Weekend Open Forum: Do you use a 4K monitor with your desktop?

J

Justin Kahn

Posts: 752   +6

I had my eye out for a 4K or at least a ultra widescreen monitor for my desktop set-up over the Black Friday sale weekend. Having seen a couple in action, I was quite impressed, but couldn’t quite get around the steep price tag. 

To be honest, I'm not an expert in this particular field by any means, but would like to have at least as high a resolution (ideally much higher) for my home dektop computer as I do with my laptop. I’m starting to find more and more people moving from multi-HD set-ups to more expensive ultrawide/4K monitors like those from Dell, LG and ASUS, so it is something that is certainly on my radar.

I am still using a fairly basic 1080p monitor and, especially for the work I do, have never really felt the need to upgrade outside of simply wanting the newest and best option out there. So for this week’s open forum we are wondering what kind of display set-ups you guys are using and whether or not you think the jump up to a ultra wide/4K (or higher?) option is worth the money for the home desktop.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/59153-weekend-open-forum-4k-monitor.html

 
I think 4K is probably too much for a monitor sized screen. But regular 1080 isn't enough. I wish there was something in between that was more mainstream. They make tablet screens that are 2560 x 1600 (or whatever), why not a monitor?
 
I haven't heard enough good news about 4K to warrant the purchase. GPU's in a mainstream budget price range don't keep up with that many pixels, and if they could the monitor doesn't refresh the lines nearly quick enough to produce a clean smear-free image. I think for now they do have a specific purpose and allow more room on the desktop, great for processing documents. But for specific uses such as gaming or movie watching they're not quite ready for massive audiences. Prices are getting better tho. And quality will improve.
 
Nope and don't plan on doing so since all my gear here is 1080p LED HD. 4K, 8K, 16K etc. when the need comes I'll think about it. Right now there is no need to buy such equipment unless you really, really want it so badly!
 
It is kinda cool but not sure I am convinced yet. In 28” or smaller I think 4K is pretty useless myself (even if you need more screen real-estate for video editing or whatever), at least right now. I just ordered the Dell 32” 4K monitor so I will let you guys know what I think.

I just sent back the 28” Dell 4K, the one with the low 30Hz refresh. I thought it might be okay for Excel and Word, it was fracking useless. Worst monitor I have ever seen/used. The input lag just at the Windows desktop is horrendous. If I had to pick a worst product of 2014 it would be the Dell P2815Q.

Had I not had amazing experiences with their 30” 2560x1600 monitors over the past 6 years I would never buy Dell again. That said if the Dell 32” 4K monitor is anything short of amazing I won’t be happy.

I could never go back to 1080p though, has to be 2560x1600 for me. The fact that you can have two full size windows side by side is awesome.
 
I do not, but I'd like to pick up a 40" 4k TV to use as a monitor. I like the DPI on current monitors, I would just like some extra screen real estate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rwburnham
@Steve did you buy this, or something else?
https://www.techspot.com/review/769-dell-ultrasharp-32-uhd/

I would kill for dual monitors at 4K to replace my aging 27-inchers, but we're not there yet unfortunately. Setting up more than one 4K display is messy and expensive. On top of that Windows' (and most of Windows software's) scaling leaves a ton to be desired.

I know some like the extra desktop space, but for me it's the pixel density and definition, so I'm a big fan of what Apple does with the Retina Macbook Pros, where 4 pixels make up a single one.

points.jpg

They've been offering it on iPads and Macbook Pros for a few years now, but their first UHD desktop just came out months ago, showing it's still challenging making things work on the desktop side for a number of reasons.
 
Julio Franco said:
@Steve did you buy this, or something else?
https://www.techspot.com/review/769-dell-ultrasharp-32-uhd/

I would kill for dual monitors at 4K to replace my aging 27-inchers, but we're not there yet unfortunately. Setting up more than one 4K display is messy and expensive. On top of that Windows' (and most of Windows software's) scaling leaves a ton to be desired.

I know some like the extra desktop space, but for me it's the pixel density and definition, so I'm a big fan of what Apple does with the Retina Macbook Pros, where 4 pixels make up a single one.

View attachment 79534

They've been offering it on iPads and Macbook Pros for a few years now, but their first UHD desktop just came out months ago, showing it's still challenging making things work on the desktop side for a number of reasons.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's it but I paid nothing like the asking price in that review ;)
 
I just downgraded to 1366x768. I dont even notice a difference except in games and GUI scaling, and I dont care. what I do care about more is the color quality and such that is definitely lacking in this screen...
 
I'm using two 27-inch monitors with a maximum resolution of 1920X1080 (one for each PC). Given the confusion around connections for driving 4K monitors-HDMI 2.0 is required to run a screen at 60Hz for HDMI connections while DisplayPort 1.2 allows for this automatically but version 1.3 supports 5K and higher but is not available on graphics cards or monitors-I'd say the safest course of action is to wait until the dust settles.
 
My 80 year Gran pa has been using 1080p for like 6 years. How can you not have a 1080p monitor?

I plan on getting a high res or 3d monitor, I have always wanted to try out 3d gaming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beyond Stellar
Using a Dell U2412M 1920x1200 on Display Port. Would love a 27" something like an Asus PB278Q 2560 x 1440 or a Dell 27" U2713HM 2560 x 1440 but I always find another more pressing use for the funds. I think 4k is too new, I don't really trust the monitors. Wouldn't want to end up with something at 30Hz or two panels made to appear as one or something like that.
 
Not yet. Just got a Dell 24" $119 Amazon special and will be getting another soon. Just don't see the hype right now. Until it become standard in a simple desktop.
 
I cannot resolve individual pixels on my 24" 1920x1080 Asus at the distance I sit from the monitor, so any higher pixel count on a similar size screen would be a waste for me. My current desk doesn't have room for anything much bigger; 27" is probably about the limit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beyond Stellar
No. I use some 1080p acer monitor I got on clearance at Walmart after my older monitor died.
 
No point to it. I have a DELL 2560 x 1440 and my SLI rig struggles at times to keep up decent frame rates for the newest games as is.

Until they release single GPU's that can sustain an average gaming 60 fps on a 4k, you're wasting your time going that route.
 
  • Like
Reactions: treetops
A good 4k display + the video card to drive it acceptably in some undemanding games = 1000 euro or so. I'm not ready to spend that much for a less that perfect experience, so this setup would have to wait for me at least until video cards catch up in performance and price.

I'm still rocking my 1920X1080 old 24 inch VA Benq and it looks as good as when I first bought it, some years ago. For gaming, I switch to my 50 inch LED TV. and no puny 27 incher, 4k or not, can hold a candle to that :)
 
I like the idea of 4K, but as it is right now, it's not very practical for me. I'm a PC gamer. I'm also using 3 monitors. 1 x 23 inches and 2 x 20 inches. I prefer my PC to be as quiet as possible. 4K screens tend to be big and my current setup is already pushing my workspace to the limit. It would also require a complete overhaul of my computer and I fear that a SLI setup is going to add a lot of unwanted fan noise to my system. Also, Windows 7 does not handle high DPI screens very well. When I can get a single GPU system that can run 4K at 60 FPS and there's a decent selection of monitors no larger than 24 inches suitable for gaming, then I'll consider it. Until then, I'll stick with lower resolutions.
 
No, 4K is pointless on PC.

3rd party scaling sucks bigtime. Game GUIs don't scale right in most games. Textures arent made for 4K anyway.

And you need 3x 290+ or 970+ to max games out and stuck with 60 Hz. No thanks.

I'll be at 1440p at 120 or 144 Hz depending on ULMB or not, with my two 980s at ~1600/2000.

We can talk again in 3-5 years, when 4K has matured and 120 Hz or more is possible.
 
Not interested in 4K, yet. Maybe in a couple years, but I can still make due with my current 1080p resolution on my 3 screen setup. Maybe I will make my next gaming rig a 4K setup and get some good 4K monitors, but that's not going to be for at least 3 to 4 years.
 
2 21" 1080... My desktop is for games and video editing. As previous stated 4k will need to be at least 60hz with playable frame rates and high detail eye candy at a semi reasonable price. However not sure how big I want one, I played games on a 9' projected screen to 46" tv I like my 21's I had a 28" a long time ago.. Sweet spot for me prob would be 24" now I would like the experience of old on my CRT with 100+ frames but that set up a 1080 seems a bit out reach $ wise.... I'll be happy with a 90+ IPS gaming monitor set up... That hopefully closer to affordability that a 4k rig
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

midian182
Samsung unveils the All-in-One Pro: A sleek alternative to the iMac with a 27-inch 4K display
Replies
10
Views
171
Bobbydpue
Bobbydpue
Shawn Knight
Hisense rolls out 100" QLED 4K TV, selling for under $2,000
Replies
6
Views
411
bandit8623
B
Daniel Sims
Samsung's 2024 TV lineup receives a new 98-inch model for $3,999
Replies
22
Views
202
mailpup
mailpup

Latest posts

Back