NEC Brings 4K Ultra HD to MultiSync EA Series Starting with 24-inch EA244UHD

21

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

I have a couple of questions for the smart people around here:

On a 24" screen, won't that resolution yield absolutely tiny fonts, buttons, and other screen items? Visually speaking, Windows doesn't scale to fit screens or accessibility needs, beyond the clumsy setting of resolution outside a monitor's native specs. Right?

And why the hell is that? Windows should have a slider that adjusts the size of all text and menus dynamically. My browser has simple scaling; why can't the operating system?

Oh, and there is no single video card under $1000 that can run any modern game at a 4K resolution, right? One would have to buy one of the stupid expensive dual GPU cards or run multiple cards to support playable frame rates on most modern titles, correct? Even then, there are all sorts of timing problems that are only now beginning to be resolved.

As far as I can see, neither video cards nor our #1 operating system are ready for 4K, so why buy it?

avatar

tom_m

You can actually scale icons and windows -- it's in the personalization menu. Many programs don't scale correctly, though. The Steam client is a notable example. The advantage of a smaller screen is higher pixel density. As for video card horsepower, a pair of GTX 780s or R9 290s will do Ultra HD with pretty good performance. Dual-GPU frame latency hasn't been a noticeable problem in most games lately. Nvidia actually has hardware on their cards that's dedicated to frame syncing.

avatar

LatiosXT

Windows does have the capability of scaling GUI elements, but the general consensus is that it's "okay" at best since it basically scales up the text and buttons, menus and icons may or may not be affected or scaled very well. It's buried though under Control Panel -> Personalization -> Display.

And honestly, and I think it was mentioned here or somewhere else, gaming at higher resolutions is sort of... meh compared to using a desktop at higher resolutions. In games, you only see a fixed amount of content, regardless of the resolution. Sure the pixelation goes away, but in most games, I'm going to see the same exact thing at 720p as I do at 4K. It also depends on your definition of "playable". People here seem to be detail snobs that want max everything at 60FPS before it's "playable" (or at least just the 60FPS part). But honestly, to me, 25FPS is the bare minimum, and most high end cards can exceed that easily, at least on medium details. I don't really have this "need" that everything must run on High or better, most games these days look really well on medium. I'm pretty sure even on Low, Metro LL looks better than most contemporary FPS games.

Outside of gaming, more resolution means more workspace. At 1920x1200, I can see two Word documents side to side at 100% zoom. I can't do that at 720p unless I shrink it down to mini sizes. I'm pretty sure at 4K I can start seeing three side by side. And then there are those who do photo editing, they get to see more of the image at once, which allows them to see the impact of a local change against the whole much better.

avatar

vrmlbasic

Pixelation matters. Precision sniping at range is out of the question in MechWarrior Online for my LAN lancemates who game @ 720.

Although when we play Xbox 360 ports, as so many PC games are, playing them at 720 makes the low resolution (and the blurriness that it brings) textures not stand out so much.

I've gotten used to gaming at <60 FPS due to crappy game coding being nigh ubiquitous but it is eyestrain inducing as 25 FPS is much too low to truly convey fluid motion, which is why we get 720p60 sports broadcasts.

avatar

LatiosXT

Well, if you need extra resolution, you need it.

I kind of wish you'd get off the "bad PC port" argument. There are plenty of multiplatform games that look better than the console counterpart, like Crysis 2, Battlefield 3, and Metro. Eidos didn't compromise the UI or size of maps of Deus Ex: Human Revolution to suit the needs of a console like they did with Invisible War. And while RAGE started off rocky, id fixed it up.

The problem is that honestly, details like mesh polycount and texture resolution I feel are reaching a "99% of the population doesn't care" point. Like how we reached that point with CD audio and 24-bit color. And for me, I have to actually stop and look at the details to appreciate them because the rest of the time I'm not focused on it.

Besides that, I think lighting is more important than trying to increase poly counts and texture resolution at this stage. When I look at Crysis versus a modern game with a physically based shader, it just feels off. And unlike poly counts and texture resolution, lighting is noticeable most of the time.

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

But I would think you would want a 4K monitor to be more like 36-48" diagonally. Personally, I'd love something that size on my desk. The immersion would be fantastic. The work space would be a dream come true.

To me, 4K on a small monitor seems silly.

avatar

LatiosXT

I don't want a monitor to be that big. One, it requires a lot of desk space which many people can't afford to have taken up (I already think my 27" monitor takes up a lot of space). Two, immersion or not, I don't like having to move my head around a lot for one display, and the closest I'll comfortably sit in front of my 46" TV is at least two feet because I can still move my eyes. And three, high DPI is becoming a thing.

Displays are a tricky thing. You can't just increase the screen size for a desktop because you're limiting where you can put it, and you can't just crank up the DPI because well... productivity area is kind of king still. Plus larger displays are more expensive because for the same silicon you used to make say a 46" monitor, you could've made 4 (whatever a size a quarter area of that) monitors.

I'd like a 24" or 27" 4K monitor paired with an effective GUI resolution of 1920x1080. Like how Mac OS X handles high DPI screens. I get my nice DPI smoothing and still a pretty good amount of work space, and photo editors can still get to see more at the actual 100% zoom.

avatar

enonu

I'll never buy a MST 4k display given the nasty problems with it.

avatar

MrGeek

$1,349??

I bought, 2 weeks ago, SAMSUNG U28D590D Black 28" 1ms (GTG) HDMI Widescreen LED Backlight LCD Monitor TN Panel for less than $700 and it is a thing of beauty! Connected to display port of my AMD R9 200X, everything looks amazing, especially games!

Yes, 60Hz on display port.

avatar

praetor_alpha

TN looks like crap compared to IPS. That's why it costs about twice as much.

avatar

Hey.That_Dude

And if they ever annotated all of the information contained on the NEC's spec list with the exact way they received those numbers then I might be interested in that screen, as would many professionals. Until then, NEC will sell because they don't hide important information in marketing garbage (You'll notice there is no DCR measurement on NEC's product, because it's a worthless measurement).

avatar

Obsidian

There are many people that have never experienced an IPS display. Once I did back in 2005 I wasn't able to bring myself to another TN panel. I'm lucky enough to be able to purchase mostly IPS displays since then, but they don't come cheap. I'm not sure it's objectively worth it, but for professional work it is, and I happen to be able to fit a monitor in every 3 to 5 years, so I want to make them great products.

Lots of people look at things they believe matter, then look at size, pixels, and price ... so little time is spent on quality.

Although it would be really interesting to see if the MPC crew can tell an IPS display (of the varying styles) from a TN panel in a side by side by side image test. Some people might not care or notice??

avatar

vrmlbasic

IPS is definitely worth it. "Crushing blacks" and lower response times are a nagging issue but after experiencing the superior quality I could never go back.

I'm sure that anyone can identify a TN display vs an IPS display in a side-by-side test as all they have to do is view the screens off-center and the IPS will reveal itself.

avatar

LatiosXT

While I will swear by IPS panels, I can see why people are still "meh, who cares?" about them.

TN panels show their ugly head when the panel size is sufficiently large or the viewing distance sufficiently short such that you start seeing color divergence even at ideal viewing angles. but often times this isn't really that big of a deal, I only really noticed this on the last TN panel monitor I used if there was a large block of a solid color.

But for something like games or movies, this is less of a concern. You don't see color infringing all that much or even care to pay attention to it. It was just bothering me when I saw a solid color blotched over the screen.

avatar

vrmlbasic

I thought that the blurays that I was getting were defective as they looked rather poor. I thought it was the resolution but while 1080 is still much too low a resolution my IPS monitor made it readily apparent that it wasn't the blurays that couldn't hack it but rather my TN LCD :(

avatar

Hey.That_Dude

Go and change the color gammas to match better what the IPS has. It doesn't fix the problem, but I can now at least watch movies on my Laptop's TN panel after doing that... It was pretty bad how much it favored blue.

avatar

Enigmatistical

Consumer 4k is troublesome to me. 4096 x 2160 being the industry standard and 21:9 displays growing in acceptance, why are we receiving 3840?

avatar

SliceAndDice

Nice to see the higher pixel densities creeping into the desktop display market. AA will probably be a non issue at 4K on a monitor this size.

avatar

John Pombrio

Refresh rate, Paul?

avatar

Thiazolium

640 x 480 @ 60 Hz to 75 Hz
800 x 600 @ 56 Hz to 75 Hz
832 x 624 @ 75 Hz
1024 x 768 @ 60 Hz to 75 Hz
1152 x 870 @ 75 Hz
1280 x 1024 @ 60 Hz to 75 Hz
1400 x 1050 @ 60 Hz
1440 x 900 @ 60 Hz
1920 x 1080 @ 60 Hz (DVI-D)
2560 x 1440 @ 60 Hz
3840 x 2160 @ 30 Hz (HDMI)
3840 x 2160 @ 60 Hz (DisplayPort)

avatar

Innomasta

Probably just 60HZ, being a 4K display after all.