Large Monitor (>= 40") recommendation - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MatteoX
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2017, 02:55:58 am
content: I am thinking of replacing my 27" monitor with a large monitor (40"-43").Requirements: 4K, IPS or LED, 10:16 or 9:16 aspect ratio, non glare screen. Price range arround $700 (no more that $800).The monitor will be used for programming and electronics CAD (layout, FPGA,..). It won't be used for gaming or high quality image editing.I have been considering LG 43UD79-B or Philips BDM4350UC (both of them are now avaliable for about $600). Any experience with these (or any other) 40"+ monitors or suggestions?

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2017, 05:05:52 am
content: If you don't need great color quality, there's little reason to go with IPS over cheaper MVA.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2017, 07:04:59 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on November 21, 2017, 05:05:52 amI disagree. I much prefer the wider viewing angle of an IPS screen and find that this is more important with larger monitors which will subtend a larger visual field.

author: Bashstreet
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2017, 07:13:27 pm
content: Quote from: MatteoX on November 21, 2017, 02:55:58 amUsing such large monitor for CAD work is going to give you neck-pain of the century.Best try first if the ergonomics are what you want.If so get led one (although you might need to adjust it quite bit to find suitable setting to avoid eye strain)

author: MatteoX
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 04:29:06 am
content: Quote from: Bashstreet on November 21, 2017, 07:13:27 pmI am also bit worried about neck pain. I don't have a chance to personally try these monitors. I saw one briefly in a store but it was at standing height so it didn't help much. This is the reason I wanted to see if someone here has experience with such monitors. On the other hand I know they are definitely becoming popular in programmer circles.Quote from: David Hess on November 21, 2017, 07:04:59 pmI don't mind paying a little bit more if I am going to spend many hours in front of it. Good monitor can last much longer that a computer.Dell monitor I am currently using is probably around 8 years old and is still as good as many of the new monitors of the comparable size.

author: nidlaX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 10:59:36 am
content: Quote from: MatteoX on November 21, 2017, 02:55:58 amI saw this yesterday:https://slickdeals.net/f/10869647-43-acer-et0-series-et430k-uhd-4k-ips-led-monitor-white-400acFit the bill?

author: shteii01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 26, 2017, 08:56:33 pm
content: I have 40" AMH A409U. It is South Korean "second or third tier" manufacturer. The panel is VA if I recall. I use DisplayPort and GTX 750 video card to do 4k. If I recall correctly HDMI and DVI have some hoops you have to jump through to get 4k, so you need to do some research on that.I bought mine two years ago. I paid about 600 or a little under it. I don't see them being sold anymore.It is good solid monitor. Not top of the line or super performer or gaming monitor. I have been happy with it.I am looking at ebay, seems there are fewer choices now. But you can still get one for 500-600 USD. It will not be brand name or IPS.

author: ChrisLX200
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 26, 2017, 10:44:19 pm
content: Can't see the point of a 40" monitor to be honest - not unless you need to be sat some distance from it. I use a 27" 4K monitor (Dell Ultrasharp) for image processing and it looks perfect. There are actually 4 monitors attached to that PC, run of the mill notification and system info goes on the others, the 4K just displays the image processing software.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 01:57:40 am
content: Quote from: 3roomlab on November 22, 2017, 05:29:21 amMost TVs have the ability to display 1:1 pixels using 4:4:4 and low latency, but its damned hard to find how to get many models into the right mode. For quite a few, including most LGs, its a matter of setting the label for the HDMI input to "PC", "Gaming" or something similar. They don't tell you this does more than label the port in the on screen menus, but it does.If you want 4k at 60fps there are quite a few displays with broken HDMI 2.0 ports which can't do that properly. They'll give you 4:4:4 at 30fps OK, but at 60fps they drop back to something like 4:2:0. You might find one or two of the HDMI ports are vaguely described as having higher functionality, and these might get 60fps right, while the other HDMI ports don't.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 02:00:33 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on November 21, 2017, 05:05:52 amAn IPS TV is generally the cheapest way to get a 4k 40" monitor. Now that many graphics cards have proper HDMI 2.0 ports that can output 4k at 60fps at 4:4:4, its easy to drive such a TV well.

author: shteii01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 02:12:15 am
content: coppice, why are keep harping about HDMI?If you deal with pc, normal people, ignore HDMI. It is "one of those consumer things" that for tv, not pc.You want 4k at 60 Hz, you do Display Port. Nvidia 4xx, 5xx, 6xx, 7xx, 9xx and 10xx cards, all have Display Port. Don't even need new card. Can get refurbished Nvidia 7xx card for 60-100 USD, use DP, 4k on screen, DONE!

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 02:16:02 am
content: Quote from: shteii01 on November 27, 2017, 02:12:15 amIf you use display port then you need to use a monitor, rather than a TV. Look around. There are lots of 40" TV options, but very few 40" monitor options. The monitors are a lot more expensive, too.

author: shteii01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 02:19:08 am
content: Quote from: ChrisLX200 on November 26, 2017, 10:44:19 pmYou got 4 monitors... and you ask why you need one monitor... have you done the math? 4 monitors... vs one monitor...I was actually looking at setting up a surround triple 22" monitor "thing". So I started looking at the ergonomics of it, where/how I would sit, what would I see. Then I looked at the price of 1 40" monitor, and I had to laugh, ordered 1 40" a week later.

author: shteii01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 02:26:39 am
content: Quote from: coppice on November 27, 2017, 02:16:02 amRight. I was harsher toward you then I should have. I missed the emphasis on TVs that you were making.Ok. TVs. The problem with TVs is that they are slower than proper computer monitor. Secondly, the 4k TVs are actually somewhat recent, the really affordable ones have been around for around a year. The bottom line is that monitor tech is a bit more complex and/or sophisticated than tv tech, that is why monitors cost more than tvs.And I forgot about the whole HDMI thing. Like you wrote earlier, 4k can be done, but requires more research from the user, I hope that at this point it is plug and play, but I have no experience in the matter since I went Display Port straight up and avoided the whole issue.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 02:41:14 am
content: Quote from: shteii01 on November 27, 2017, 02:26:39 amIf you want a 40" 4k monitor in most countries you are out of luck, unless you import one. Globally, very few models exist. Philips has a fairly nasty one, available in a few countries. There are one or two others. Even if they are available in your country, they aren't very attractive choices.Monitor are pretty dumb display devices. TVs do a lot more than monitors, but all the extra stuff they do adds latency, which is bad for anything interactive, like games and computing. Thankfully, most modern TVs have modes that disable all the messy processing, and let the TV act pretty much like a monitor. You might need to hunt around for how to get into that mode, but its usually there. The bottom line is that TV tech is a lot most complex than monitor tech, but you have the ability to bypass that and make the TV behave like a monitor.Monitors cost more than TVs because that's what the market will currently stand. Cheap 4k TVs have been available for around 4 years. 4k monitors of any size were very expensive until quite recently. That's just the way the market works.

author: ralphrmartin
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 04:59:17 pm
content: I used a 58" 4K TV as the "monitor" on my Mac for software development, and I was generally happy with that, apart from the distance I needed to move the pointer. I used a tablet in absolute mode instead of a mouse to get over that issue.

author: ChrisLX200
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 27, 2017, 05:29:02 pm
content: Quote from: shteii01 onYesterdayat 01:19:08 PM>Quote from: ChrisLX200 onYesterdayat 09:44:19 AMYou got 4 monitors... and you ask why you need one monitor... have you done the math? 4 monitors... vs one monitor...I was actually looking at setting up a surround triple 22" monitor "thing". So I started looking at the ergonomics of it, where/how I would sit, what would I see. Then I looked at the price of 1 40" monitor, and I had to laugh, ordered 1 40" a week later.You misunderstand - I have a 4k monitor PLUS three other monitors attached to my main astro observatory PC. The backup PC next to it has just three standard monitors. The 4k monitor is entirely dedicated to image processing, the other three monitor the environment and the hardware I'm running. Display quality is not important for the latter. My point was that you get no more information displayed on a 40" 4k monitor than you do on a 27" 4k monitor, and the difference between the two is entirely dependent on how close you sit to the screen. I needed a monitor with excellent colour gamut, reproducible colour space, and profiles that work well with Photoshop and Pixinsight (et al). If you HAVE to sit several feet away from the screen then a large display is a good option, if not then it's a waste of money - even assuming you can get a decent quality display in that size.

author: MatteoX
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2017, 04:23:29 am
content: I decided to go with LG 43UD79-B. Monitors provide better image quality than TVs and if I am going to spend hours in front of it I don't mind paying a little bit more. Costco had (has?) quite a good deal, $550.My personal philosophy is that for the fixed amount of money to spend a little bit more for ergonomics than spend all money on the processor and get a crapy monitor or chair.I prefer to have everything on one screen but I understand that different people have different preferences. At 43" (42.5" to be more precise) it will give approximately same resolution as 27", 2500 x 1600 monitor (103dpi vs. 106 dpi). My current monitor is working at 106dpi and I find that resolution quite satisfactory. I am planning to use display port as a primary connection.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2017, 01:48:40 pm
content: Quote from: MatteoX on November 28, 2017, 04:23:29 amThat's an interesting monitor. It looks like there might finally be a reasonable 40"+ 4k monitor option that's available in a lot of markets at a price that is not too bad. What we need now is a curved one.Curved screens are pretty silly in most cases, but a curved monitor is a good thing. It means you can sweep your head across the screen without your eyes needing to refocus. This seems to reduce tiredness quite a bit. There are curved 40" TVs, which help compared to flat ones, but at monitor viewing distances they are not curved enough to maintain a roughly equal distance from your eyes as you scan from left to right. The other tiredness issue you get with big 16:9 screens is their height means you need to nod a little to cover the whole vertical sweep. This seems to cause far more tiredness than the much greater left to right movements a large screen requires. The only way I've found to mitigate this is by changing my working style - basically, I arrange windows on my screen so the information I skip between a lot is spread left to right, and the less required information is separated vertically. It could be a strong argument for curved 21:9 screens for larger sizes, but I feel I would really miss the extra height of a 16:9 one.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2017, 02:44:59 pm
content: Love my BDM4350's (one at home, one at work). 4K so much better at 100% scaling.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2017, 03:14:00 pm
content: Quote from: TiN on December 01, 2017, 02:44:59 pmThat display seems to be the large 4k monitor which has been around the longest, and its price has never looked too bad. The snag is Philips don't offer it in many markets, and in others they list it but seem never to have stocked it. When I lived in HK, Philips didn't list it for a long time, then they listed it but never had any. I never actually saw one in real life there.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2017, 03:17:31 pm
content: I had no problem ordering them at local disti, lead time was just few days.

author: calin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2017, 02:57:16 am
content: Google Wasabi Mango and see the options ... happy owner od a 43 incher 4k IPS from them best money spent ... And these are not TVs they are real monitors with LG panels