LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.The ultimate gaming monitor?
Read more.The ultimate gaming monitor?
I could almost live with the cost of it....if it was a 32inch panel.
But £1800 for a 27 inch? nope.
24inch = 1080p
27inch = 1440p
32inch = 4K
..end of story, IMO.
I've always wondered what kind of image of "the gamer" these companies have. Do they ask for suggestions to those "gamers" they talk to/imagine to make the best product they can or do they make surveys?! It's like they are always doing things to sell the less products they possibly can.
The panel has great features but could be a lot more sleek than that, I mean it's like a supercar, the sleeker the better(it is what's under the hood that matters) but it seems like they have no idea about what people really want so they put it all anyway. On another hand people who make/sell these products aren't the ones using it so I guess it's a given.
I've never encountered someone who calls himself a gamer being proud about an ugly(subjective/I find the asus version of this even uglier) thing like some of those RBG detritus we see today in their setups. All of the people I know or read seem to like sleek stuff to match their clean setup. Maybe it's an age thing or I just like being in the shadow...
That's because gamers and the 'Gamerz' designs of today lack the finesse of yesterday. Just because it has lights on, doesn't mean it has to look like a rainbow unicorn christmas tree.Originally Posted by LeSWiS
_______________________________________________________________________
This. Plus at the price these things are sellings, the public it is advertised to doesn't seem to be the one actually being able to afford it.
[/Coil Whine Mode On]And also the fact that in this world today, everything has to be labeled, "gamer" this "gamer" that, "geek" this & that, "special" this & that etc. like wtf...I may be bland af but not all people are "gamers" or whatever the hell people think they are nowadays, they play games here and there and people of all sorts/backgrounds like quality possessions. No need for compartmentalization on every and anything. But it's another topic. I think I'm tired today my bad.[/Coil Whine Mode Off]
Pleiades (01-02-2019)
The problem with these is who the hell wants to sit and watch a movie on a 27" monitor. And HDR for games is very meh.
Could be the best looking monitor in the world AND make me a cup of tea whenever I ask it.
Still no way I'm paying £1800 for a monitor. Ridiculous.
It's no different from films in that it depends on implementation.
Kalniel: "Nice review Tarinder - would it be possible to get a picture of the case when the components are installed (with the side off obviously)?"
CAT-THE-FIFTH: "The Antec 300 is a case which has an understated and clean appearance which many people like. Not everyone is into e-peen looking computers which look like a cross between the imagination of a hyperactive 10 year old and a Frog."
TKPeters: "Off to AVForum better Deal - £20+Vat for Free Shipping @ Scan"
for all intents it seems to be the same card minus some gays name on it and a shielded cover ? with OEM added to it - GoNz0.
not true, 4k does well on 40" / 43"
I got Philips 4k 40" and for me it has pixel density barely acceptable for using it without UI scaling. i am doubt that anyone can comfortable use 32" 4k for text at normal scaling.
As you probably know, if 1080p at 24" is ok for you, then 4k at 40 is like 4 x 1080p at 20"
For my eyes the golden ration is about ~22" per 1080p yet i wouldn't accept such a small screen for desktop.
anyway, people my want this to play 1080p, as the monitor will do the GPU free antialiasing for you.
exactly, I would pay ~£1200 for a monitor tops, my next monitor is going to be the Philips 499P9H 49-inch SuperWide at £1000, which its self is more than my entire current computer (i5-4690k, GTX 1060 6GB, 12GB RAM, 750GB SSD storage) cost.
+1 yikes. I paid about £200 for my not average 24" 1080p Samsung about 5 years ago and the next one will probably be a 27" 1440p 144Hz one for about £500.
I'd question the reasoning behind buying a £1000 5120x1440 monitor and powering it with the GTX 1060 you mention. No way you can be playing games on it then?
I have found 27" and 1440P to be the sweet spot at the moment. My Vega64 will just about do 4K but the issue is that I'll be upgrading far more frequently than I want to. I think you also need to be at around 32" and also be far more of an avid gamer than I am in order to justify 4K at the moment.
I spent around £450 on my 27" monitor and, whilst it doesn't have Freesync or HDR, it's just a decent IPS panel with really good colour reproduction and good contrast. I think at our budgets spending the money on a monitor focussing on the basics (although I'd say now Freesync isn't exactly poncy) is far more sensible than going for something where they've spent the R&D on one amazing feature and sacrificed the rest. This monitor has obviously gone down the route of "make everything as good as it can be and we'll figure out the cost later". And that's fine if people want that. Myself I'd not spend the money on that kind of thing but I can certainly see why people would.
And I think there is just about a justification for 4K at this size. My mobile phone is under 6" but is 1440P and that is the sweet spot where the human eye is not going to ever be able to see individual pixels. Yes a monitor is normally viewed from further away but, until you get to this kind of "retina" resolution (and YES I know the distance from the screen makes a difference but again, there are different configs - I'm so close to my screen that it treat it as two monitors as the whole thing doesn't fit in my fovea) there is going to be an advantage for some people to having higher pixel densities. It's a niche.
I don't find a problem with it... why, you got summat better for me?
_______________________________________________________________________
Horrible looking thing
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote