My Samsung U28D590D (4K) has arrived... and it's awesome

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Does it come freesync compatible?

£700+ for a 27" monitor with a TN panel!! :vomit:

The profit margins must be massive for that model!

[Biscuit]

This a lot. Kinda why I want to know about freesync, if it is an ultimate gaming monitor with huge refresh, it needs freesync IMO.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This a lot. Kinda why I want to know about freesync, if it is an ultimate gaming monitor with huge refresh, it needs freesync IMO.

Sorry,but I don't see how a 27" TN panel costs more to make than a 27" AH-IPS(not e-IPS),plus the G-SYNC module is meant to be around £100 to £120 in DIY install form. Nvidia bumpf stated that for the monitors with the module already installed it would cost less.

So ATM,I don't see why it costs £300+ more than this monitor for example:

http://www.pcbuyit.co.uk/dell-ultras...01-p-2170.html

Its almost like they are trying to see how far they can scam early adopters.

Its why I have little or no interest in G-SYNC. Ripoff prices for monitors with cheap to make panels,probably serving to increase profit margins.

Plus where such technology would be of most interest,ie, for people with slower cards,its even more pointless,since there are no sub £150 monitors with the technology.

It kind of reminds of Ageia PhysX,nice enough idea but ultimately cost is the reason why they failed.

I might even understand the U28D590D being TN to push 4K monitors down to £400,but ultimately I am not sure even with calibration how it work out for image editing.

Edit!!

The Eizo Foris FG2421 uses a 120HZ VA panel,so it looks like it is possible to make a non-TN high refresh rate monitor.

[dangel]

Sorry,but I don't see how a 27" TN panel costs more to make than a 27" AH-IPS(not e-IPS),plus the G-SYNC module is meant to be around £100 to £120 in DIY install form. Nvidia bumpf stated that for the monitors with the module already installed it would cost less.

For perspective - I have this very samsung on my desk here for testing (quit nice brushed metal look to the back of it BTW) but a quick test via DP showed my PC wasn't capable of driving it properly (scrambled image, could select highest res).

That said, I have the ASUS 1440p pre-ordered for home - so i'll be able to look at both. I don't really think either will disappoint but for gaming I wanted the high colour TN of the ASUS (it's not a 'normal' TN), 1ms/144hz/3d etc with Gsync (and the latter because I don't think i'll be able to hit even 60fps all the time in everything which is where i comes into play). I'm not keen on it being nvidia specific but technically it probably is better than freesync and freesync basically isn't available. That's my take, highly subjective as monitors always are. I'm very unhappy with < 60fps now, and I hate vsyncs obvious downsides. Is the ASUS great value for money? Nope, probably not to you. I looked at it long and hard yesterday and decided it was the best match for my needs. If you want 4k (and heck, would love to) over all other things the sammy looks like a great buy

So why not 4k? Did think about it but it's just too early - I'm already thinking i'm going to be getting by with the current cards (video memory restrictions, overal GPU power/bandwidth) the 7x0 series looks like a poor match for 4k too and so I'm waiting for 8x0's to make it a more sensible proposition.

I might have both in front of me come the 28th-ish... Will report back..

Congrats Jim

[dangel]

Managed to find a PC here to try the 4k.. Blimey, that's a lot of deskop!

The stand.. yeah.. Did you think part of the stand was a mobile phone when you unpacked it? Weird as you say it works but is wobbly. Like the rear joystick controls tho

As for the screen - without any tweaking my first impression is that it lacks 'sharpness' of text elements - and not just because they are small. Bit washed out from a higher viewpoint as expected but fine in a sitting position.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

For perspective - I have this very samsung on my desk here for testing (quit nice brushed metal look to the back of it BTW) but a quick test via DP showed my PC wasn't capable of driving it properly (scrambled image, could select highest res).

That said, I have the ASUS 1440p pre-ordered for home - so i'll be able to look at both. I don't really think either will disappoint but for gaming I wanted the high colour TN of the ASUS (it's not a 'normal' TN), 1ms/144hz/3d etc with Gsync (and the latter because I don't think i'll be able to hit even 60fps all the time in everything which is where i comes into play). I'm not keen on it being nvidia specific but technically it probably is better than freesync and freesync basically isn't available. That's my take, highly subjective as monitors always are. I'm very unhappy with < 60fps now, and I hate vsyncs obvious downsides. Is the ASUS great value for money? Nope, probably not to you. I looked at it long and hard yesterday and decided it was the best match for my needs. If you want 4k (and heck, would love to) over all other things the sammy looks like a great buy

So why not 4k? Did think about it but it's just too early - I'm already thinking i'm going to be getting by with the current cards (video memory restrictions, overal GPU power/bandwidth) the 7x0 series looks like a poor match for 4k too and so I'm waiting for 8x0's to make it a more sensible proposition.

I might have both in front of me come the 28th-ish... Will report back..

Congrats Jim

The thing is TN exists only for one reason -cost. Even the spate of very cheap IPS panels is due to the invention of e-IPS panel types which can use part of the production lines of TN panels,and hence makes them cheaper.

Eizo already has a 24" monitor with a 120HZ MVA panel and a number of the 27" AH-IPS ones can work upto 90HZ to 100HZ via fiddling. The scope is there to have higher refresh rate VA and IPS panels - it just needs the correct push.

This is why I want TN panels to just die - its holding back everything else,and if people pay loads of money for them,it will just give less incentives for other tech to push forward.

PS:

It appears the first sub $1000 4K monitor using an IPS panel is to be released by Asus in Q3 2014:

http://www.techpowerup.com/201513/as...-computex.html

It even is an 8 bit+FRC extended gamut one too.

[dangel]

The thing is TN exists only for one reason -cost.

That's one of the reasons, and most cheap panels are 6bit dithered because of it. Speed is also the a pro over IPS - 1ms/144hz/input lag in this example (without tricks) - as is brightness, power draw, contrast etc. Of course there's a huge variance in quality even in TNs and ASUS is suggesting their panel is the best choice for the job at hand (gaming). I suppose we could assume they've chosen the cheapest panel they could for what they're marketing as 'the best gaming monitor ever' but at what they're charging it seems unlikely (and they're going to get mullered by the press if it's the case - and by me too!). Obviously their margins are good though.
Each technology has both pro's and con's - IPS isn't a cure-all either. You will, like many things, have to compromise on something - my point is that it's a personal choice based on your use case (all well and good). I have an IPS now.. in fact i've got three. And they all vary just as much in PQ.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

That's one of the reasons, and most cheap panels are 6bit dithered because of it. Speed is also the a pro over IPS - 1ms/144hz/input lag in this example (without tricks) - as is brightness, power draw, contrast etc. Of course there's a huge variance in quality even in TNs and ASUS is suggesting their panel is the best choice for the job at hand (gaming). I suppose we could assume they've chosen the cheapest panel they could for what they're marketing as 'the best gaming monitor ever' but at what they're charging it seems unlikely (and they're going to get mullered by the press if it's the case - and by me too!). Obviously their margins are good though.
Each technology has both pro's and con's - IPS isn't a cure-all either. You will, like many things, have to compromise on something - my point is that it's a personal choice based on your use case (all well and good). I have an IPS now.. in fact i've got three. And they all vary just as much in PQ.

I have done a lot of imaging based work(including stuff that needed to be published in print) and the TNs never really cut them despite all the rubbish bumpf they kept saying all the time at each generation. Plus the backlights have always been one of the main contributors towards monitor power consumption,this is why LED backlights led to such noticeable reductions over CCFLs.

Regarding the speed difference with TNs. I play FPS games,and honestly I see no difference after trying different monitors even with supposedly "better" response times. Even the response times published are usually a load of bumpf too,since it depends on what they are measuring in the first place,which can differ between companies. If it were that important for gaming,most gamers would have stick with flat screen CRTs!

TNs are a holdover from the 80s when they were the only viable design to make active matrix LCDs,over the older passive designs.

There are loads of other technologies now,IPS,PLS,PVA,MVA,OLED,etc. Even that Eizo has a 120HZ native refresh rate(AUO VA panel). Like I said the push needs to be there,but people buying TN panels,only means we are stuck with them,since it is diverting R and D spending to a deadend technology.

Plus if they get decent sales at a high price point for a cheaper panel,why bother pushing anything else which would cost more?? I would do the same if I was a company.

[dangel]

I have done a lot of imaging based work(including stuff that needed to be published in print) and the TNs never really cut them despite all the rubbish bumpf they kept saying all the time at each generation. Plus the backlights have always been one of the main contributors towards monitor power consumption,this is why LED backlights led to such noticeable reductions over CCFLs.

Well, I'm not doing imaging work with it, my target is gaming. At work I am using monitors for imaging - in fact imaging is exactly what we do. Hence I've got a stack of different monitors to play with at any given time (like the new 4k sammy).

Regarding the speed difference with TNs. I play FPS games,and honestly I see no difference after trying different monitors even with supposedly "better" response times. Even the response times published are usually a load of bumpf too,since it depends on what they are measuring in the first place,which can differ between companies. If it were that important for gaming,most gamers would have stick with flat screen CRTs!

You'll find plenty of people who lament the loss of CRT for smoothness and removal of input lag. I'm not one of them but it's perfectly possible to measure response times and input lag objectively (plenty of review sites do). It's not 'supposedly' better it's proven to be so. If you want to argue that you can't subjectively see it yourself that's fine - I believe you. I've never been convinced myself but I'll play with it side by side with my IPS panel. I've specifically shied away from 1440p IPS because of the increase input lag though. I'd like to make up my own mind (but not yours).

Amusingly I remember a friend who couldn't see CRT flicker at low refresh at all - it drove me nuts..

[Biscuit]

Sorry,but I don't see how a 27" TN panel costs more to make than a 27" AH-IPS(not e-IPS),plus the G-SYNC module is meant to be around £100 to £120 in DIY install form. Nvidia bumpf stated that for the monitors with the module already installed it would cost less.

So ATM,I don't see why it costs £300+ more than this monitor for example:

http://www.pcbuyit.co.uk/dell-ultras...01-p-2170.html

Its almost like they are trying to see how far they can scam early adopters.

Its why I have little or no interest in G-SYNC. Ripoff prices for monitors with cheap to make panels,probably serving to increase profit margins.

Plus where such technology would be of most interest,ie, for people with slower cards,its even more pointless,since there are no sub £150 monitors with the technology.

It kind of reminds of Ageia PhysX,nice enough idea but ultimately cost is the reason why they failed.

I might even understand the U28D590D being TN to push 4K monitors down to £400,but ultimately I am not sure even with calibration how it work out for image editing.

Edit!!

The Eizo Foris FG2421 uses a 120HZ VA panel,so it looks like it is possible to make a non-TN high refresh rate monitor.

I'm not talking about G-Sync.

[Agent]

You'll find plenty of people who lament the loss of CRT for smoothness and removal of input lag.

Every now and again I'll fire up UT2004 on my 120Hz Samsung CRT Syncmaster, because I start to think "You know what, modern TFT's aren't that bad!".

Then I sit in the corner, angry at myself for falling into the trap again and letting myself slip.

I've used TFT's right the way up to the latest 144Hz and have seen G-sync in action. They're all nice additions, but even now I still feel like we're still quite a distance away from what we used to have. I don't think TFT as a technology will ever make me truly happy to be honest. I've given up trying to find a 'gaming' setup with them and have just gone with decent IPS screens recently. It's never going to feel right to me, so I'm not going to try any more.

I'm totally with you cat on the death of TN though. The problem is, most people don't care. It's the same with monitor calibration. I recently calibrated my friends TFT with a Spyder. It was like buying a new screen to him once we were finished.

People want bright, oversaturated screens that look nice on their desk for cheap. Not us lot, the unwashed masses. Unless that changes anytime soon, which I don't think it will, then we're going to be paying premium prices and waiting a lot longer for decent tech. This has always been the way though and I guess computing in general would progress at a lot slower rate overall if it wasn't.

[jim]

Took some photos to check the backlight, at my normal brightness settings (c. 30%)

I'm pretty surprised:

U28D: U2212HM(1): U2212HM(2):

I'd say the Samsung's the best, comfortably.

[KeyboardDemon]

Does it come freesync compatible?

My understanding of Freesync is quite limited, however I believe that it is an AMD technology that provides adaptive framerate syncing on the driver side of things and I am using an EVGA GTX780Ti so I wouldn't be able to make use of Freesync but I would be able to make use of both G-Sync and nVidia 3d Vision.

I can see why some people would not be as impressed by the PG278Q as I am, price, panel choice, size and resolution can all be beaten by different monitors out there and if my decision to order one was based purely on logic I most likely wouldn't have ordered it, however, knowing all of this doesn't stop me from wanting one even though I can get a larger screen with higher resolution at a lower price, like dangel I don't believe that 4k panel technology has matured enough for me to want it. I also don't think I would really need to be concerned with the better colour depth available through IPS panels, I think I have spent about 4 maybe 5 hours using Photoshop in the last 12 months and the combined total number of hours on the last 3 games I have played on Steam comes close to 200 hours, so in terms of my usage I definitely want a gaming oriented model, and in my mind nothing shouts gaming more than the ROG branding. To me ROG is a mark of quality and performance.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

My understanding of Freesync is quite limited, however I believe that it is an AMD technology that provides adaptive framerate syncing on the driver side of things and I am using an EVGA GTX780Ti so I wouldn't be able to make use of Freesync but I would be able to make use of both G-Sync and nVidia 3d Vision.

A suitable Nvidia card would work though. Adaptive v-sync will be part of the next VESA specification for monitors(some monitors already have the required bits),so ultimately should be available to all with cards which confirm to it,but I doubt Nvidia would come on board,since they will probably make more money by selling G-Sync modules.

Edit!!

Not so sure now:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasoneva...playport-spec/

Q: What is DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync?
A: DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync is a new addition to the DisplayPort™ 1.2a specification, ported from the embedded DisplayPort™ v1.0 specification. DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync provides an industry-standard mechanism that enables real-time adjustment of a monitor’s refresh rate of a display over a DisplayPort™ link

Q: What is Project FreeSync?
A: Project FreeSync is an AMD effort to leverage industry standards, like DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync, to deliver dynamic refresh rates. Dynamic refresh rates synchronize the refresh rate of a compatible monitor to the framerate of a user’s AMD Radeon™ graphics to reduce or eliminate stuttering, juddering and/or tearing during gaming and video playback.

Q: How are DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync and Project FreeSync different?
A: DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync is an ingredient DisplayPort™ feature that enables real-time adjustment of monitor refresh rates required by technologies like Project FreeSync. Project FreeSync is a unique AMD hardware/software solution that utilizes DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync protocols to enable user-facing benefits: smooth, tearing-free and low-latency gameplay and video.

Q: Is DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync the industry-standard version of Project FreeSync?
A: The DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync specification was ported from the Embedded DisplayPort™ specification through a proposal to the VESA group by AMD. DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync is an ingredient feature of a DisplayPort™ link and an industry standard that enables technologies like Project FreeSync

Q: What are the requirements to use FreeSync?
A: To take advantage of the benefits of Project FreeSync, users will require: a monitor compatible with DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync, a compatible AMD Radeon™ GPU with a DisplayPort™ connection, and a compatible AMD Catalyst™ graphics driver. AMD plans to release a compatible graphics driver to coincide with the introduction of the first DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync monitors.

Q: When can I buy a monitor compatible with Project FreeSync?
A: AMD has undertaken every necessary effort to enable Project FreeSync in the display ecosystem. Monitor vendors are now integrating the DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync specification and productizing compatible displays. AMD is working closely with these vendors to bring products to market, and we expect compatible monitors within 6-12 months.

Q: What AMD Radeon™ GPUs are compatible with Project FreeSync?
A: The first discrete GPUs compatible with Project FreeSync are the AMD Radeon™ R9 290X, R9 290, R7 260X and R7 260 graphics cards. Project FreeSync is also compatible with AMD APUs codenamed “Kabini,” “Temash,” “Beema,” and “Mullins.” All compatible products must be connected via DisplayPort™ to a display that supports DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync.

Q: How is Project Freesync different from NVIDIA NVDA +0.92% G-Sync?
A: While both technologies have similar benefits, G-Sync uses expensive and proprietary hardware. In contrast, Project FreeSync utilizes the industry-standard DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync specification to promote wider adoption, lower cost of ownership, and a broad ecosystem of compatibility.

Q: Why should gamers purchase a system that utilizes Project FreeSync?
A: Project FreeSync’s ability to synchronize the refresh rate of a display to the framerate of a graphics card can eliminate visual artifacts that many gamers are especially sensitive to: screen tearing, input lag, and stuttering. Project FreeSync aims to accomplish this through an open ecosystem that does not require licensing fees from participants, which encourages broad adoption and low end-user costs.

Q: What is the supported range of refresh rates with FreeSync and DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync?
A: AMD Radeon™ graphics cards will support a wide variety of dynamic refresh ranges with Project FreeSync. Using DisplayPort™ Adaptive-Sync, the graphics card can detect and set an appropriate maximum and minimum refresh rate based on the capabilities reported by the display. Potential ranges include 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.

Second Edit!!

I am still trying to work out why the PG278Q is over £700.

Thats a £300 premium over 27" monitors with an AH-IPS panel having the same resolution.

Even if you add £100 for the G-Sync module,that is still £200 more for a TN panel??

[jim]

But it's also high refresh rate, and we know that high refresh rate monitors cost more than 60Hz equivalents - irrespective of G/Free-Sync.

If nothing else, they're niche.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

But it's also high refresh rate, and we know that high refresh rate monitors cost more than 60Hz equivalents - irrespective of G/Free-Sync.

If nothing else, they're niche.

But it also is using a cheaper to make TN panel too.

OTH,it could be simply Asus taking the urine,since its "ROG" branded,so they feel they can charge more for it. Everytime companies start branding these computer parts with ROG,Fatal1ty,etc the price just gets bumped up a silly amount.

However,it could be worse,like the crap that is Beats headphones.