Upgrade from 30" 2560x1600 IPS?

C

chris719

n00b
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
40
Hi all,

I have an HP LP3065 which has some permanent image retention (been there 2 years and tried all kinds of things), so I am looking for a replacement.

Problem is, I don't know what really is a clear upgrade. I'm really just looking for the best image quality overall and would rather not go up or down in size too much. The 4k monitors seem to not be there yet and might require Windows scaling which is iffy even still.

Any thoughts? I might just wait for now until something better shows up.

Thanks!
 
Just to throw out an idea...

I just picked up a dell u3415w; loving it. 34 inches of curved 3440x1440..
 
If going 4K, 40" 4K or bigger will be a clear upgrade from 30" 16:10. Though you stated you don't want to go up or down in size too much, this is the only hands-down upgrade IMO, since the PPI is roughly the same given the increase in physical size (no scaling needed in OS/software).

If staying around the same size... 34" 3440x1440 21:9 monitors are more of a sidegrade, but can be an upgrade depending on your use case. Still, the lost physical height is a downer for many who don't like change.

As for image quality, pretty much anything released nowadays is going to be heads and tails above your old HPLP3065 in terms of matte anti-glare coating. As for image quality itself, you need to state a budget. From how you held on to this monitor for so long even after it displayed image retention issues, I'm thinking budget is more important to you than image quality itself...
 
No, budget isn't that important, although <$1500 is probably good. The image retention is mild and only shows up on certain colors / scenes, like it only affects some sub-pixels. I don't know if the anti-glare coating has anything to do with image quality really. I don't mind the AG coating and I have used dozens of monitors with less grainy AG / glossy panels that have worse image quality since I got it.

Thanks for the link to that Samsung, I'll check it out. Though I'm not sure if it will have less input lag since the LP3065 is a first gen 30" without OSD so it has very little input lag due to that.

I might check out the 34" 1440p monitors but it does bother me slightly to go to 1440 vs 1600 vertical pixels. Probably not the end of the world though.
 
chris719 said:
No, budget isn't that important, although <$1500 is probably good. The image retention is mild and only shows up on certain colors / scenes, like it only affects some sub-pixels. I don't know if the anti-glare coating has anything to do with image quality really. I don't mind the AG coating and I have used dozens of monitors with less grainy AG / glossy panels that have worse image quality since I got it.

Thanks for the link to that Samsung, I'll check it out. Though I'm not sure if it will have less input lag since the LP3065 is a first gen 30" without OSD so it has very little input lag due to that.

I might check out the 34" 1440p monitors but it does bother me slightly to go to 1440 vs 1600 vertical pixels. Probably not the end of the world though.
Click to expand...

It will definitely have less lag than your LG if you've got an AMD video card and can use FreeSync. It's effectively like running with V-Sync off.

Trust me, you don't want a 21:9 monitor. There are so many disadvantages. It's not supported by many games, it's actually a tiny monitor (especially compared to a 16:10 30" monitor). It's going to feel so small compared to what you have now. 34" 1440p monitors are just ultra wide 27" monitors. They're very short.
 
I owned a 3007WFP for 10 years. Going from 2560x1600 to 2560x1440 actually isn't that bad for me. 4k I sitll haven't really gotten used to interface wise.

But i do have a 4k and 1440p monitor and enjoy both.
 
30" 16:10 (blue) vs 34" 21:9 (green):

30-inch-16x10-vs-34-inch-21x9.png


30" 16:10 (blue) vs 40" 4K 16:9 (green):

30-inch-16x10-vs-40-inch-16x9.png


Images courtesy of Display Wars
 
Don't bother going 1440p ultrawide IMO, they look tiny, they're not immersive if you're used to larger screens and for the price you may as well go 4k 40"+, which is all of the above.
Or if you can hold on, wait for the OLED 4K stuff via CES to see what's coming.

Had a look at quite a few panels side by side recently and my opinion seems to fit what most here are saying in this matter, so don't think it's just coincidence. Happy hunting!
 
evilsofa said:
Can you say what you're really talking about without getting banished from the Displays forum again?
Click to expand...

Im sure it has to do with it not being the industry standard of 1:1. Obviously the best upgrade is that 2560x2560 panel.

Eizo makes a 26.6" square perfect for the upgrade.

Link
 
suiken_2mieu said:
Im sure it has to do with it not being the industry standard of 1:1. Obviously the best upgrade is that 2560x2560 panel.

Eizo makes a 26.6" square perfect for the upgrade.

Link
Click to expand...

That's 1920x1920 which is a really interesting thing, but it isn't 2560x2560. Did anyone ever get it to see how it did for gaming?
 
evilsofa said:
Can you say what you're really talking about without getting banished from the Displays forum again?
Click to expand...

I don't think buying a 16:9 or 21:9 display for use as a computer monitor is a good idea.
 
Dos anybody have any experience with the cheap Korean 2560x1600 ips panels? I know NCX says they're all junk but can anybody confirm that? I really want it not to be true because I love 16x10 too much.
 
I second anyone who says to grab a 40" 4K phillips/samsung. The image quality is awesome and you don't need scaling.
 
chili dog said:
Dos anybody have any experience with the cheap Korean 2560x1600 ips panels? I know NCX says they're all junk but can anybody confirm that? I really want it not to be true because I love 16x10 too much.
Click to expand...

Check Amazon and New Egg customer reviews if you only want to read positive impressions from people with no standards or means of objectively testing monitors. Most of the newer 21.5" IPS panels are much better than all of the 30" Korean monitors, but it's your money and ignorance is bliss :)

KazeoHin said:
I second anyone who says to grab a 40" 4K phillips/samsung. The image quality is awesome and you don't need scaling.
Click to expand...

Or one can spend considerably less on a superior Flicker Free Crossover, Microboard and Sony 4K displays instead of buying 4k displays with 2005 motion clarity.
 
Last edited:
I personally bought the Crossover, but I think a lot of display snobs would baulk at the idea of buying a non-name-brand screen.
 
The Crossover has a metric shit heap of input lag. It's trash.

The 31.5" 4k Samsung FreeSync is far and away the best of the 30"+ monitors.
 
bigbluefe said:
The Crossover has a metric shit heap of input lag. It's trash.
Click to expand...

Seriously? I have yet to notice it: I played some UT15, Serious Sam 3 and Gary's Mod (prop hunt) locked at 60 FPS and it felt MUCH more responsive than my old monitor. There is a image processing mode called 'bypass' that reduces the input latency like crazy. Maybe that's what you need to try.
 
geok1ng said:
What 32-40" models from these brands do you consider superior to the Philips 40"?
Click to expand...

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1874753&highlight=

AMH and Microboard recently released Flicker Free equivalents Philips not mentioned in the above thread, and there are multiple good matte 32" 4K monitors, but they're all matte aside from the HP 32 Spectre which is likely awesome.

bigbluefe said:
The Crossover has a metric shit heap of input lag. It's trash. The 31.5" 4k Samsung FreeSync is far and away the best of the 30"+ monitors.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to ask for a source since I know you don't have one. The BenQ BL3201PH/PT also supports Free-Sync now, is cheaper. has much higher contrast and has a lighter matte coating too.

Polar_Fox said:
What about nec pa302w or similar eizo? Looks like a worthy upgrade.
Click to expand...

Glow free 27" 1440p Eizos are available for the same price as the PA302W, as are superior 4k 32" with far, far less glow than the PA302W, and 32" 4K AHVA panels are available for significantly less and also suffer from far, far less glow than any 30" IPS as well as easily best them at everything aside from professional use.
 
Last edited:
How would you rank BL3201PT in terms of overall quality compared to other 4k of the same size? The only other accessible option I have near me is Asus PA328Q and that is quite a bit pricier than BL3201PT.
 
chenw said:
How would you rank BL3201PT in terms of overall quality compared to other 4k of the same size? The only other accessible option I have near me is Asus PA328Q and that is quite a bit pricier than BL3201PT.
Click to expand...

The BenQ is the best of the matte 4k monitors in terms of price & performance, but I suspect that the HP 32 Spectre is actually significantly better image quality wise since it has a 1% haze or Almost-Glossy coating and has a white bezel which vastly increases the perceived black depth. The HP is likely Flicker Free too since most of their new monitors are, but I don't know if it has a 2 frame delay like the Acer B326HK since there are no reviews. Best Reviewed 27-32" 4K Monitors.
 
Thanks. Unfortunately HP Spectre 32 is not available here lol.

The only other 4k I know for certain with a white bezel that is available here is Acer S277HK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top