Philips BDM4065UC 40-inch Ultra HD Monitor Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oleander

Reputable
Oct 16, 2015
1
0
4,510
0
Bought one back in january. Best decision ever!

A lot of bad stuff were said about it in forums (for all the wrong reasons) so it's nice to see that for what I use it (non first-person gaming and all-round) this review vindicates it.

Only remaining issue is the flicker of the backlight if brightness is not at 100%, but since the brightness is so low, it's not a problem to me.
 

cats_Paw

Distinguished
For professional use, absolutely.
For gaming, probably not (Black levels are amazing for LED panel, and also contrast is amazing, but color delta and input lag... no way).

Plasmas are still king for gaming in my books, too abd they are almost all gone by now.
 

Maryland_USA

Honorable
Feb 28, 2012
7
0
10,510
0
A completely unique product? I don't think so. Several other 40-inch monitors are available that will drive a VA panel at 3840x2160@60Hz through both DisplayPort 1.4 and HDMI 2.0. They're sold by AMH, Crossover, Iiyama, MIcroboard, and Seiki. Step up to 43 inches, and you must add Wasabi Mango. All but the Seiki and Iiyama cost less than the Philips.
 

Larry Litmanen

Reputable
Jan 22, 2015
616
0
5,010
17
I currently game on a 32 inch TV, honestly you can not go back to a monitor with a better resolution that is 24 or 27 inches. Once you go big it is just amazing.

It's not just the width, you also need that vertical screen real estate.

 

hotdogee

Honorable
Aug 14, 2012
4
0
10,510
0
"Nearly every LCD panel on the planet is made by either Samsung, LG or AU Optronics. A few are also made by Innolux (formerly Chi Mei). But the Philips BDM4065UC is made by TP Vision, which is the actual owner of the Philips brand."

The panel is made by Innolux for TP Vision.
 

Eggz

Honorable
Sep 3, 2013
2,044
0
12,460
253
Great to see this. Is tom's planning on reviewing the new LG 4K OLED displays? They would seem to score very well in just about every category that matters for professional use. I'd love to see it, and the reviewers would also probably enjoy playing with one. Consider it, please.
 

Xorak

Honorable
Jun 7, 2013
79
0
10,660
13
I used a 32" 1080p TV for a long time, so I completely get the appeal of a big screen with great contrast and vibrant color, even if it's not the fastest or most accurate. Now I'm used to my MG279Q and would not go back to a fixed refresh screen. I hoped that 4096x2160 would start catching on too, but it looks like it won't. In the next 2 years a single GPU should be able to make use of a true 4k panel with variable refresh up to 75 or 90hz and it would be a thing of beauty at 30+ inches.
 

enewmen

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2005
2,228
0
19,810
5
Can someone explain why not to use Ultra HD LEDs TV for computer work? (another dumb post) For small font text (using 1080p TVs) , the TVs did'n't look as sharp as PC monitors. But I don't see that as a problem for 2160p TVs. Yes, the TV must have HDMI 2.0 and the graphics card must also support that. But is that the only reason? Anyway, the Philips looks like an UHD TV made for PC work at a price similar to TVs.
I also personally don't like Display Port cables because only the BEST cables won't give problems with recovering from sleep mode. Gave up on Display Port and currently using DVI Dual Link at 1440p.
 

mavikt

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2011
172
0
18,680
0
Great to see this. Is tom's planning on reviewing the new LG 4K OLED displays? They would seem to score very well in just about every category that matters for professional use. I'd love to see it, and the reviewers would also probably enjoy playing with one. Consider it, please.
I too would like to see a proper technical review of said (TV) tech.
In a home theater magazine I subscribe to they said that the latency was around 50ms (55EG960V), didn't say how it was measured though. Otherwise they said it was The Perfect TV.
So it remains to be seen if LCD will "remain the dominant tech for the foreseeable future"
 

none12345

Honorable
Apr 27, 2013
431
2
10,785
0
Meh no thanks. too big for that resolution. Would have to set it so far back on the desk it would be no different then buying something smaller and putting it closer.

And if you are talking about couch playing games, then its too small for that distance.

Where are the 4k 24" oled monitors! Ill take 2 please! as long as they arent extremely expensive, which im sure they would be at this point.
 

Spanky Deluxe

Distinguished
Mar 24, 2009
506
0
18,980
0
I almost bought one of these a few months ago to replace my 20-30-20 PLP setup but I decided to pass as what I really want is a 5K 40" screen. While 4K at 40" is about the same PPI as a 2560x1600 30" monitor, I'd rather get an upgrade in screen size as well as an upgrade in resolution.
 

Choong Keong

Reputable
Nov 5, 2014
3
0
4,510
0
It's only big and contrast! No HDML , no mentioned of G or Free sync , color calibration compromises, and it's earn a Tom hardware's recommendation? When is your standards has gone so low?
 

picture_perfect

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2003
278
0
18,780
0
Bigger the better! Eye strain decreases exponentially with distance. It's about time tiny tiny monitors go away. Remember UltraHD will limit you to 40fps average (with current games) with the best card available. If you don't mind 20-60 fps with a good dose of persistence blur, lag and stutter in games then get it. For that reason not for me.
 

naturesninja

Honorable
Dec 15, 2013
1,153
0
11,660
178
I have owned this exact model for a few months, and have not been impressed with it at all. It has been replaced with a Pixel Perfect that is far superior to it in all ways. I don't believe the test model you are using is the same one as retail, because my results are far different than this articles, and I have done everything under the Sun to calibrate it properly. Either Philips is pulling a fast one on you, or you are on the readers. This monitor should not be used for any level of photo/video editing, it's RGB is around 40/70, not 62/90. Curious how you got those results...
 

Volumize

Reputable
Oct 17, 2015
1
0
4,510
0
I've been using a UHD IPS 40 inch TV as monitor for some months, and it's brilliant.
(HDMI 2.0) LG 40UF675V, also a few hundred buck less than the Philips here.
 

Candre23

Reputable
May 11, 2015
4
0
4,510
0
Meh no thanks. too big for that resolution. Would have to set it so far back on the desk it would be no different then buying something smaller and putting it closer.
I've been using a 39" 4k seiki display for a couple years, and it works perfectly at normal desktop viewing distances. Dot pitch and overall screen size is the same as having four 20" 1080p panels in a 2x2 grid, but without any nasty bezels getting in the way. For productivity purposes, this is the ideal size and resolution. Text is perfectly readable from 18-24" without any scaling.

My only complaint with the seiki is the 30hz limit for 4k, which this phillips panel improves upon. I'll be upgrading to this (or something very similar) soon.
 
enewman,
There are a number of reasons NOT to use a 4K HDTV as a gaming monitor:

#1 - may have high input latency due to VIDEO PROCESSING (we do not care about delay watching video as it's not interactive)

#2 - must preset the RESOLUTION and can't easily change it in a game. I don't believe you can even choose a resolution like 2560x1440 and since 4K is too high for most people's gaming hardware you'll be sticking with 1920x1080 which rather defeats the purpose somewhat.

#3 - 4K scaling is problematic for many applications

#4 - most are too LARGE for a desktop and if using as an HDTV with PC attached for gaming then you're probably sitting fairly far back (which in many cases makes 4K pointless as you resolve out the extra pixels)
 

dropadred

Honorable
Aug 9, 2013
10
0
10,510
0
Christian, thank you for an awesome review, I have really enjoyed it as I am always so happy seeing new reviews on 4065UC to always be more and more sure I have chosen right monitor for me, but...nevermind.

Thank you for the tip, how to turn-off monitor without unpluging the power cord or switching off the power switch...I was missing it and now I know how to do it, nice!

In the same way - I have got the DP cable in the packaging too, and it is a decent one, not as the ones coming with Crossover's 44k for example;

Price and "Get Korean 40" 4k TV, it is cheaper!"...This applies maybe for the USA, but for the EU with our tax rate and various income payments...I will give you an example:
AMH A399U had a price of 500-540€, but with tax 20% in our country and various income payments I would pay almos? 700€ totally and I would have just 1yr warranty, which accidentally RMA would "break my bank"..as with the piece-by-piece condition variations it is highly possible
For Philips..price 640€ and 3yrs warranty, so what would you choose ?

Now, there comes the third-generation of 40" 4k (first was 30Hz panels gen, second 60Hz) as the manufacturers start to improve existing designs, improving electronics and even implementing FreeSync (which as I saw at teksyndicate review, still buggy tho), but I do not regret even because I have 980Ti..

Monitor wise...My latest monitors were: HP ZR2740W and Dell P2414H and I loved the IPS panels, but since philips...I can't simply stop watching on it...unbelievably sharp, alive on glossy (with anti-glare filter - style of macbook/iMac anti-glare filter) panel I love; unbelievable black levels - with purple tone (for deep blacks and not colored tone we would need plasma panel, but as the manufacturing has ended it is sci-fi now - otherwise we have to wait for the OLED, which will take years IMO) if you have like completely black image tho; viewing angles are as we would expect, nothing great;

Gaming ? No problems there - I have "response time" "orverdrive" turned off as regarding review by tftcentral it is absolutely not worth it, as it is bringing only overdrive/ghosting artifacts...I do not feel any input lag and I was expecting it, but no chance.

PWM regulation is there, I cannot see any flickering, but it has an affect on motion blur, it is not "naturally blured", but more "focused" but while moving, the movement is not smooth, it is laggy, which means that at 90% of games, gaming on <40-45fps is for me unacceptable - 50+ fps is great, but it is 4k, is it not ? I have 980Ti and with little bit of smart touch on the settings, for example with graphics guide on geforce.com you can achieve minimum image quality loss, while reaching much higher fps, even I have no problems using the GemFX or ReShade framework plugins, which may consume a lot of fps.

So, it is all from my side. Thanks again for the review.
 

Maryland_USA

Honorable
Feb 28, 2012
7
0
10,510
0


A pair of 4Ks at 32 or 28 inches will come awfully close to a 5K on 40 inches. As calculated at https://www.sven.de/dpi/ :

157.3 ppi for 3840 x 2160 on a 28-inch display
148.7 ppi for 5120 x 2880 (5K) on a 39.5-inch display (40-inch nominal)
139.9 ppi for 3840 x 2160 on a 31.5-inch (32-inch nominal) display
111.5 ppi for 3840 x 2160 on a 39.5-inch display (40-inch nominal)
100.6 ppi for 2560 x 1600 on a 30.0-inch display.
 

Maryland_USA

Honorable
Feb 28, 2012
7
0
10,510
0
At work, where my computer is a quad-core laptop (16GB RAM, Intel 4600 graphics), I use two Seiki 39 4K displays: the original, 2013 model (SE39UY04) and the final, 2014 update (SE39UY04-01). One is driven through DisplayPort 1.4 through a $20 Plugable HDMI-to-DP active adapter; the other through a $70 Plugable 4K HDMI-to-USB adapter. Neither I nor anyone can perceive any flicker. With Windows 7 Aero shut off, there's almost notice no latency when moving a solid window. I'm living large and loving it.

In the USA, you can still find these Seikis for about $350 shipped new, or for $300 used on Craigslist. If you want one for browsing or general office use and you're on a budget, ignore the gamers: get one or two while you can. The next-cheapest option, a new AMH A399U, will set you back $450 to $500.
 

eriko

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2008
212
0
18,690
1
Can someone explain why not to use Ultra HD LEDs TV for computer work? (another dumb post) For small font text (using 1080p TVs) , the TVs did'n't look as sharp as PC monitors. But I don't see that as a problem for 2160p TVs. Yes, the TV must have HDMI 2.0 and the graphics card must also support that. But is that the only reason? Anyway, the Philips looks like an UHD TV made for PC work at a price similar to TVs.
I also personally don't like Display Port cables because only the BEST cables won't give problems with recovering from sleep mode. Gave up on Display Port and currently using DVI Dual Link at 1440p.
On Friday, I tried a friends 65" 4k panel, connected to my Alienware 18 (dual 880M GTX@8GB each).

We tried for over an hour to find an acceptable picture on screen. Changing HDMI cables one after another. In the end, the longest, HDMI cable, with a bent connector on one end, connected ONLY to HDMI Port 1 worked.

And we got 3840x2160 @ 30 fps. Not what we were hoping for. And the lag was so laughable, as to make gaming impossible. I fired-up Advanced Warfare, and I was shot to buggery. But the detail, and the immersiveness, was striking to the eyes. Really, a sight to behold.

So we changed out my Alienware 18 for his 6-core PC with 980GTX. Same dance. Also screen tearing was quite evident from time to time on both machines. It just felt like 4k wasn't ready for prime time. Interestingly, his non-SLI machine was a tiny-bit-less lagged than my machine. But still awful, and I'll describe it to you as thus - you move the mouse, and look up and see the pointer move.

Who could accept that for everyday productivity use? Not me.

I got home and 'Added to cart' a 34" Ultrawide, as I think this is likely the way PC gaming is going. But just couldn't hit the 'Pay button'. But is it? TVs and consoles may 'win the day' and shape what comes next, and as they move to 4k TVs, consoles will follow, and so will our games. So I think this is a very interesting product, but I want something similar, but absolutely massive, and I want it with real gamers resolution.

I'll wait another six months and see how this screen situation develops.

But seriously try before you buy if you expect to use a typical TV as your monitor, or you'll regret it. You really will. Hope some of that helps.

Anybody have experience of both 34" 3840x1440 AND 3840x2160 care to comment?
 

Eggz

Honorable
Sep 3, 2013
2,044
0
12,460
253


It was bad because you were using incompatible parts. The TV was only accepting a 30 hz signal over HDMI 1.4. You need at least HDMI 2.0 for that (i.e. the newest one today). Your 980 ti had that, but the TV didn't, so you got bumped down from 2.0 to 1.4 overall. Running 4k is the same for desktop use when you have the proper signal chain all the way through.

I has used both 4k and Ultrawide QHD (3440x1440). Actually the screen I'm on now is the UW-QHD. There's no lag, but I have it hooked up via DisplayPort. The native signal wouldn't work on an HDMI 1.4. I've tried it, and it stinks. But that's not a fair way to judge everything UW-QHD, just as it's unfair to judge 4k based on an improper setup. It would be writing a bad review on a car because it constantly pulled to the left, but failing to mention that the front left tire was flat. If you want to try 4k for real, hook up the 980 ti to a 4k TV that has either HDMI 2.0 or DisplayPort. Nothing else will work properly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY