News Huawei Reportedly Preps 32-Inch Monitor with 3:2 Aspect Ratio, 4500x3000 Resolution

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
141,247
7,899
174,090
21,848
How is a 3:2 screen for gamers? Wider aspect ratios are more beneficial and 400nits brightness is nowhere near good enough for good HDR. Don’t really get who this is for.
There was a member here a few months ago, looking for a monitor just like this.
Don't remember the exact use case, but he does NOT like the current 16:9, 16:10 things.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
How is a 3:2 screen for gamers?
This monitor isn't for gamers, 3:2 is a fine aspect ratio for more productivity-oriented tasks. High color accuracy is typically aimed at photo and video editors. With a resolution beyond 4k, a video editor can have the output rendered at 1:1 resolution with enough space to have tool bars and time lines still visible. This monitor will likely cost a fortune.
 
This monitor isn't for gamers, 3:2 is a fine aspect ratio for more productivity-oriented tasks. High color accuracy is typically aimed at photo and video editors. With a resolution beyond 4k, a video editor can have the output rendered at 1:1 resolution with enough space to have tool bars and time lines still visible. This monitor will likely cost a fortune.
Read the OP…
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
The 42” hasn’t been shown and the article is purely on the 32” that is pretty much for no one.
Which brings us back to my original point: the 32" model IS NOT FOR GAMERS, there are no mentions of gaming in the article anywhere besides the title and only once near the end in conjunction with the 42" model before the conclusion. Zero mention of gaming on the 32" model.
 

CooliPi

Prominent
Oct 4, 2019
62
20
535
0
How is a 3:2 screen for gamers? Wider aspect ratios are more beneficial and 400nits brightness is nowhere near good enough for good HDR. Don’t really get who this is for.
For me, for example. Professionals in the CAD arena love high resolutions, but also reasonable aspect ratios, because they tend to rotate 3D models. 3:2 is even taller than 16:10 (which I have - 3840x2400 with 208 ppi), but not as tall as 4:3 aspect monitors, which have unfortunately completely vanished.

This aspect ratio allows to view two A4 pages next to each other, such as when reading some online pdf catalogues. The Digi-key one is an example, some 2000 (4000?) pages with small fonts, but easily readable on a 4k monitor, two pages at a time. Way faster to find something on a 4k monitor than on a full HD one. On 4k, you see 4 times as many information at once.

For this kind of work, you don't need high brightness, 400 nits is enough. My vp2290b has 235 cd/m^2 brightness, which is actually low, but it looks awesome. It has 8 CCFLs, you know. Only 24Hz refresh rate now, can do 48. But I love it, it's a heavy duty worker. Needs two DVI-I cables (or four DVI-I for 48Hz).

So, I'm looking forward towards 3:2 aspect ratio monitors for professionals. Hopefully even smaller diameter ones, because when working with a CAD, you want the dots to be so small, that you don't see they're rectangular. You don't want to see jagged lines. This monitor, being 24'' would be perfect. At 32'', it's a little bit too big for me.

The other group I can think of are programmers, they barely see 100 lines on the contemporary 16:9 aspect ratio monitor at one.

When the wide aspect ratio happened, it ate 1/4 of our 4/3 monitor estate, so to speak. Yes, in a notebook, limited by horizontal width, you can have 33% more space on a LCD with 4:3 aspect ratio than with 16:9 aspect ratio.

Go figure yourself, how much screen estate was eaten by the "widescreen" revolution. See
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Aspect_ratio#/media/File:Aspect_Ratios_and_Resolutions.svg
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
The other group I can think of are programmers, they barely see 100 lines on the contemporary 16:9 aspect ratio monitor at one.
When I do programming or have a long reading session ahead, I often flip my 1920x1200 monitor in portrait, love having about twice as many lines on-screen. If I did programming more often, I'd get a 2.5k monitor in portrait for it.
 

daedalus1

Distinguished
Jul 23, 2011
6
1
18,515
0
Well it's going in the right direction at least. I must be an old git as I would much prefer to go back to 4:3. I can turn my monitor around by 90° but would much prefer to just leave it were it is. 5000:3750 would be nice. But I'd like to try a 1:1 to see what that is like.
 
May 1, 2021
1
0
10
0
3:2 or 15:10 versus 16:10 which is hard to get vs 16:9. Of course 4:3 would be nice, but I will take 3:2
 
For me, for example. Professionals in the CAD arena love high resolutions, but also reasonable aspect ratios, because they tend to rotate 3D models. 3:2 is even taller than 16:10 (which I have - 3840x2400 with 208 ppi), but not as tall as 4:3 aspect monitors, which have unfortunately completely vanished.

This aspect ratio allows to view two A4 pages next to each other, such as when reading some online pdf catalogues. The Digi-key one is an example, some 2000 (4000?) pages with small fonts, but easily readable on a 4k monitor, two pages at a time. Way faster to find something on a 4k monitor than on a full HD one. On 4k, you see 4 times as many information at once.

For this kind of work, you don't need high brightness, 400 nits is enough. My vp2290b has 235 cd/m^2 brightness, which is actually low, but it looks awesome. It has 8 CCFLs, you know. Only 24Hz refresh rate now, can do 48. But I love it, it's a heavy duty worker. Needs two DVI-I cables (or four DVI-I for 48Hz).

So, I'm looking forward towards 3:2 aspect ratio monitors for professionals. Hopefully even smaller diameter ones, because when working with a CAD, you want the dots to be so small, that you don't see they're rectangular. You don't want to see jagged lines. This monitor, being 24'' would be perfect. At 32'', it's a little bit too big for me.

The other group I can think of are programmers, they barely see 100 lines on the contemporary 16:9 aspect ratio monitor at one.

When the wide aspect ratio happened, it ate 1/4 of our 4/3 monitor estate, so to speak. Yes, in a notebook, limited by horizontal width, you can have 33% more space on a LCD with 4:3 aspect ratio than with 16:9 aspect ratio.

Go figure yourself, how much screen estate was eaten by the "widescreen" revolution. See
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Aspect_ratio#/media/File:Aspect_Ratios_and_Resolutions.svg
Wouldn’t say 3:2 is great for CAD, if you need it taller you can always vertically orientate your screen.

If you’re trying to find something on a PDF why not control+F? Also if you’re writing a lot you’d want to be on a Mac for pages anyway.

For coding again rotate the monitor you get a lot more lines than 3:2.

16:10 is the sweet spot for most things tbh.
 

CooliPi

Prominent
Oct 4, 2019
62
20
535
0
Wouldn’t say 3:2 is great for CAD, if you need it taller you can always vertically orientate your screen.

If you’re trying to find something on a PDF why not control+F? Also if you’re writing a lot you’d want to be on a Mac for pages anyway.

For coding again rotate the monitor you get a lot more lines than 3:2.

16:10 is the sweet spot for most things tbh.

The problem with rotating the screen is subpixel anti-aliasiation. The OS must support it, or at least the rendering library used by each program. Maybe have things changed, but from what I tried it wasn't rendering it right on Linux as well as on Windows. I don't know how about MACs.

I barely remember, that KDE or maybe even GNOME has some support for rotation of LCD strips now - but again, don't know how it handles it per each monitor.

There are 1:1 monitors, but aren't 4k. Just 1920x1920 at most.

See
https://www.amazon.com/FlexScan-EV2730QFX-Monitor-1920x1920-EV2730QFX-BK/dp/B00R58MLSY

Here are some even taller LCDs
https://www.litemax.com/product/catalog.php?index_m1_id=2&index_m2_id=84
But too big with low resolution, not for me. I dislike jagged lines and contours.
 

CooliPi

Prominent
Oct 4, 2019
62
20
535
0
Wouldn’t say 3:2 is great for CAD, if you need it taller you can always vertically orientate your screen.

If you’re trying to find something on a PDF why not control+F? Also if you’re writing a lot you’d want to be on a Mac for pages anyway.

For coding again rotate the monitor you get a lot more lines than 3:2.

16:10 is the sweet spot for most things tbh.
I use CTRL+F all the time. The problem is, most of the time, I'm browsing some products catalogues and look for the right item - not knowing its exact description. So, I start by using finding a keyword, but then I browse the section of the catalogue and read what to explore further. It's more like browsing a printed brochure than finding a specific keyword. The last time - ABB catalogue, 280MB, 2000 pages, small fonts. Lots of options, and I had to choose just the right one. I was searching for a needle in a haystack...
 
I use CTRL+F all the time. The problem is, most of the time, I'm browsing some products catalogues and look for the right item - not knowing its exact description. So, I start by using finding a keyword, but then I browse the section of the catalogue and read what to explore further. It's more like browsing a printed brochure than finding a specific keyword. The last time - ABB catalogue, 280MB, 2000 pages, small fonts. Lots of options, and I had to choose just the right one. I was searching for a needle in a haystack...
I have to go through tech docs that are hundreds of pages long in small font. Just control F related words until I find what I’m looking for then I have to find the annex to go along with that.

Windows and Mac have both been fine for me tbh. Though I don’t use rotated screens with Macs more than once in a blue moon.
 

watzupken

Notable
Mar 16, 2020
378
148
870
1
How is a 3:2 screen for gamers? Wider aspect ratios are more beneficial and 400nits brightness is nowhere near good enough for good HDR. Don’t really get who this is for.
If this is your question, the obviously the monitor is not targeting you as their buyer. 3:2 works very well for productivity due to having more vertical space.

In my opinion, I think Huawei is a company that seems to think through their products well. Like when everyone in the mobile industry was chasing after faster hardware, they turned to better phone camera and night mode to win market share. In this case, when everyone is chasing after higher refresh rate, at least on paper this sounds like a good monitor. It may not be for everyone, but I am sure there are people that will appreciate the 3:2 aspect ratio.
 
If this is your question, the obviously the monitor is not targeting you as their buyer. 3:2 works very well for productivity due to having more vertical space.

In my opinion, I think Huawei is a company that seems to think through their products well. Like when everyone in the mobile industry was chasing after faster hardware, they turned to better phone camera and night mode to win market share. In this case, when everyone is chasing after higher refresh rate, at least on paper this sounds like a good monitor. It may not be for everyone, but I am sure there are people that will appreciate the 3:2 aspect ratio.
They work well for artists but it gets blown out of the water by the surface studio that has touch and the surface dial. It’s not colour accurate enough for video/photo work and has bad HDR. Plus the artists might actually like good colour accuracy.

Huawei has never had a top 2 camera on their phone and their night mode just doesn’t match up to apples or Google’s.
 

watzupken

Notable
Mar 16, 2020
378
148
870
1
They work well for artists but it gets blown out of the water by the surface studio that has touch and the surface dial. It’s not colour accurate enough for video/photo work and has bad HDR. Plus the artists might actually like good colour accuracy.

Huawei has never had a top 2 camera on their phone and their night mode just doesn’t match up to apples or Google’s.
I'm not sure man. The product is not even launched, nor did the article mentioned about the colour accuracy level. So not sure how you can immediately ascertain that the colour is not accurate enough. In addition, we still need to look at the pricing.

On your second point, I think you are not comparing right, or you are not aware. The P20 Pro is the first Huawei phone where they started to put a lot of emphasis over quality of phone camera. Public news linked below in case you have any doubts.

huawei-p20-pro-triple-camera-receives-dxo-score-of-109-smashing-the-competition
 
I'm not sure man. The product is not even launched, nor did the article mentioned about the colour accuracy level. So not sure how you can immediately ascertain that the colour is not accurate enough. In addition, we still need to look at the pricing.

On your second point, I think you are not comparing right, or you are not aware. The P20 Pro is the first Huawei phone where they started to put a lot of emphasis over quality of phone camera. Public news linked below in case you have any doubts.

huawei-p20-pro-triple-camera-receives-dxo-score-of-109-smashing-the-competition
At HDR 400 it’s not going to be colour accurate.

DXO is stupid for phone cameras, they don’t seem to understand that software is the key factor. They rates the S20 at 118 and that camera is horrendous compared to the competition that if scored higher than.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS