BenQ Releases 24-inch 16:10 IPS Monitor

[10tacle]

The retail going price for a 1920x1200 IPS from the likes of Dell, HP, and a few others is around $350-$400.

Oops, forgot to add that this is general market pricing for a 24" 16:10 IPS.....

 

[fkr]

nice monitor..

but since 4k seems to seep into all conversations nowadays, I am a little worried about moving into super HD. remember when HD first came out and how bad regular def looked. regular def looked better on an old TV. what is going to happen to all of the websites out there. how are they going to look when they are reproduced on a 4k screen. now if we improve all of the graphics on the internet then imagine how much more bandwidth we are going to use and what is going to happen when my mobile device wants to go to these same websites. web pages will take longer to load and bandwidth use will greatly increase. lastly broadcasts of television will not any time soon start going to 4k production. they still run non HD channels just because they can put out a 4 to 1 ratio std def to HD. 4k may have its place but I do not see it happening anytime soon.

so 4k will be good for theatres where you sit 30 feet away and 8-16k will be for imax

http://wolfcrow.com/blog/notes-by-dr-optoglass-the-resolution-of-the-human-eye/
^ some good math for figuring out human eye pixel density at distance.

 

[10tacle]

[citation][nom]fkr[/nom]nice monitor..but since 4k seems to seep into all conversations nowadays, I am a little worried about moving into super HD. remember when HD first came out and how bad regular def looked. regular def looked better on an old TV. what is going to happen to all of the websites out there. how are they going to look when they are reproduced on a 4k screen.....[/citation]

1) If you look at how hard even multiple GPU (SLI, Crossfire) top end cards struggle with today's maximum resolution of 2560x1600, or a three-way 1920x1080 setup (effective 5720x3240) in a game like Crysis 3 with all the eye candy maxed out, you will see that 4k resolution for PC gaming (or console gaming) is a long, VERY long way off.

2) I remember seeing my first HDTV on display at the Smithsonian Technology Institute in Washington DC back in 1994. It was running 720p resolution, and I believe it was a Sony. They were showing a soccer game and I'll never forget actually being able to see the audience faces for the first time. It truly was like looking through a window. But what you have after 720p resolution is a law of diminishing returns. Think about it: 1080p does not look *that* much better than 720p from a distance. It's because the human eye can only process so much information, similar to why we can't tell the difference between 60fps and 120fps, but we can tell the difference between 15fps and 30fps. With 4k, sure, it looks better, but not blow-your-mind better.

 

[killerb255]

Not impressed. For $400, I can get an Auria 2560x1440 IPS monitor from Micro Center!

 

[acerace]

Not impressed. For $400, I can get an Auria 2560x1440 IPS monitor from Micro Center!

And playing Russian roulette.

 

[eric4277]

1) If you look at how hard even multiple GPU (SLI, Crossfire) top end cards struggle with today's maximum resolution of 2560x1600, or a three-way 1920x1080 setup (effective 5720x3240) in a game like Crysis 3 with all the eye candy maxed out, you will see that 4k resolution for PC gaming (or console gaming) is a long, VERY long way off.

2) I remember seeing my first HDTV on display at the Smithsonian Technology Institute in Washington DC back in 1994. It was running 720p resolution, and I believe it was a Sony. They were showing a soccer game and I'll never forget actually being able to see the audience faces for the first time. It truly was like looking through a window. But what you have after 720p resolution is a law of diminishing returns. Think about it: 1080p does not look *that* much better than 720p from a distance. It's because the human eye can only process so much information, similar to why we can't tell the difference between 60fps and 120fps, but we can tell the difference between 15fps and 30fps. With 4k, sure, it looks better, but not blow-your-mind better.

1.) I agree. 4k capable graphics cards are at least half a decade off for multiple reasons. 1.)Consoles are still using 1080p. Games are being developed with consoles in mind. So this next gen of consoles will drastically increase image quality for PCs and streamline around 1080p. I would assume that this generation of consoles is going to last at least 6 or 7 years. By the time the next gen releases, 2560x1440 should be mainstream for gaming. 2.) As you mentioned, our current gpus can barely handle 2560x1600. Give it a few years of continuous development of gpus w/o reaching a technology limitation and we might see some cards able to play 4k Rez. 3.) Affordability. Given how 2560x1440(1600) monitors are just now becoming somewhat affordable, not considering the cheapoo korean monitors, 4k monitors will probably have an astronomical cost when they release and remain that way for a few years. Not to mention transmission bottle necks. Display port will have to be mainstream for 4k support.

2.) This is where you begin to talk out of your ass. I am tired of people spouting about how the human eye can only perceive so many frames per second. I personally can tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. and 60 fps and 100fps. After a certain point, the eye will not be able to perceive a difference in frames, but it is not 30 or 40. Depending on the person it can be upwards of 100. For example, MLB players can see and track a baseball traveling >90mph in a split second. Not everyone can do it, but some can. Especially those with eyes trained to do so.

I also see a huge difference in resolution when going from 720p to 1080p. I will be buying a 1440p monitor next week to confirm if I can see the difference there, I am sure I will be able to though.

 

[fkr]

you will really be able to tell the difference because every image or movie not designed for a 1440p resolution will look even worse on your monitor than on a 1080p monitor.

 

[aramisathei]

Not clear on why people keep saying one can't tell the difference between 60 and 120fps anyway.
Maybe not on a 60hz monitor, but across the board that isn't the case.
The main reason I picked up some BenQs was because I wanted something with 120hz.
It in every way makes a huge difference as far as fluidity.