.

      • Sargent Duck
      • 6 years ago

      I paid $800 for my Dell 2407 back in 2007.

      Not a single issue with it, not even a dead pixel 7 years later. I’d pay that kind of money again for that same level of quality.

        • d0g_p00p
        • 6 years ago

        You and me both, love my 2408. While I am not looking at getting a 4K display the new Ultrasharp U2713HM and Asus PB278Q 27″ are looking mighty nice. Since you don’t need a monster video card anymore to run games at default rez, it’s even more tempting.

        Monitor, Keyboard and Mouse are things no PC enthusiast (or hell anyone) should skimp on since that is what you use to interact with your box. A high quality monitor for under $700, yes please!

      • Deanjo
      • 6 years ago

      Would it then offend you then that my monitor setup on my main system cost $2200? (3xAsus PB278Q with Ergotron VESA mounts.)

        • anotherengineer
        • 6 years ago

        Don’t stop there Deanjo, tell him the rest of your main system costs, like those Titan’s and 960GB Crucial SSD’s and and and…………….. 🙂

        Edit – are you running those monitors in landscape or portrait ??

          • Deanjo
          • 6 years ago

          Lol, he would likely have a heart attack if I told him the rest.

          As far as how I am running the monitors, that depends on the task. Most of the time they are in landscape unless I am coding and then they get put in portrait.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 6 years ago

      I get it. $650 is a load of money on its own (it’s a ton of money to me, it’s a bit over half my bi-weekly paycheck). And the cost of a GPU (or a pair of them) that can handle the resolution is also prohibitive. You’re looking at 1500-2000 for a PC and the monitor that it drives. That’s more than I’m ever going to spend on a PC. Definitely a luxury item, and I’d likely never call it “affordable” myself.

      That’s why I have a $140 6-bit IPS 1080p display from Dell and GTX 760 video card. 😆

      • Ninjitsu
      • 6 years ago

      Context. It’s some of the latest monitor tech around, and will remain expensive till the supply-demand equations balance out.

      For 4k monitors, and for people who’re looking to spend that kind of money, or who need this sort of tech, it’s affordable and one of the cheapest around.

      Heck, my monitor cost around $150, I know a lot of people who’d think that’s too much. Heck, I had to save for months before i could afford it myself.

      Moral of the story: It’s all relative.

      • jihadjoe
      • 6 years ago

      It’s not cheap, but it’s hardly insane for what you get.

      I’m actually rather surprised 4k display prices have come down so quickly. I guess that’s the power of being a mainstream resolution. Now hopefully AMD and Nvidia will give us a midrange-priced card with the power to handle this new mainstream resolution.

      • maxxcool
      • 6 years ago

      Not that a true photog would use a TN panel… but plenty of media based jobs would pay that in a heart beat. Other professional users would be inclined as well as they would have less mouse work to to do see larger chunks of work.

        • Deanjo
        • 6 years ago

        CAD users love the extra res as well.

      • mcnabney
      • 6 years ago

      Not sure why you are getting hammered. 4K prices are in freefall right now. This TN panel will go for $400 next Xmas. Besides – it is already outdated since it lacks both HDMI2 and DP 1.3. It will be incapable of playing protected 4K content. So for a display ‘you will be using for 5-10 years’ it will have a very very short shelf life.

        • Deanjo
        • 6 years ago

        [quote<]It will be incapable of playing protected 4K content.[/quote<] Non issue for 99.9% of desktop users. If they are going to watch 4k protected media, chances are they are going to watch that on a much larger screen. I don't know of any desktop user that watches protected media on their desktop systems instead of their TV.

          • mcnabney
          • 6 years ago

          I guess you can sit out the next 50 years of IPTV if you continue to plan around YESTERDAYS habits.

            • Deanjo
            • 6 years ago

            I’ve been watching IPTV for almost a decade thank you very much quite comfortably from the couch on a big screen.

            In fact I’m watching the Raptors game via IPTV right now.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 6 years ago

          You’re right only because 99.9% of desktop users wouldn’t have this monitor (or any other 4K display) in the first place. If you’re buying 4K display, wouldn’t you want 4K media to go with it?

            • Deanjo
            • 6 years ago

            [quote<] If you're buying 4K display, wouldn't you want 4K media to go with it?[/quote<] On my big screen TV sure, on a piddly 28" monitor I could care less. I'm not going to park myself 20" from a screen for a day to watch a Star Wars marathon no matter what the resolution is. Just like how I don't watch movies on the iPad despite it having a higher res than my 64" plasma.

      • LoneWolf15
      • 6 years ago

      I think my Dell 2407WFP cost that with a 4-5 year warranty when I bought it new.

      • oldDummy
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<]...That's an insane cost.[/quote<] For what it is, no. For what you use it for: maybe. depends.

      • sschaem
      • 6 years ago

      +1 :

      A Bugatti Veyron for $300,000 is amazingly cheap, but that doesn’t make it affordable.

      Since some people entire system cost less then this monitor (including the monitor),
      I can see where considering $650 affordable questionable.

      Asus 28″ 1920x monitor are $280 on newegg I believe. I would consider that affordable.

      Having said that, $650 for a quality monitor is a good deal. (But for me, 28″, pass.)

        • PixelArmy
        • 6 years ago

        Cheap doesn’t imply affordable, but affordable also does not imply cheap. A $10 McDonald’s burger isn’t cheap, but is easily affordable by many.

        Who decides the affordable line? You? Me? Maybe [i<]I[/i<] think your $280 threshold is crap, it should be $200. It seems a consensus for [i<]most[/i<] tech enthusiasts is that $650 is affordable. Median US income is ~$50K, maybe after taxes that's ~$40K. You can save up for this monitor in less than a week (40 hrs). Tech enthusiasts generally earn a lot more.

      • mcnasty72@gmail.com
      • 6 years ago

      Is it me or do I think that a expert that says this

      To my eyes, the colors look nearly as good as those produced by Asus’ 31.5″ PQ321Q, which is based on IGZO tech and sells for $2,999.

        • Deanjo
        • 6 years ago

        So you have seen them both in real life side by side? Pretty hard to judge colours on a monitor by viewing it on your monitor.

      • WaltC
      • 6 years ago

      How old are you…13?….;) j/k

      Many of us remember very clearly when low-res 13″ 15khz monitors from C= for Amigas cost $500-600 dollars. IIRC, at one time 10″-12″ black & white *low-res* Apple “printing” monitors rang the bell at ~$1200…I once paid ~$1k for a 17″ 1600×1200 long-persistence monitor, again for use with an Amiga–I remember well when NEC 20″ RGB monitors went for ~$2300, or so. Many years ago.

      Back in the late 90’s I was thrilled to buy a 20″ 2048×1536-capable Sony Trinitron “flat screen” CRT shipped to my door direct from Sony for $600–I thought I had a steal. And it only weighed 55lbs, or so….;)

      Perhaps this will provide some insight into why most people think this monitor is an absolute steal @$649. It should. I love to see this happening.

    • chuckula
    • 6 years ago

    [quote<]To my eyes, the colors look nearly as good as those produced by Asus' 31.5" PQ321Q, which is based on IGZO tech and sells for $2,999.[/quote<] FWIW, if my understanding is correct then a TN panel can actually be IGZO since the IGZO technology refers to the chemical components in the panel transistors* but the rest of the panel technology (TN/PVA/IPS/etc.) is separate from the transistor chemistry. * Indium gallium zinc oxide

      • anotherengineer
      • 6 years ago

      The IGZO doping allows a smaller transistor size and therefore a greater pixel density.

      As for colours, it is the bit rating. Notebooks are typically 6-bit and no FRC (262,000 colours), most TN PC monitors are 6-bit with FRC, the FRC algorithms determine how well it can interpolate 8-bit colour.

      A lot of budget IPS PC monitors are 6-bit + FRC, so if that Asus TN panel is 8bit + FRC, it would be trying to interpolate 10-bit colour, so therefore it should look as good as a typical 6 bit+FRC IPS panel, straight on at least anyway.

      A good TN panel side to side viewing angles are typically decent, its the up/down and especially the down (if you were below the monitor looking up at it) which is the worse angle for TN panels, and where you get that camera negative effect.

      edit – spelling/wording

        • chuckula
        • 6 years ago

        Getting smaller transistor size (leading to smaller pixel size & corresopndingly greater density) would definitely be vital to getting a 4K display crammed into a 28″ monitor.

          • mcnabney
          • 6 years ago

          Why? The screen DPI is the same on this 4K 28″ as on a 1080p 14″ screen. IGZO was really made for handhelds and Oculus Rift displays that have a very high DPI. The key challenge for 4K is eliminating manufacturing defects.

        • keltor
        • 6 years ago

        Those are e-IPS panels from LG and they also have the crappy anti-glare sheets/coatings. Some of the cheap displays are not e-IPS and those are all 8-bit panels. There are also those AHVA and PLS cheap screens which are also 8-bit.

          • Voldenuit
          • 6 years ago

          There are also good e-IPS and bad e-IPS. My secondary rig has a hp e-IPS monitor with AFRC, and I can’t tell any difference between the 8-bit (with 10-bit color look up table) *VA it replaced or the 8-bit AHVA panel on my primary rig, as far as color reproduction/banding/dithering goes.

          • anotherengineer
          • 6 years ago

          Well for reference, Dell ultra-sharp U2414h, a little on the expensive end for a 24″ 1080p monitor is a 6-bit+FRC panel.
          [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2414h.htm[/url<] Most VA derivatives are 8-bit, and Samsung also makes 6bit+FRC PLS panels. [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_p2714h.htm[/url<] So many makes now it is hard to keep track. As for the AG coatings, they have been getting lighter lately. I wish monitor makers would put the actual panel manufacturer and part number on the box or somewhere easy to read it.

    • PadawanTrainer
    • 6 years ago

    TN or not it’s nice to finally see some monitor options for desktops. This area had been stagnant for so long.

    • ludi
    • 6 years ago

    In before JAE posts a “nasty TN panel” comment.

      • JustAnEngineer
      • 6 years ago

      Shall we just take it as read, then?

        • Airmantharp
        • 6 years ago

        I still want to know if you think it’s a truly ‘nasty TN’ 🙂

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This