Sharp PN-K321 32-Inch Ultra HD Monitor Review: More 4K!

Status
Not open for further replies.

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Give it some time. Display manufacturers like gouging fat wallets while they can to recover some of their R&D costs while production volumes are still low and their products are still different enough to justify higher margins over models aiming for the bargain basement.
 

loki1944

Honorable
Oct 31, 2013
1,665
2
12,460
211
Maybe by the time single GPUs can run games at 60fps on 4K prices will be reasonable, because right now holy cow. Sticking with my 1080p and 1440p monitors for now.
 

NightshadeRC

Reputable
Oct 3, 2014
8
0
4,510
0
I got 2 of the Samsung 4k 60hz monitors about 3 months ago and they were only $349 each. Much better than the 1080p for $150-$200 and 1440p was another couple of hundred more (in Australia, tech tends to cost a bit more).
It's won't be long before 4k TN gets more popular
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
0
19,780
0
Got an Dell 3214 and the "split screen" (many don't know this fact about the current 4k 1.2 DP driven displays running at 60hz but in order for DP1.2 to show 4k @ 60 hz the screen is virtually split into two screens over the interface and then combined) issue, many have all kind problems with this including only picture on one screen, different resolutions on one half or all kind of wake from sleep issues.

My advice - Wait for DP1.3 that can handle 4k@60hz properly before considering an 4k screen and that is a shame - the resolution and picture clarity on the Dell UP3214Q is an enormous breakthrough - The issues however are so severe i'm not even using it! So much for a 2000$ monitor =/
 

mesab66

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
893
0
19,160
56
Definitely very keen on this becoming the norm...and developers fully supporting it for the PC (i.e. e.g. not being 30fps frame-locked because of consoles).

But, for gamers, we're still a long way off before 4k becomes mainstream. Put simply, to get acceptable frame rates for latest AAA games needs 2 way and above using latest cards with enough VRAM...that's a s#%tload of GPU investment (assuming there are no system bottlenecks).
60Hz and above? with enough GPU fps to justify any higher refresh rate? $$$

 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

That is only if you want to play with Ultra settings. Once you start dropping costly features like FSAA and shadows, the GPU requirements drop considerably.

I'm still using a HD5770 to play games at 1200p and that's good enough for me. Yes, I do have to drop a few of the fancier graphics effects but in many cases, those features do not look right (at least to me) and annoy the heck out of me (like noisy/jittery/blocky or otherwise unnatural shadows and hair animation) so I would disable them even if I had infinite GPU power anyway just to cut down on unnecessary distractions.
 

mesab66

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
893
0
19,160
56
Agreed, fair point, though even simply pushing 4 x 1080p pixels for gaming is something few of us can currently do - try using your 5770 here. Some eye candy can be reduced though for the current investment that might be hard to swallow for many. NVIDIA's DSR looks like heading in the right direction.
 

Evolution2001

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2007
107
0
18,680
0
It seems that many of you aren't thinking outside the box of your home or small business. Just because Tom's reviews something doesn't mean that its intended audience is you, the home gamer / DIY'er. These are Professional / Workstation class displays. They aren't developed nor marketed with the gamer or the casual home user as the target. They are meant for professional graphic people with workstations and workstation budgets.
Most of us here wouldn't buy a $14K Avid or Autodesk workstation "that can't even manage 30fps in Crysis 3 with Ultra settings". However, the professional market has no problem paying that for a workstation and they'll have no problems paying that for a top-of-line monitor that suits their needs.

Upper-end gamers are lucky that their market segment drives a lot of PC innovation such as in GPUs, and to a lesser extent CPU and storage devices.
However, the other cool stuff like larger high-density monitors starts at the top of the food chain and y'all just need to remain patient while the technology and prices work their way down to your level.

There's a reason you're satisfied driving your Hyundai while drooling over the Ferrari.
 

mczak1

Honorable
Jul 23, 2012
11
0
10,510
0

While I'd agree it's best to avoid the hassle, this has _nothing_ to do with DP 1.2. DP 1.2 can handle 4k@60Hz just fine as a single tile, the problem is the monitor scalers which couldn't handle it. There's a couple single-tile DP 1.2 monitors out now where this works just fine (even with older graphic cards, if they could handle 4k@60HZ as DP 1.2 MST they can handle it as DP 1.2 SST just fine).
5k though is another matter and indeed requires DP 1.3 for 60Hz single tile.
 

soldier45

Reputable
Oct 29, 2014
21
0
4,510
0
Phillips is coming out with a 40" 4K monitor with display port supports 60hz for around $800.

http://4k.com/news/philips-releases-new-40-inch-4k-monitor-4040/
 

d_kuhn

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2002
704
0
18,990
2
So this monitor looks to me like it's EXACTLY like my Asus PQ321 (as in the exact same monitor but for $1000 more)... all the buttons and connector locations are identical, the decals are identical, the plastic parts are identical... the support stand is identical... how it mounts to the panel looks identical, and the on screen display looks to be nearly identical. In fact the only thing that looks different is that mine says ASUS on the front. I paid over $3k for the ASUS but that was almost a year ago.. now they're under $2k.

After looking at the test results... this monitor looks like maybe it's made on the same line as the ASUS and someone slaps a different budge on it before it goes in the box... the only thing that looks significantly different was brightness... maybe a brighter backlight? That's not necessarily a bad thing... I really like the PQ321 (not a gaming monitor but it's a fantastic on a 4k editing system), but I'm not sure where the $1k premium is coming from (maybe the OP who's seen both can comment?).
 

jazzy663

Honorable
Feb 12, 2014
557
0
11,360
108
Mmmm... sorry, no. The hardware for 4k stuff is less expensive than it was, but it's still pretty expensive. I just can't see the merit in shoveling out the extra cash just for a higher resolution. I think 1080p will be the standard for years to come.
 

teodoreh

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2007
290
0
18,780
0
if a 5" sub-140€ cellphone can have full HD resolution, then where is the problem having a 32" monitor with 4K? Since there are so many cheap Korean panels nowadays, I just believe that those people want to steal customers before reaching reasonable prices for all...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS