Frustration - I can't find THE 40-43" 4K All-purpose monitor - suggestions?

B

BlindZenDriver

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
147
I am a long time user of the 40" Philips BDM4065UC which was perfect when I went big monitor in 2015, in fact it is still great only it is missing HDMI 2.0 and only DP1.2 is also becoming an issue.

So I am looking for a replacement, but so far I am failing to find it. As I suspect other might be on the same quest perhaps we can hunt together :)

Here is my "must have" list:
- Must be a real monitor ie. 4:4:4 and RGB color grid.
- Minimum two DP 1.3 ports (full size or mini)
- HDMI 2.0 (two connectors preferred, one is minimum)
- VA or OLED (Loving the black of VA over IPS)
- No static dithering
- Quick response

And the nice to have(some almost "must have"):
- Freesync and much more than 60Hz
- HDR support and with many zones
- USB-C video input
- Non-glossy frame
- Adjustable stand
- VESA mount
- Reasonable price

Ie. I want a monitor that is great for gaming, but it must also be well suited for the more boring stuff - it does not have to be graphics artist worthy but text must be crisp.

If the monitor I want is out there do say, as mentioned I have not been able to find it. For a moment I thought the Philips 436M6VBPAB was it, but it unfortunately it turned out to ill suited for anything except gaming.
 
Last edited:
I was looking at the Phillips as well, decided to get a Samsung TV instead after reading reviews. But it seems to be pretty close to what you want, if you can live with the problems.
 
I'm surprised you didn't add "fold my laundry" to that long list. The list of gaming monitors with RGB color space are pretty small (more color depth = slower response time). sRGB is the best you should expect form a cheaper, faster display.

Your list is every monitor buyer's wet dream, (4k va 120hz), and it just isn't going to be cheap.


Quality VA gaming displays will always be released several years after IPS, because the panel tech has a slower response time. They have to play more tricks with the panel layout and controller chips to speed things up.

So today you get IPS. In a few years you'll get VA.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it's best to not have too many deal breakers.

Just pick a size/resolution and maybe 1 or 2 key features you want and don't worry about getting the perfect monitor. It doesn't exist.
 
defaultluser said:
I'm surprised you didn't add "fold my laundry" to that long list. The list of gaming monitors with RGB color space are pretty small (more color depth = slower response time). sRGB is the best you should expect form a cheaper, faster display.

Your list is every monitor buyer's wet dream, (4k va 120hz), and it just isn't going to be cheap.

VA gaming displays will always be released several years after IPS, because the panel tech has a slower response time. They have to play more tricks with the panel layout and controller chips to speed things up.

So today you get IPS. In a few years you'll get VA.
Click to expand...

Are you drunk mate?
 
There really are ZERO monitors/TV at that size that do over 60hz at 4k. The only thing that does 4k > 60 hz is a $2000 monitor.

Acer Predator X27 does 4k at 144hz.

You are stuck at 4k 60hz for a long time, simply because most inputs can't even handle a wider bandwidth than that.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
defaultluser said:
I'm surprised you didn't add "fold my laundry" to that long list. The list of gaming monitors with RGB color space are pretty small (more color depth = slower response time). sRGB is the best you should expect form a cheaper, faster display.
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to the color space, but to how the sub-pixels should be arranged. For example that Philips 436M6VBPAB uses BGR rather than RGB which is part of why it isn't great for text.

Also. Don't be negative - I didn't ask for having someone fold my laundry. Maybe you missed that I wrote "So I am looking for a replacement, but so far I am failing to find it. As I suspect other might be on the same quest perhaps we can hunt together :)"


defaultluser said:
Your list is every monitor buyer's wet dream, (4k va 120hz), and it just isn't going to be cheap.
Click to expand...

I asked for "Reasonable price" not for cheap. Most things in life that are cheap aren't really cheap anyway, they just don't cost that much to buy only as a general rule one gets what one pays for - sometimes less and rarely more.


defaultluser said:
Quality VA gaming displays will always be released several years after IPS, because the panel tech has a slower response time. They have to play more tricks with the panel layout and controller chips to speed things up.

So today you get IPS. In a few years you'll get VA.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but remember that the computer monitor and the TV market is in many ways becoming one ever since 4K and TV size monitors became a thing. As I mentioned in my OP my current monitor is a Philips BDM4065UC which I have had since 2015 and in many ways that is still great - except that some of the new electronics standards like HDMI 2.0, HDR and so on is starting to be available(HDMI 2.0 for a long while now).

IPS isn't terrible, but having grown accustom to much higher contrast than IPS offers going back isn't easy. My Philips sits next to a older but decent IPS monitor and at work I sit with a new 43" Acer IPS panel, both are fine just not great.
 
BlindZenDriver said:
I am a long time user of the 40" Philips BDM4065UC which was perfect when I went big monitor in 2015, in fact it is still great only it is missing HDMI 2.0 and only DP1.2 is also becoming an issue.

So I am looking for a replacement, but so far I am failing to find it. As I suspect other might be on the same quest perhaps we can hunt together :)
Click to expand...

I'm in exactly the same boat as you, same current monitor. It was revelatory when I bought it three years ago, but now I'm itching and convinced there must be something better out there.

Having searched high and low, I can't find anything nor see anything in the immediate future. So I'm not ready to get rid of this beast yet.

TVs seem to be doing a lot more than monitors currently, so I suspect we'll need to wait and see what 2019 brings.
 
caffix said:
I'm in exactly the same boat as you, same current monitor. It was revelatory when I bought it three years ago, but now I'm itching and convinced there must be something better out there.

Having searched high and low, I can't find anything nor see anything in the immediate future. So I'm not ready to get rid of this beast yet.

TVs seem to be doing a lot more than monitors currently, so I suspect we'll need to wait and see what 2019 brings.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

From what I have been finding so far it seems like LG might be worth keeping an eye on. Not their OLED as the technology has the burn in issue, but their Super UHD screens which look really interesting - it is IPS panels with an extra coating that allows for higher contrast and more. Now if only they'll put out one with DisplayPort and real monitor electronics. And they are 120 Hz I think.
Fingers crossed.
 
Interesting, I'll keep an eye out for those.

I'm also hoping that we'll see some of the same tech seen in the Nvidia BFG displays, but in smaller form (and hopefully a bit more affordable too...). There's no way I could use anything bigger than 40-43" at a desk with 2 foot distance away. 40 inches is perfect.

It's worth bearing in mind that the BDM4065UC is still a great monitor. But like me, you probably see things like HDR and high refresh rates and think... I want!
 
I believe the only monitor that even comes close to your list is the $2000 ASUS 4k 144hz monitor. It misses in that it only has 1 DP input and not 2, and it also uses an IPS panel and not VA. It has a static contrast ratio of the same 1000:1 that all IPS's have, however with 384 zones of full array and local dimming the contrast should be better than a basic VA panel anyway. It gets about 6000:1 with the local dimming, and typical VAs are around 4500-5000:1. Only the very best are 6000+ on VAs, and usually that too comes from local dimming methods.

Why do you care so much about subpixel arrangement? RGB vs GBR vs BGR makes no difference anymore. That was only really a thing years and years ago.


Anyway, just remember that if you go over 60hz you either have to drop your color bit depth or drop down from 4:4:4. You cant have it both ways yet. And since 4:2:2 actually does affect text reading ability you will probably want to stick to 8-bit color and no 144hz.





Other possible options would be something like the Samsung Q6FN. Though that misses 2 of your "must haves" in that it does not have RGB subpixels and it does not have DP inputs. It also misses on your "option wants" in that it doesnt have above 60hz at 4k. It ticks the majority of your boxes though and at a much cheaper price than the $2k asus and acer ones.


Really I think you just have to wait another couple years if you want all of your boxes ticked off.
 
Last edited:
caffix said:
TVs seem to be doing a lot more than monitors currently, so I suspect we'll need to wait and see what 2019 brings.
Click to expand...

They are, but the problem is they are getting much bigger. If you want the premium models, you are looking at 55" minimum size. There are 40" sets, but they don't have all the high-end features.

But a TV is a valid option. Samsung makes some good ones. I had the KU6300 for a bit, and it was nice as a monitor and 40" was about perfect.

I got an itch for better HDR and FreeSync, so I got the Q7F, but the smallest they had was 55". It's for sure too big as a monitor, but it's nice for gaming and movies.

It's a compromise either way, you just have to find what you really want and go for that, even if it means getting a display that's smaller than you want, or too big, or lower refresh, or lower resolution, etc. It's a trade-off.
 
BlindZenDriver said:
Exactly.

From what I have been finding so far it seems like LG might be worth keeping an eye on. Not their OLED as the technology has the burn in issue, but their Super UHD screens which look really interesting - it is IPS panels with an extra coating that allows for higher contrast and more. Now if only they'll put out one with DisplayPort and real monitor electronics. And they are 120 Hz I think.
Fingers crossed.
Click to expand...


Closest thing I could find.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA90V80R4931

The monitor with your exact specs probably doesn't exist at this point.
Or would need to be a spec-built device (See $$$,$$$.¢¢).
You willing to drop a mid-to-high 5-digit figure on a 40-something-inch monitor to get your dream specs?
 
Everything is interim. Next year people will be talking about 200Hz, or 8K, or whatever.

Buy what is good enough today, and sell when something better comes along (and something better always comes along, if you wait you will be waiting forever).
 
cybereality said:
Everything is interim. Next year people will be talking about 200Hz, or 8K, or whatever.

Buy what is good enough today, and sell when something better comes along (and something better always comes along, if you wait you will be waiting forever).
Click to expand...

Completely disagree. There are sweet spot times to invest in hardware, and this is not one of them. This is an absolutely awful time to buy hardware. We're right on the edge of a bunch of major improvements. We're not talking about insignificant resolution or refresh rate bumps. We're talking about basic stuff. Having variable refresh or not having it. Having > 60hz or not having it. Honestly, the difference past around 90hz is basically nothing, but the 60hz -> 90hz leap is noticeable.
 
I agree about you disagreeing.

In 2019+ we should have 4k 120hz native hdmi 2.1 input VRR with QFT and hdr 1000 nit+, 4:4:4 p3 - high % rec 2020 color at 4k 120hz breaking into tvs and eventually monitors.

For me, that means my next tv, monitor, gaming gpu(s) and eventually even 7.2 to 9.2 receiver will be hdmi 2.1 which is a considerable amount of money to me.

People say just turnaround and sell but lucky to get 60% of - current retail at the time of the sale - reliably and have to deal with random person's lack of care handling delicate hardware, bad home environments and resulting claims potentially. Ebay and paypal fees are bad too if you go that route. I've sold a few things but I can't count on it as a major factor every time especially when other models are out new that are as good as or displace what i am selling and prices dropping on the outdated hardware specs.

Considering a high density 480 zone fald 1000nit+ HDR tv with hdmi 2.1 4k 120hz native will likely be $2500 - $3800 and a good 9.2 reciever with hdmi 2.1 will probably be $1200 - $2000, gpus $800 - $1100 each, it's worth biding my time and picking my battles.

I could however understand buying now if you aren't planning on upgrading anything to the next level for two to three years after hdmi 2.1 is in full swing, waiting for the prices to drop a bit.. or perhaps waiting out the gsync vs vrr thing to see what happens in the long run. I tend to do the opposite - buying fairly big at strategic times then riding it out 2 - 3 years if I can.

That's my perspective personally at least.

J62gufP.png
 
Last edited:
Chas said:
Closest thing I could find.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA90V80R4931

The monitor with your exact specs probably doesn't exist at this point.
Or would need to be a spec-built device (See $$$,$$$.¢¢).
You willing to drop a mid-to-high 5-digit figure on a 40-something-inch monitor to get your dream specs?
Click to expand...

Going to a five digit figure is not gonna happen. Some major lottery winnings would have to come my way to consider doing so - after all this is a monitor and tech moves fast these days (even with monitors). It is not like back when I invested in a Sony GDM-F520 and it remained the greatest thing for years - I adored it(1600x1200 120hz, 2048x1536 75hz).

The Wasabi Mango is interesting, but as far as I can tell it will have to be an import from South Korea and I am not sure if I am up for that which a large item like that. Then again I have bought smaller items from there just fine and monitors are shipped across the world all the time. I would though like to see some reviews of it first in order to make an informed choice, their dead pixel policy and especially their light bleed policy makes for some reservation.
 
BlindZenDriver said:
Going to a five digit figure is not gonna happen. Some major lottery winnings would have to come my way to consider doing so -
Click to expand...

Hello? (LG/Samsung/Sony/etc)?

How much for a one-off super-high resolution 80" monitor with the following specs?

...
...
...
 
I don't think you can get what you want because you are in a size range that isn't popular. 40" is too large for a desktop monitor for most people. 32-34 inches is pushing what most people are willing to put on their desk. Hence, you don't see high end monitors up in the 40" size. You can find 27"-32" monitors that'll check many if not all of those boxes, but not larger.

On the flip side there's TVs. They can do a lot of what you want, but not until they are high end and for that you are talking larger. 40" is a "budget" TV size these days. You don't see high end sets until 55" or larger. People are just not willing to spend for high end features on a small TV.

So if you are willing to get something bigger you could look at TVs. For example the Vizio P series which comes in a 55", 65" and 75" variant has a lot of what you want: 4:4:4 color input at all resolutions including 4k, 120Hz VA panel (that supports 120fps at 1080p), VA panel and FALD. Likewise Samsung has similar sets but they additionally support Freesync.

The order of the color grid is not a problem for text readability, if it is, it just means your text antialiasing is wrong. The monitor is supposed to report to Windows what order it uses but if it doesn't you can set it manually. Just go to the settings menu and type in "cleartype" to the search, it'll bring up the tuner you can use to set it correctly for your monitor and personal preference.
 
elvn said:
I agree and am looking toward a samsung Q9/Q9F/Q9FN 2019 model line continuation in 2019+ that should have hdmi 2.1 with 120hz native 4k, VRR, 480zone FALD, HDR 1000+, QFT, 4:4:4 HDR quantum dot filtered color, 120hz 4k, VA + FALD black depths and contrast, pretty low input lag on interpolation mode for consoles too relative to other tvs ("With Game Motion Plus enabled, input lag is 21.0 ms with 60 Hz interpolation, and 27.3 ms with 120 Hz interpolation."). Those samsungs are generally 65" (and over $2000) though so I'd have to rearrange my pc room for a more distant view of the display... which I'm more than willing to do for the feature set.



The problem is nvidia has a monopoly on the high end gaming gpu segment and will prob skip on hdmi 2.1 for at least this whole gpu generation and likely only support g-sync rather than VRR for who knows how long after that. AMD gpus and xbox and samsung Q8 and Q9 series' already support VRR on hdmi 2.0b. The 65" nvidia BFG 4k hdr is rumored to be priced at $5k+ which is already $1700 more than the Q9 series' slot and it will prob be hdmi 2.0b and unable to do 4:4:4 over 98hz. That on top of the monopolistic high end gpu g-sync pricing. The nvidia fald monitors also have 384 zone vs 480 zone FALD on the samsungs, and the smaller nvidia fald hdr models reportedly have banding over 120hz too.



I'm happy with the size and black level gain on this 32" LG to ride out my 1080ti gpus and my game backlog.
I've become really tired of the poor black levels on ips and tn

...which are up to 2/3 less than a modern gaming VA and way less than a fald VA tv. VA tvs typically have around 5000:1 native contrast and go to 7000:1 - 10,000:1 to 19,000:1 or more in SDR (or the smaller ~ 13" tall nvidia fald IPS g-sync hdmi 2.0b models's 1000:1 to 8700:1 to 11,900:1 sdr) with dynamic FALD active depending on the model . I have a 43" TCL 4k 60hz VA next to the LG and might get a similar 43" VA for the other side on sale at some point too, then I'd have all VA on panels larger than my ips laptop and oled tablet and phone.
Click to expand...

With the information I can glean now about the display and gpu roadmap.. it looks like TV for me in 2019+ considering the state of things. Perceived size and ppi are a function of viewing distance so if you have the room and the will to re-do your setup they are just as usable as a monitor, more so even --

considering their resolution and size allows more usage scenarios like desktop real-estate gain, going ultrawide resolutions without making the screen tiny, more engrossing media playback, etc. and the fact that they will be packing a much fuller feature set that isn't available in computer monitors. You just have to break out of the desk against the wall like a bookshelf mode and go to more of a command center room design (again, as long as you have the room to do it).

They are quite expensive but the full feature set of "real" HDR (HDR 1000+, high % rec 2020 quantum dot filtered color at 4:4:4, high density FALD), 120hz hdmi 2.1 4k 4:4:4 VRR, QFT, and larger than 13" height etc it won't be more affordable for around 3 years after 2019 I'm guessing. Even the 27" ~ 13" high hdmi 2.0 limited ones are $2000+.
 
Last edited:
Sycraft said:
I don't think you can get what you want because you are in a size range that isn't popular. 40" is too large for a desktop monitor for most people. 32-34 inches is pushing what most people are willing to put on their desk. Hence, you don't see high end monitors up in the 40" size. You can find 27"-32" monitors that'll check many if not all of those boxes, but not larger.
Click to expand...

I am hoping that 40"ish monitors are gonna become a thing. Back when I bought my current Philips in the spring of 2015 it was pretty much the only real monitor of that size which wasn't a 1080p one meant for like a screen in a conference room. Since then a lot more choice has come into the large desktop monitor market. Then again you're right about TV's moving to even bigger sizes which won't work on the desktop until we get like 8K and even putting say a 55" on someones desk is not gonna be mainstream.

The reason I have hope for the really big monitors is from observation at work and in general. A decade ago most people had like a 17" TFT on their desk at the most, except of course if they were like graphics artists or engineers doing technical work. But the move from CRT's and the price drop in general meant that I could get my boss to see the light, so soon everybody regardless of function was on dual-monitor setups. Almost a decade and a half after I went dual monitor(SVGA+80x25 text), but things take time. By now the standard setup is dual 23-24" monitors, some with dual 27" and I am on a 43"+27". I think that with the price of 40-43" 4K monitors some of those dual 24-27" colleagues are gonna go to a 40-43", there is just that much freedom with the big screen.

Now some people at work moving to big monitors won't mean a bigger market for big gaming monitors per se, but it should make more people want the big ones for at home also - at least that is what I am hoping for.


Sycraft said:
On the flip side there's TVs. They can do a lot of what you want, but not until they are high end and for that you are talking larger. 40" is a "budget" TV size these days. You don't see high end sets until 55" or larger. People are just not willing to spend for high end features on a small TV.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I am willing to pay extra for the right monitor. The monitor(s) has always been a priority for me and I know having high demands comes with a prize (I can't be crazy high though, there is a limit).


Sycraft said:
So if you are willing to get something bigger you could look at TVs. For example the Vizio P series which comes in a 55", 65" and 75" variant has a lot of what you want: 4:4:4 color input at all resolutions including 4k, 120Hz VA panel (that supports 120fps at 1080p), VA panel and FALD. Likewise Samsung has similar sets but they additionally support Freesync.
Click to expand...
Going above 43" doesn't really make sense to me, doing so would mean compensating by putting the screen further away than normal desk depth which would be impractical. Maybe when there is 8K.


Sycraft said:
The order of the color grid is not a problem for text readability, if it is, it just means your text antialiasing is wrong. The monitor is supposed to report to Windows what order it uses but if it doesn't you can set it manually. Just go to the settings menu and type in "cleartype" to the search, it'll bring up the tuner you can use to set it correctly for your monitor and personal preference.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Not all OS do well with other than an RGB grid and I also suspect, that when using remote sessions - say controlling a computer with a RGB setup then doing so on a system with a different grid could be a problem. I haven't been able to test that though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top