NEC Releases Pictures, Price For Beautiful 43-Inch Curved Monitor
Posted 06/04/09 at 04:30:24 PM by Andy Salisbury
Comments
Print
Email
This week NEC announced a 43-inch, curved monitor that will sport a 2ms response time.
The CRV43 “ultra-widescreen” display will pack a native resolution of 2880x900, and thanks to LED backlighting, feature a response time of just 2ms. For those of you that are looking to get one of these for yourself, start saving now – it’ll cost you $7,999.
Though, for those of you that have gaming running through your blood, no length is too great in order to have the baddest rig on the net. And, adding this to your setup will without a doubt put you near the top of the stack.
Image Credit: NEC
This seems like it would be better for
Submitted by DRAGONWEEZEL on Mon, 06/08/2009 - 1:32pm
a security system monitor & productivity. While I applaud a 2ms response time, I don' know that the hight resolution is appropriate for a gamer. It's not for me anyway I'd need 1024 MINIMUM, but would prefer 1536.
THERE ARE ONLY 11 TYPES OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD. Those that think binary jokes are funny, those that don't, and those that don't know binary
Submitted by jhonka232 on Mon, 06/08/2009 - 9:42am
Just imagine running three of these side-by-side....
Submitted by domih2009 on Sat, 06/06/2009 - 10:20am
"...This is a nice monitor, but personally I would rather use the money
much more wisely by purchasing the emperor chair gaming station from
Novel Quest at novelquest.com..."
Given the price, $40K, they should revamp their marketing and address a market that actually has the money for it.
They should call it the CEO chair and make a TV ad with Austin Powers' Dr Evil :-)
Oh man, Dr. Evil would be a
Submitted by Denis63 on Mon, 06/08/2009 - 11:30am
Oh man, Dr. Evil would be a kickass way to sell high-end chairs! -Denis
Economically impractical
Submitted by Sonickid101 on Fri, 06/05/2009 - 7:40am
You can buy 3 20" monitors around $180 each and a Matrox triplehead2go for around $260 and build a 53" monitor for around $800 with a max resolution 3840x1024
20" monitors usually are
Submitted by FrancesTheMute on Fri, 06/05/2009 - 3:20pm
20" monitors usually are 1600x1200, so you'd be looking at more like 4800x1200 with that setup you described
Submitted by Sonickid101 on Fri, 06/05/2009 - 4:42pm
The Max res for the Matrox TripleHead2Go is currently 3840 * 1024
Submitted by Morete on Fri, 06/05/2009 - 6:06am
This is a nice monitor, but personally I would rather use the money much more wisely by purchasing the emperor chair gaming station from Novel Quest at novelquest.com. This chair comes with three screens that angle just perfect. It's nice not having the separation, but with this gaming station a person could pick their favorite screens of choice and modify their settings on each individual screen.
Submitted by tkddan87 on Fri, 06/05/2009 - 4:38am
I suppose if you have the cash to burn its not bad to try it out. It would be cool to have just for the braging rights. I could only imagine what kind of setup you could have with this display and a Cinemassive setup.
For those worried about how the back sticks out, (like someone else said) check the Gizmoodo post. This monitor is DLP. this explains the size and also the insaine preformance.
Geez...
Submitted by K0BALT on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 8:56pm
I was totally excited with my new 24" HD 1080P widescreen. I want one of these now... :(
Submitted by LordPyro on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 7:13pm
I think its pretty damn cool actually, and the fact it is LEDis even better.
But... 8k is a lot of money, I think I will stick with my 17" LCD and my 58" 1080p plasma...
Submitted by SuperiorBeing on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 5:38pm
Has anyone looked at the original Gizmodo article? It's definitely not flat, it sticks out of the back.
http://gizmodo.com/photogallery/nec43/1008565604
THey neglect to mention that it's not an LCD.
Submitted by roninnder on Fri, 06/05/2009 - 6:07am
And who would have thought that a 43" CURVED LCD monitor wouldn't be flat? What is this world coming to?
Is there actually anyone out
Submitted by Tekzel on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 4:48pm
Is there actually anyone out there dumb enough to spend 8k on one of these instead of buying 2 19in LCDs? Is the curve worth that much? Anyone actually want a seamless super wide display enough to pay that kind of markup? Besides, I had my 2 22in widescreens side by side for a long time, then decided to rotate one so I get a portrait and a widescreen and it make so much more sense. Oh, and waaaay cheaper.
Wasn't there an issue with
Submitted by jcollins on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 4:30pm
Wasn't there an issue with these types of monitors where it's like 3 LCD panels in a row to deal with the curvature, and you can see the vertical line separating them (not as bad as 3 separate monitors and their bezals, but still noticeable).
Submitted by DRAGONWEEZEL on Mon, 06/08/2009 - 1:29pm
Like my 21" SGI. it supports a resolution of 2048x1536. On a white screen (like google's page)you can notice the 3 horizontal lines. They are thin, about 1/2 a pixel or so. On anything even somewhat "normal" for videogames you'll never know they are there. I'm very sensitive to "optical defects" which is why I still use a 75lb CRT monitor, and I never have an issue with those lines, you don't see them when the screen is up. My only issue is framerate, need to upgrade my 8800gts!
Anyone got an upgrade in the Oly, WA area?
THERE ARE ONLY 11 TYPES OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD. Those that think binary jokes are funny, those that don't, and those that don't know binary
Submitted by Vegan on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 4:08pm
$8k and you can't even play a Blu-ray at full resolution?
Submitted by van_helblaze on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 3:55pm
Would be worth it, if it supported a higher resolutions, I would be nice for people who have their computers in the corner though.
Submitted by SEALBoy on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 2:39pm
Resolution is pretty crappy. My 22" LCD is 1680x1050. This 43" is almost twice the size but doesn't even have close to twice as many pixels. Vertically, it's actually shorter - only 900 pixels. A 30" LCD running at 2560x1600 has 58% more pixels.
To my tastes, the pixel size on my LCD is about as big as I want it to get. This is going to look significantly worse as far as picture sharpness goes.
Submitted by foamcup on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 2:18pm
Eh...I'm too used to running at 1050 now, I can't go lower, must go higher!
Great idea
Submitted by digital demon on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 2:17pm
But the reason people run multi-monitor setups is to literally have 2 to 3 different screens up at one time. Is this monitor going to be able to partition itself into multiple different sized screens, or is only going to be able to be one giant one?
Submitted by armada439 on Thu, 06/04/2009 - 2:13pm
Looks like that Alienware display. Which has yet to be released...
Must Read Articles
Feature
Review
Feature
Feature
Feature
Most Popular Articles
This Month's Issue
FEATURE Windows XP/Vista/7 Tips!FEATURE Monitor Roundup: 7 LCDs ReviewedHOW TOMaster PhotoshopFEATUREAMD's Awesome New GPUWHITE PAPEROrganic LEDs
Technology News
Computer Cooling Fans
Computer Cases
PC Game Controllers
PC Games
Computer Hardware
Headphones
MP3 Players
Stream Video
Computer Mouse
Monitors
Motherboards
NAS Storage
Networking
Laptop Computers
DVD Burner
Digital Cameras
Portable Storage
Computer Accessories
Smartphone
Antivirus Software
Sound Cards
Speakers
Computer Systems
Thumb Drives
Video Cameras
Video Card Reviews
Water Cooling
Gadgets
- Keyboards
© 2009 Future US, Inc. All Rights Reserved.