{"id":3610,"date":"2014-12-08T15:43:05","date_gmt":"2014-12-08T05:43:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reckoner.com.au\/?p=3610"},"modified":"2017-03-06T20:03:46","modified_gmt":"2017-03-06T10:03:46","slug":"4k-monitor-buying-guide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reckoner.com.au\/features\/4k-monitor-buying-guide\/","title":{"rendered":"4K Monitor Buying Guide"},"content":{"rendered":"

TLDR; buy the Philips\u00a0BDM4065UC.<\/em><\/p>\n

I spend a lot of time looking at transistors stuck on elaborate chemical films<\/span>, squished between electrodes, encased in plastic boxes. I want more and more of those transistors, as the more transistors, the more pixels available to display the wonderful things my computer has to offer – such as photoshopped images of celebrities and a constant stream of news that my government and the government of my government\u2019s allies are conspiring against me in the name of some bullshit war on terrorism that\u2019s totally driven by corrupt and racist ideologues.<\/p>\n

My unquenchable thirst for pixels has led me on a hunt for a relatively inexpensive UHD4K (3840×2160)<\/em> display that I can hook up to my computer. I\u2019m not alone in this hunt as others want a sweet piece of silicon and plastic that can make 8,294,400 little lights glow in unison with pretty colours. This article will guide you through the maze of technical jargon and obsolete information in order to find a monitor that won\u2019t make your eyes bleed.<\/p>\n

\"connectors\"<\/div>\n

Does Your Computer Support 4K?<\/h4>\n

First of all, you need a computer that\u2019ll actually support 3840×2160. The main issue with 4K support is the insane amount of bandwidth required to send all those pixels uncompressed down the wire from your computer to the display. There\u2019s over 12Gbit (that\u2019s 1.5 gigabytes)<\/em> of data a second transferred between the computer and display! This sort of bandwidth requires special protocols and connectors.<\/p>\n

HDMI v1.4 can support 4K, but only at a maximum of 30Hz – not so good for desktop computer use. HDMI 2.0 is designed with 4K 60Hz in mind and many of the new 4K TVs have HDMI 2.0 support or a quasi version of it. HDMI 2.0 support is still thin on the ground as of late 2014, not appearing in any Macs and only on the top end latest model graphics cards.<\/p>\n

DisplayPort 1.2 supports the higher bandwidth required for 4K@60Hz and is on most relatively modern graphics cards. DisplayPort 1.3 is more recent (September 2014)<\/em> and has ample bandwidth for 4K@60Hz, but isn\u2019t on any graphics cards right now.<\/p>\n

For Macs, Apple has written a support document on support for 4K monitors<\/a>. You pretty much need a Mac with Thunderbolt 2 and has Intel Iris Pro graphics or better (Intel 5000 graphics won\u2019t cut the mustard)<\/em>. If you want 60Hz output, you need to use the Mini DisplayPort plug, as HDMI 1.4 (which is on all the Macs)<\/em> won\u2019t be enough.<\/p>\n

Also useful to know is what SST and MST mean – Single Stream Transport and Multi Stream Transport. Although we have these cool 4K LCD panels and graphics cards that support 4K, the input controller on the displays didn\u2019t keep up. As a workaround, the display manufacturers used multiple input controllers to handle the extra bandwidth coming in from the computer. This method is called MST and is kind of a hack to split data up and sort of pretend to be multiple monitors. Any 4K display out now will probably have a setting in it\u2019s menus to enable this. Without it on, the max refresh rate you\u2019ll get is 25Hz or 30Hz.<\/p>\n

If your computer can handle 4K output, now you can actually think about getting a 4K monitor. The ideal 4K display for computer use needs to satisfy a few criteria.<\/h2>\n

Native resolution of 3840×2160<\/strong>
\nDuh, this is the whole point! Heaps more pixels and screen real estate than the 2560×1440 displays.<\/p>\n

60hz refresh rate at the UHD4K resolution<\/strong>
\nThis is one of the most important considerations, as using a computer monitor lower than 60hz is quite annoying and almost all 4K TVs are 25hz or 30hz, as television content doesn\u2019t generally go beyond this. We will discuss why this is important later on in the article.<\/p>\n

Pixel density in the 92-115ppi range<\/strong>
\nDudley Storey has written an easy to understand explanation of what pixel density<\/a> is and what it means in relation to what you see on your display. A 27\u201d 2560×1440 display has a PPI of 108.79 and is at the upper end of what my eyes are comfortable with. A nice PPI calculator<\/a> (pop in the screen size and the resolution and it gives you the PPI and lists the PPI of many popular displays) has been made by Sven Neuhaus.<\/p>\n

38-42\u201d diagonal size<\/strong>
\nThis helps achieve the right PPI so that we actually get a nice big desktop to spread our pixel junk all over. If the monitor is too small text is hard to read as the pixels are squished together.<\/p>\n

Sub-$1000 price<\/strong>
\nWhen new 2560×1440 displays are going for under $500 and 2nd hand Dell ones in the $350 range, I didn\u2019t want to spend more than $1,000 for the extra pixels 4K brings.<\/p>\n

I am not a gamer and I don\u2019t edit photos for a living, so colour accuracy, super high 120hz or 144hz refresh rate and input lag are not considerations of mine.<\/em><\/p>\n

With that criteria – UHD4K@60hz, 90-115ppi, 38\u201d-42\u201d and under $1,000, let\u2019s go shopping!<\/h2>\n

Seiki SE39UY04<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"seiki\"<\/div>\n

The display that started it all, the Seiki SE39UY04 was released in 2013 for only US$699 and is only US$339.99 right now. It ticks all the boxes, sub$1000 even when delivered to Australia, is 4K, 113ppi and 39\u201d – oh, but wait, 4K is limited to 30Hz. Bummer. Many people overlooked this due to the excellent price, got one anyways and plugged it into their computers. Here\u2019s some blog posts of nerds who did this:<\/p>\n