• Find an incredible deal for Black Friday or Cyber Monday? Share those epic bargains with the community by posting them in this forum thread!

Samsung U28D590D 28-Inch Ultra HD Monitor Review

Status
Not open for further replies.

mgilbert

Honorable
Feb 5, 2014
27
0
10,530
0
Correction - I wound up with R=49, G=33, B=48. And this monitor is blindingly bright. I have brightness set at 40, contrast at 60, and sharpness at 52.
 

Charly2nd

Reputable
Jan 27, 2015
2
0
4,510
0
"If you want a 32-inch jumbo screen to anchor your high-end rig, you’ll still pay between $1500 and $2000."
This is not true anymore. Benq and Acer bith sell 32inch IPS panels for under U$D1000. Also, Dell' has a 27 inch 4K IPS panel that sells for 700 dollars, but can be found regularly for U$D 500 during promotions. So, there are cheaper IPS options out there (I purchased one for U$D 524 - hasn't arrived yet), almost for the same price of these TN panels.
 

airborn824

Honorable
Mar 3, 2013
226
0
10,690
3
I have this monitor and i enjoy it, i got it for free. I Would buy the ASUS if it was my own money. Does anyone know if this is also getting Freesync support? I have 2x R9 290
 

Charly2nd

Reputable
Jan 27, 2015
2
0
4,510
0
My correction aside, I like the thoroughness of Christian's reviews. I come often to this site because of hardware reviews like these! Thanks!
 

Grognak

Reputable
Dec 8, 2014
65
0
4,630
0
Eh, TN on such a massive, 4K monitor is kinda counterintuituve. It's true that they're getting better when it comes to both viewing angles and colors, but that's still not quite IPS quality here. Also, the 98ms input lag is insane, most TVs don't go that high. I guess you can't be too demanding at that price.
 

Ilander

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2007
173
0
18,710
5
The Amazon link to the PB287Q links to the incorrect product, mistakenly leading me to believe that it was 399.99 USD. That's a huge difference in price which really sets a person's opinion on value...please fix.
 

xj97

Reputable
Jan 27, 2015
1
0
4,510
0
I had this monitor at work and ended up pawning it off on someone else. The panel was pretty decent, but it did NOT play well with sleep states over displayport. The monitor wouldn't wake up... I'd have to pull the power plug to reset the darn thing.

Other than that I loved it, but the sleep issue was just too annoying.
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
288
0
10,780
0


When I test monitors with the Accupel signal generator it is indeed over HDMI but since the input resolution is 1920x1080, the tests are run at 60Hz. I have made comparisons of HDMI and DisplayPort with regards to response and input lag and found no difference in speed. Resolution also makes no difference since the panel scales any incoming signal to its native resolution.

-Christian-
 

qlum

Honorable
Aug 13, 2013
196
0
10,690
1
Looking at these screens I think my upgrade to 4k for my primary monitor is going to wait a while longer. Especially since my 4 screen setup would require a vesa mount.
 

Tanquen

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
226
0
18,680
0


But if you can run the native res through DP at 60Hz, wouldn’t that negate the scalar and possible help with input lag?
New displays, what are they thinking? Bezels bigger than a 50” TV, capacitive buttons that don’t work well, bad input lag and so on. Lame! :(

 

ShawnT007

Honorable
Nov 16, 2013
16
0
10,510
0
I own a U28D590D. I heard that the U28E590D is the model number for this monitor that will release in March 2015 that supports Freesync. I also heard that it is just a firmware upgrade, however i dont know if that is correct. Can anyone out there confirm if owners of the U28D590D will be able to add Freesync, whether if be a firmware update, or swapping out a component? I for one really want to get my U28D590D upgraded on launch day to support Freesync... (also made a thread on this)
 
I say use a TV as your monitor. (I currently use a 52" HDTV) They are often bigger and cheaper. Personally I'm fine with 1080p.. Why? because I used to use much lower resolutions in the past so I think 1080p still looks great. Plus, it's easier for my video card to get excellent frame rates at 1080 which means the newest games still run great without the need to spend more on a video card. Aside from resolutions I don't really care about color accuracy as long as it's fairly decent.

The only other consideration is getting a monitor with a gaming style refresh rate (like 144Hz for example). I think the prices on those screens are more than I want to spend. I'd love to have one of those but I'll be getting the Oculus Rift when it comes out and it will provide what I'm looking for in terms of refresh rate, resolution and screen size (perceptual).
 

codo

Honorable
May 5, 2012
69
0
10,630
0
not that it matters cause you wont hit even 60fps @ 4k anyway but I couldn't step down from 144hz now, even though I want that resolution. later on when a setup that can handle this at a frame rate beyond console levels is affordable maybe
 

Bondfc11

Honorable
Sep 3, 2013
232
0
10,680
0
I don't understand these OEMs - same panel, same specs, same price. It seems silly to me for them all the have essentially the SAME monitor out. Same panel and I bet if you crack each one they use the identical TCON (which more often then not is bundled from the panel OEM with the panel) and a standard 4K AD PCB, which can be had from many sources, but have pretty much all the same thing as all the others.
 

Grognak

Reputable
Dec 8, 2014
65
0
4,630
0
@mgilbert - Short answer, yes. There's a test on the web that compares the same animation, running at different FPS, and while it's not incredible, the difference is still noticeable - on a simple, crude, pixelated loop. Now, if you want to get into more details, here's how it works: while it's true that our eyes can't really tell the difference between different FRAMES at 50Hz and above, there are several factors that cause higher refresh rates to be preferable for most people. The first is simply because even if our eyes can't tell, our brain does. The world isn't rendered at 30, 60 or 120 frames, it's continuous and the higher we get, the more pleasant the experience feels. A lot of people, gamers and non-gamers alike, report that 120 or 144Hz monitors simply feel faster, smoother, and overall better, while admitting that there's no truly visible difference. The second is of course frame time variance, which becomes much less noticeable as the FPS rise. In fact, it's the reason 30 fps in games feels so choppy, while it's perfectly acceptable in movies and series - frames are rendered at the exact same intervals, and our brain isn't bothered by it too much.
 

ShawnT007

Honorable
Nov 16, 2013
16
0
10,510
0
not that it matters cause you wont hit even 60fps @ 4k anyway but I couldn't step down from 144hz now, even though I want that resolution. later on when a setup that can handle this at a frame rate beyond console levels is affordable maybe
You get higher than 60fps max setting in most games with 290x in crossfire.
 

ShawnT007

Honorable
Nov 16, 2013
16
0
10,510
0


Regarding 144 Hz, there is something I've always wondered about. The human eye cannot detect individual frames at 60 Hz, much less 144 Hz. Can people really tell the difference, or is it that they are staring at an FPS display in the corner of the screen instead of the game itself? I'd love to hear some opinions on this.
I have had 120hz and 4k and 4k is the way to go. The answer to your question, from my perspective is while gaming you can not tell the difference. here is an interesting test by NCIX https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWEpIwNDeCA
 

codo

Honorable
May 5, 2012
69
0
10,630
0


don't mind cheapskates, they are always out to negate anything they don't want to spend money on. seeing is believing, trust me. 60hz is painful to look at now. even the mouse cursor on the screen is pleasing to watch, smooth as it is, but it definitely shows through in gaming, big time.

 

Lumenix

Reputable
Jan 30, 2015
2
0
4,510
0
On my U28D590D, when I feed it a 1920 X 1080 signal, when gaming for example, contrast and gamma change dramatically. Blacks look gray, and the picture is washed out. I have my video set to scale all resolutions up to 3840 X 2160, so that's the only resolution the monitor ever sees. I don't know if this is a design issue, or just a faulty monitor. I wonder if anyone else has seen these shifts in contrast/gamma with resolution changes. If it weren't such a hassle, I'd have the monitor replaced under warranty, but the monitor is perfect otherwise, so I'm leaving well enough alone.
I found this issue too, are you perhaps running NVidia graphics hardware? I am running a GTX 780 and playing Metro at 4K (barely) the color is great, but at 1080 is totally washed out. A workaround for this is to change from RGB color output to YCbCr 444 when you have to run games and such at 1080. There should be a setting for RGB full range (0-255) but it does not seem to work correctly for me. If anyone else has info it'd be appreciated!
 

Ghost walker

Reputable
Feb 17, 2015
3
0
4,510
0
When 4k monitors become the new norm and work out there kinks and provide a better gaming platform for gamers higher refresh rates of 144 hz and up and come down in price then I'll buy one
 

Ghost walker

Reputable
Feb 17, 2015
3
0
4,510
0
When 4k monitors become the new norm and work out there kinks and provide a better gaming platform for gamers higher refresh rates of 144 hz and up and come down in price then I'll buy one
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS