Samsung's 28-inch, billion-color, UHD 4K display up for pre-order for less than $700

[Shawn Knight]

Samsung on Monday unveiled a trio of new monitors but it’s the UD590 that we’re most excited about. This headline-grabbing 28-inch LED display features a UHD 4K resolution of 3,840 x 2,160 (157 pixels per inch) although Samsung opted to include a TN panel instead of an IPS / PLS display.

The UD59 is capable of displaying one billion colors with a speedy response time of 1ms which means it’ll be perfect for everyday use as well as gaming. Other specs include 370 cd/m2 brightness, 1000:1 contrast, two HDMI ports, a single DisplayPort and audio output. The refresh rate through HDMI is 30Hz (meh) while the DisplayPort is capable of 60Hz.

The display supports Picture-in-Picture which allows users to connect two computers (or anything else really) and view both inputs at the same time. Best yet, there’s no dip in resolution between the two pictures.

The only major knock against Samsung’s UHD 4K display is the panel choice. Today’s LCD market is dominated by two different technologies: TN (twisted nematic) and IPS (in-plane switching). The former is speedy and cheap but the latter (including Samsung’s own PLS technology) offers better viewing angles and improved color fidelity.

As such, the company likely went with a TN panel to keep cost down for the consumer. We’ll reserve final judgment until we can get a look at the display in person although early reports suggest it looks pretty good.

The UD590 is available for pre-order as of writing for $699.99 and is expected to ship on April 18 in the US.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/56197-samsungs-28-inch-billion-color-uhd-4k-display-up-for-pre-order-for-less-than-700.html

 

[VitalyT]

A 10-bit TN panel - that's unheard of. I'm a little skeptical about that.

Without seeing the picture in person, I think it will beat DELL completely in its price niche anyway: For the same money DELL is trying sell a standard 8-bit TN panel made of 2 screens that only works at 30Hz, so it is no surprise it doesn't sell well.

Looking forward to hearing from the first users of this monitor what the colors are really like, and how really bad are the view angles.

Looks good on the picture, but it is one product that needs up-close scrutiny.

Other than that, I find it bizarre for the PC monitors to step back into the TN-s while the new TV-s are coming with OLED.

Another thing that puzzles me is that Samsung has stopped producing HDMI 1.4 TV-s and switched over to HDMI 2.0, so why on earth does this product come with HDMI 1.4 again - that's absurd!

 

[GhostRyder]

A 10-bit TN panel - that's unheard of. I'm a little skeptical about that.

Without seeing the picture in person, I think it will beat DELL completely in its price niche anyway: For the same money DELL is trying sell a standard 8-bit TN panel made of 2 screens that only works at 30Hz, so it is no surprise it doesn't sell well.

Looking forward to hearing from the first users of this monitor what the colors are really like, and how really bad are the view angles.

Looks good on the picture, but it is one product that needs up-close scrutiny.

Other than that, I find it bizarre for the PC monitors to step back into the TN-s while the new TV-s are coming with OLED.

Indeed I agree, but then again 4k is new and is going to cost a fortune as it is so anyway to keep the price down is a bonus. Im curious what the refresh rate is one this (Im assuming 60hz) because that could be a deciding factor.

I would really love one of these for gaming, but I kinda wanted one around 24 inches (Im at 27inch on 3 screens) and in all honesty for a gaming PC I would want a bit smaller. Dunno, maybe I will have to see some reviews of these or see one in person to decide, but at 700 bucks, I may make the jump and sell some of my 1080p screens and just go back to single screen Ultra HD instead of eyefinity.

 

[VitalyT]

Im curious what the refresh rate is one this (Im assuming 60hz) because that could be a deciding factor.

It is absolutely a 60Hz 4K panel, which is stated clearly. Otherwise there would be nothing to talk about, as we already saw just how crappy the sibling from DELL looks.

I would really love one of these for gaming, but I kinda wanted one around 24 inches

My sentiment exactly. I do not like these new dimensions at all - not 28", and much less the 32". A 24" is the perfect size, because 24" is big enough for 1920x1200, not to mention 1920x1080. And what you ideally would want is to use the the 200% scale in Windows 8.1 just to boost the quality while keeping the old UI proportions. Therefore, I am camping for a good 24" 4K screen when it comes out.

 

[VitalyT]

UPDATE: The first buyers say the picture quality is quite good, but the stand is not adjustable at all: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2RY1DK9756

Still, it is the cheapest 4K monitor capable of 60Hz refresh rate. That counts for a lot.

 

[9Nails]

TN vs. IPS? I understand that IPS is better. But I don't know why. Does anyone have a layman's guide to the two technologies?

I like the price. That $700 isn't terribly unreasonable. But the size is greater than what I'd want on my desk at home on my gaming PC. I'd look for a 22 - 24" which I think is about the perfect size for my viewing distance.

 

[amstech]

because 24" is big enough for 1920x1200, not to mention 1920x1080. And what you ideally would want is to use the the 200% scale in Windows 8.1 just to boost the quality while keeping the old UI proportions. Therefore, I am camping for a good 24" 4K screen when it comes out.

Any 23"/24" 16:9 monitor is too thin IMO. A 24" 16:10 is a decent size monitor no doubt, but lets not get carried away. IMO 24" is just enough to run 3,840 x 2,160 and anything less would be a waste. I have a 30" 1600p @ 60hz (and sometimes things are a little too small) and I couldn't go back to a 24" regardless of its resolution.

 

[GhostRyder]

It is absolutely a 60Hz 4K panel, which is stated clearly. Otherwise there would be nothing to talk about, as we already saw just how crappy the sibling from DELL looks.

I could not find anywhere stating what the refresh rate was except when I went to the manufacturer website and looked down into the small details section that stated "*Supports HDMI 1.4 (3840 x 2160, 30Hz) and Display Port 1.2 (3840 x 2160, 60Hz)".

Even though it was assumed as much becasue it was not like that Dell monitor, I just wanted exact word conformation and did not see it in the article (unless ive just missed it).

My sentiment exactly. I do not like these new dimensions at all - not 28", and much less the 32". A 24" is the perfect size, because 24" is big enough for 1920x1200, not to mention 1920x1080. And what you ideally would want is to use the the 200% scale in Windows 8.1 just to boost the quality while keeping the old UI proportions. Therefore, I am camping for a good 24" 4K screen when it comes out.

Yea, I really want one of these but at the same time I really would want something smaller (Even a 26 inch would be alot more tempting to me). I hope to see one soon, though since I might swap from eyefinity, maybe one of these just pushed a bit farther back on the table would not be bad.

 

[TomSEA]

This is the year I'll be doing a new PC rebuild from scratch. Just waiting on the next generation (800 series) of nVidia video cards and Haswell (refresh) CPU's due out any time now. That is unless the Broadwell's come out which seems unlikely right now.

So I'm eyeballing these 4k monitors to go along with my new build. I'm a gamer first - everything else I do on my computer is secondary, so will be very interested to hear how they look playing some high-end games.

 

[VitalyT]

I have a 30" 1600p @ 60hz (and sometimes things are a little too small) and I couldn't go back to a 24" regardless of its resolution.

Same here, I got only one monitor, DELL U3014, which I find perfect in every way. I would love to up the quality with a 3200P 30" screen, to quadruple the pixels and use 200% scale, but I'm afraid that's the dream that will never come true.

 

[Guest]

IPS looks better at off angles - color and brightness don't shift around as much

 

[Julio Franco]

Story updated with this "The refresh rate through HDMI is 30Hz (meh) while the DisplayPort is capable of 60Hz."

 

[GhostRyder]

TN vs. IPS? I understand that IPS is better. But I don't know why. Does anyone have a layman's guide to the two technologies?

An explanation of the main difference (Ill try to put it in laymans terms) is that the IPS monitor uses the Crystal molecules moving on a vertical plane on the panel where as the TN Panel moves perpendicular. This change is what causes the colors to not shift or wash out as much at different viewing of the IPS panel versus the TN panel due to the fact that the e1 and e2 electrodes (Basically what you see) are on the same plane setup at a perpendicular angle to the top layer where as a TN panel has 2 different planes for them which makes only certain viewing angles applicable because you shift the planes around when viewing at the different angles.

The other thing is TN panels only normally render in a 6bit color spectrum but can display true black where as the IPS panel standard is 8bit which will give you the wider color spectrum yet they cannot display true black.

About the best I could do without getting into the deep layers, I hope I helped at all (Though my explanation was a bit rough).

 

[wastedkill]

This is a nice display would be nice to set it up with a monitor!

 

[madboyv1]

TN vs. IPS? I understand that IPS is better. But I don't know why. Does anyone have a layman's guide to the two technologies?

Advantages of TN: Usually faster response times (how fast a pixel can change from completely off to on), potentially faster refresh rates (the rate the monitor refreshes the entire screen), and generally lower cost.
Advantages of IPS/PLS/[insert name]: Potentially Larger color reproduction (to the point where there are more colors than a human eye can discern, reduces breaks in gradients), more accurate color representation especially at odd angles (often eliminating color shifting), better view angles (especially with vertical contrast shifting).
To say in simpler terms, TN panels are generally faster and cheaper, IPS panels are generally easier on the eye to look at and have better color representation. The average user may not know or care, but I do not think any of us are average users.
I could go into it some more, but I'd probably end up just looking it up online somewhere and reproducing it here. =p

edit: GhostRyder beat me too it. lol

 

[Gaara]

Looking forward for this!!

 

[madboyv1]

Story updated with this "The refresh rate through HDMI is 30Hz (meh) while the DisplayPort is capable of 60Hz."

That's was what I was expecting, since that's all you get refresh wise when you drop down to HDMI 1.4 instead of adopting HDMI 2.0. It's too bad really, though I much prefer DisplayPort over HDMI.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Sounds like there are quite a few tradeoffs to get the price that low. Makes me wonder if perhaps Samsung wants people to get into the UHD market. (the phrase 'UHD 4K' is not correct... 4K and UHD are different. This is a UHD panel.)

It's rare we see a product type go from new and basically un-affordable down to bare-bones budget level so fast with nothing in between. I would expect they are trying to get UHD into people's homes quickly so they can move the technology forward. TV tech has sort of fizzled out with 3D being a flop and Smart TVs being nothing too special. They need the next big thing.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Wow what a 4K display. Looks beautiful and $700 is a bargain for 4K (not cheap but a good deal for anyone looking for a good 4K display).

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

I can wait, I'm patient. 4K is not yet mainstream so as the adoption rate increases prices will decrease even further and specs become more impressive so instead of me wasting $700 on a monitor like this one, I'll play the waiting game. Thank God for early adopters, let them be the ones to throw their money around.

 

[Jad Chaar]

I can wait, I'm patient. 4K is not yet mainstream so as the adoption rate increases prices will decrease even further and specs become more impressive so instead of me wasting $700 on a monitor like this one, I'll play the waiting game. Thank God for early adopters, let them be the ones to throw their money around.

Ditto. I am not in a rush but that sure is a good deal for a desperate early adopter.

 

[VitalyT]

For all the campers here, the price drop seems to happen faster than anticipated.

DELL just dropped prices massively on their 4K panels: http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...and-32-4k-monitors2c-leaves-28-untouched.aspx

 

[GhostRyder]

Ditto. I am not in a rush but that sure is a good deal for a desperate early adopter.

...Empty's shopping cart, walks away sadly

 

[hahahanoobs]

I'll go UHD 4K when $500 video cards can run them as well as they do now @ 2560x1600, and not a moment sooner.

 

[Jad Chaar]

...Empty's shopping cart, walks away sadly

Lmao you made my day Ghost.