Be Careful About "So Called" 4K Monitors For Gaming

HardwarePal : As CES is wrapping up for this year, we have been brought a step further in the advances of technology.This years it was filled with numerous TV and LEDs both from big brand and smaller manufacturers. While there were enormous increases in the size of monitors most of the manufacturers weighed towards the 4K field.

[XiSasukeUchiha]

So this site is saying that we are not getting true 4k?

[WolfLeBlack]

Partially. Its pointing out that there's several screens, especially those in the lower price bracket, which claim to offer 4K resolution, but actually aren't.

It's also pointing out that for gaming you might want to wait a little, as most of the 4k screens would limit you to 30FPS. Companies like Sony are planning on upgrading to HDMI 2.0 to offer the higher refresh rate required for you to get 60FPS.

Finally most of the current 4k screens have an 8ms response time.

[Gabenbrah]

Who buys Sony monitors? ASUS, Samsung and Dell are where its at.

[zep]

lol Dell

[Pandamobile]

Dell makes great IPS displays.

[zpoc]

@zep

if you had any clue what you were talking about, you'd know that dell make some of the highest quality monitors in the industry - they're a standard alternative for people who don't want to pay apple tax on cinema displays but still want IPS screens with accurate colors and high resolution.

[Nicolee]

Dell monitors are high quality as far as i know and their customer service is one of the best .

[Lior]

Or you can just use a dvi cable for the monitor, HDMI 2.0 is crap and not even same standards of dvi

[maddskull]

@gabenbrah sony has great monitors and TVs and they are the first company to make a full 4k set of devices from projectors to TVs and cameras and they will advance more by time.

[Mithan]

8ms response time is more than adequate for gaming.

[Mithan]

Dell makes some of the best PC monitors.

The 24xx series is one of the most beloved by gamers anywhere.

[AndrewLB]

Mithan- They sure are. I own both a U2410 ultrasharp and an older 2407wfp. Both are a proper 1920x1200 resolution and are outstanding displays.

[ddkshah]

@gaben

Sony DOESN'T sell consumer Monitors. Only TV's.

[Pro Racer]

I have an Asus MX239H as well as a Dell U3011 which are both fantastic. Dell IPS monitors are certainly among the best - NEC also makes some great professional quality IPS panels, but their price tag isn't for everyone.

[Talidan]

Dell has amazing monitors. Computer systems? Ehh... much better out there for your money, but their monitors are just plain amazing.

[r1sh12]

yes - you are right, at the moment no 4K screen can do over 30fps.

Also smaller 4K screens like 26inch and below, you are hardly gonna notice a difference between 1080p and 4k.

[hesido]

Anectodal: my previous DELL (5 years old) had an excellent LCD, great viewing angle and response time with UXGA and good color reproduction. It was a true productivity laptop. My latest Samsung laptop (NP550) has an absolutely shitty LCD, with very bad ghosting and very bad viewing angle with very bad color reproduction. I ordered it off the internet, the specs were fine and I couldn't have guessed the screen could be this awful from Samsung.

[Withdreday]

Well until we see even high end GPUs that can do 4k at decent framerates, I don't think it's worth it anyway.

Hell even the GTX Titan scuffles with 4k without at least a 2x SLI on games like Crysis 3 with barely 60fps, and those are $1000 a pop!

Until a high range GPU can handle 4k on more demanding games singlehandedly, I say it's nothing more than a gimmick that won't do much to improve the gaming experiences.

Once it does, then I'll bite.

[MadLad]

@Gaben

The new BenQ monitor has been the best looking, not to mention, performing monitor I have had the pleasure to use.
That side, the overall visual quality certainly doesn't hold up to my LG ultra-wide. The BenQ definitely still performs better though.

[threefootwang]

I've always rocked it with LG monitors TBH. Not sure about their TVs but for Monitors they're absolutely excellent. I had a 23 inch LG LCD 1080P monitor for the last 4 years and just now upgraded to a 27 inch LG LED IPS one (gave the LCD to my sister, wanted to upgrade). Colors, quality, sharpness practically everything all top notch, never had an issue with their screens. Gaming whether it's an FPS, RTS, or RPG is awesome!

[mediate-this]

True but, most 4k tvs mine especially has game mode, to alleviate that refresh rate

[Consoldtobots]

will people PLEASE stop parroting this stupid nonsense about resolutions only mattering at certain sizes. ITS NOT TRUE. Go load a 4k wallpaper if you have a 1080 monitor and see how sharper it is even after it is scaled down to 1920x1080. Now Imagine at full 4k resolution.

[Ps4Console]

Well watching CES with the new 5K tv's too coming soon plus showing 8K in the not so distant future I say wait a bit for the 8K because even tv will be obsolete in a few years time according to the BBC click team ,

[Sarcasm]

Yeah right now it's best to wait for the 60hz displays anyway.

[kingduqc]

the asus one is 60hz for 800$...

[worldwidegaming]

Buyer beware!
I remember when they said the 360/PS3 were HD!
I remember when 720P was called HD and then 1080P was TRUE HD!
Funny how they keep tricking us!

[Parapraxis]

360/PS3 are HD.
720p IS by definition HD.
TrueHD can be lossless audio or it can mean 1080p.

Any modestly educated consumer knows these things and aren't being "tricked".

[worldwidegaming]

Guess you did not get the memo.

1) They up-scaled games last gen.
(check halo series and COD)
2) when 1080p TVs first sold they sold them stating they were "TRUE HD" or "FULL HD"

nothing on the box or in the instructions stated lossless audio just resolution.
(by god, some TVs were not even Native 720p)

These statements were rendered false by being brought out into the light or just phased out.

Now that the consumer is made aware these "Tricks" are brought out before the first person even buys it by various reviewers...

The article reinforces my statement. It really should be "Informed consumer" many educated people lack the common knowledge of what HD really means.

"Not grasping straws but stating history."

[DarkHeroZX]

@worldwide

Not every single game was upscaled there where plenty of native HD games.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

Some games being upscaled doesn't mean PS3 and 360 aren't HD.

[worldwidegaming]

You can argue its HD or its not HD but the games even stated on the box it was 720p when it was not. "how do you spin that?"

[dsswoosh]

There are a few 360 and PS3 games that are native 1080p.

Just want to point that out to everybody here.

[dantesparda]

true, but cod ghost for x1 is definitely a rock solid constant 60fps, NOT!!! LOL!!!

[dantesparda]

I only said that, cuz this guys is always spewing this crap/lie.

[Lior]

I wouldn't worry because consoles are limited to 1080p and a lot of games still can't run at that even

[MasterCornholio]

Your talking about the Xbox One. As far as I know Battlefield 4 is the only sub 1080P game on the PS4.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

Like I said, only some games were not native. There's nothing to spin.

[MasterCornholio]

Well I'm just happy that Sony isn't trying to fool us by claiming 1080P 60FPS as a standard for the PS4. Only one game runs at 900P while the rest are in 1080P which is a good thing in my opinion.

[iistuii]

True, but it's strange how the 900p games are the one that looks the best at present. Out of all the release titles Battlefield 4 looks the best, but runs at 900p on PS4 & Ryse looks the best on xbox One again at 900p.

[sAVAge_bEaST]

@iistuii "900p games are the one that looks the best at present" -huh?!?

KZ:SF, Assassins Creed, CoD, and Resogun, all look great at 1080p.

[Oh_Yeah]

Being a pc gamer...I get to mess with frames and resolution. That said, to my eyes, 900p @ 60fps looks waaaaay better than 1080p @ 30fps. If they can't hit 60 fps in games I'd rather them lower the resolution to 720p/900p to achieve it. Frames make much more of a difference to image quality then resolution does.

[sinspirit]

@Oh_Yeah

Yea but in PS4's case it isn't doing 1080p/30fps it is doing 1080p/60fps. Now lets stop talking about consoles in a non console topic.

[Blackdeath_663]

people are just unaware of the distinction between HD ready (720p tv's) and Full HD (native 1080p TV's) in the same way that some people will be unaware of UltraHD (3840×2160p) and Full native 4k tv (4096×2160).

[JBSleek]

It's about the aspect ratio in this case. 3840 x 2160 will be the standard due to it being 16:9. As in 4096 x 2160 is what movies are shot and won't be a resolution you see in TVs.

[Audiggity]

I remember when I thought the "next gen" consoles could handle 1080P...

Haha.

[ninjahunter]

Well, it would be a waste in most circumstances, 4k just takes too much power. On a side note, just use SSAA, that stuff will tank your frame rate, but i swear its some crazy black magic nonsense, can make a 720p screen look 1080p.

[Bladesfist]

It is not really black magic. The game is being rendered at a higher resolution and then downscaled back to your resolution.

[beerzombie]

There is the consumer 4k 3840x2160 and the cinema 4k 4096x2160 they are two diferent resolutions.

[Ju]

This whole 4K is quite a mess. Using it as a buzzword instead of a standard. Can't we just stick to 16:9 and done with it? Changing aspect ratios are a pain in the ass. http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

[Audiggity]

I don't know why you got 4 disagrees... apparently those people all have cinema displays or don't mind black bars!

[kmanmx]

The guy who wrote this article is clueless.

You will not get many, if any real 4K monitors (4096x2160), because it is a different aspect ratio. The standard aspect ratio for monitors now is 16:9, UltraHD 3840x2160 is 16:9. Real 4K is 4096x2160 which is 17:9.

They are not making monitors UltraHD instead of 4K because it is "cheap" or because it is "easier", they are just keeping with widely established used aspect ratio of 16:9, once you stray away from 16:9 or 16:10 many modern games will stretch and have odd HUD placement.

The newly announced UltraHD monitors at CES by Lenovo and Asus are very high quality 10bit IPS panels with a 5ms response time (though you will never get it this low in real world usage). They also support Display Port 1.2 which will do 60Hz at 3840x2160. These monitors will be fantastic, do not listen to this article.

[Coach_McGuirk]

winner

[Ju]

Right. Also 4096x2160 is only used for native film and cinema projectors. No TV will ever support it.

[Audiggity]

100% "Agree" votes... ding ding.

[mechlord]

@kmanmx

Im sorry :)

i completely agree with you, but i had to disagree (this is N4G, you know) to keep it classy :) sorry for breaking your streak

[Coach_McGuirk]

poorly written

[johny5]

I'm going with Vizio this year as they seem to offer the best picture for the price.

They announced a 50" 4k TV with full array LED starting at $999.00 I myself will get the 70" for $2600 in spring when they come out!

What I think this article is talking about are Sharps new Quattro+ TVs? There not real 4k but supposed to have like half the resolution "4 million pixels" and is again supposed to be better then HD but not real 4k like Vizio, Samsung and SONY.

The Quattryo+ don't even have Full array LED and there fake 70" 4k will sell for 3,200 while there real 4k TV will sell for $5999! That's easily 3,200 more then Vizios real 70" 4k TV!

"I heard Vizio had the best looking TVs at CES!"

[zerog]

Personally I'd pay the extra for a better set. Vizio has a good picture and all but aren't very reliable in the long haul. I know quite a few people who have bought them and my brothers lasted the longest, about 4 years.

[johny5]

There quality VS Samsung and LG are way better this time around and picture quality is unrivaled with there current 4k TV sets at a fraction of the cost!

All TV sets today are made In china. Who are you going to go with that meets your so called expectations? The Koreans? LOL

None of the 4k TVs this year besides Vizio has Full array LEDs so good luck finding one from a competitor for a reasonable price! All 4k sets from other manufactures are charging an arm and a leg for TV's that are sub par and are shoving unnecessary features to jack up the price so....

LG and Sharp are the only ones that make there TV panels in house but Sharp dropped the ball will pricing and trying to release a pseudo 4k TV set called Quattro+ and charge more for it then real 4k like Vizio and the picture quality is shit!

"I saw it and it's not that great compared to Samsung or Sony yet alone Vizio!"

So who are you going to side with LG? They the ones who like to add all those unnecessary features and charge large premiums that don't always reflect picture quality?

[mediate-this]

I just bought the samaung 65" ultra hd 4k tv. Best tv on the market till the samsung oled curve hits. My tv cost me 65hundred.

[zerog]

Actually I have no plans to buy a 4k tv anytime soon and could care less about lg. When I do I'll probably go with sony but right now I've got a 55" samsung 240hz I do my gaming on and it works for me, I bought it to replace my 42" samsung that I've had for years and it still works fine my kids use it for their ps3. Weird thing is the best quality tv I've ever owned was a 1st gen hdmi jvc which still works perfect to this day at my exs house and she leaves it running 10-15 hours a day even when she's not home for the dog. Weird right? If price is a factor amazon has a seki 50" 4k for $1050 but personally I'll wait till someone builds one that will run 4k native at at least 120hz so I know I can get a solid 60fps at that resolution.

[jacksjus]

This is very informative. My issue with the current 4k models is that you can't downscale the image if you want. 4K resolution is not always visually pleasing depending on what you are watching because it has the tendency to strip away a movies effects rendering it phony. When the Bat mobile looks like a plastic hot wheel car there is a problem. I have yet to see a game on a 4k set so I can't speak on that.

[ITPython]

You are confusing resolution with motion interpolation (the thing that makes movies look really smooth and fake looking).

A 4k set could have motion smoothing or it could not, they are not mutual features.

[strigoi814]

sony is out of this topic coz they are making 4kTV not 4kmonitors

[FlyingFoxy]

Not moving from my 120hz 1080p Samsung anytime soon. It only has 2ms refresh and below 12ms input lag. Some other well known monitor makes like Dell have normally had input lag in the 20-30+ms range.

Besides 4k needs Sli and Xfire minimum, you still need a very good mid/high end gpu to keep close to 60fps as often as possible at 1080p nevermind 1440p or 4k. For some newer titles at least especially ones like BF4.

[InTheZoneAC]

4k on little monitors really is pointless

and 4k really is pointless for now if the games aren't taking 100% advantage of that resolution.

[JBSleek]

What you just said wad a paradox. If there are no 4K monitors then what would be the point in making any games 4K.

[InTheZoneAC]

but monitors are too small for a useful 4k anyway, so what is the point?

have 4k tv's, but little tv's/monitor's? little extreme, don't you think...

[Sieg]

Terrible article really. We got Display Port and why the hell do we want to wait for HDMI? You can do 4k @ 60hz via MST. It's a good thing that cheaper TN 4k panels are coming out because it drives the market. I'm sure the PS4 and XB1 can do 4k but only for movies/tv show. No way they can handle 4k. You can get multiple monitors, debezzel them and put them in eyefinity/surround setup. There you go, you get the "4k" or greater @60hz or 120hz if you're crazy.

[TABSF]

There is so much wrong with this article and clearly the author hasn't done any worth while research.

3840 by 2160 and 4096 by 2160 are considered 4K its just that 3840 by 2160 keeps the really nice aspec ratio of 16:9
Any monitor that has 8.3 million pixels in less than 30" isn't cheap at all!

Also his understanding of interfaces and how refresh rate/frame rate isn't great

HDMI 1.4 can support
3840 by 2160 at 24,25 and 30Hz
4096 by 2160 at 24Hz

Frame rate can go beyond 30fps if the PC hardware is powerful enough however if the frame rate is higher than the refresh rate there will be screen tearing.

DP 1.2 can support 4K resolutions at 60Hz
HDMI 2.0 can do 60Hz at both 4K standards
DVI-D (Daul Link) can support 4K resolutions at 30Hz

DP 1.3 can support 8K resolutions at 60Hz, 4K at 120Hz and will also allow 4K 3D.

[TechNews]

I rather buy a g sync monitor

[Pandamobile]

4k UHD 120 Hz G-Sync monitor here I come!

[ITPython]

4k is pretty amazing and all, but it is mostly pointless and possibly counter-productive to picture quality without more 4k sources and devices.

LCD's don't look very good when running outside of their native resolution, as the pixels can't shrink like they can on say, a CRT. LCD pixels are always the same size. So I would imagine running anything other than 4k resolution on a 4k HDTV will look pretty bad.

Although since 4k resolution (3840x2160) is a perfect 4:1 scale of 1080p, upscaling to 4k from a 1080p source probably won't look bad at all, but it won't look any better than a 1080p TV (but shouldn't look any worse).

However upscaling a 720p source, or using 720p resolution on a 4k TV, would probably look pretty awful, worse than what it would look like on a native 720p HDTV strangely enough.

Right now 1080p is nearing it's peak, as more and more sources are 1080p these days. People probably would be wise to wait until PS5 before going 4k, because just look how long it's taken for more native 1080p sources to surface.

[beatled]

while article has a point... 3860×2160 still craps on 1080p

[zerog]

If you want the true benefits of 4k you have to go big, like 40" and up. For all those saying wait that may be a good way to go as the human eye can't perceive much beyond 4k and I'd bet 8k will be the last hd upgrade we see, it will all be about refresh rate and features after that.

[kingPoS]

Ten years ago people were wowed by 1080i presentations on a then new hdtv standard. Flash forward to today, now there are some pc rigs capable of benching 4k with ease. I Feel bad for those who've become jaded to 4k already. I guess thats just an unfortunate side effect of living on technologies razer's edge. Granted 4k is obviously better but why bother when 1080p still looks amazing to me. I give it 3 to 4 years before 4k truly becomes mainstream in monitors & hdtv sets. It just needs a catalyst in the same way bluray was for 1080p.

Gateway MT6706 2008

[lesrima88]

ps4 and especially xbox one will never ever be able to pull off native 4k gaming,pc ftw