Originally Posted by Hukkel
No HDMI 2.0?
Who wants to use a monitor of 5k and then go 30 Hz? That is silly.
You just use DP...like, you know, professionals that actually use proper ways to connect their professional machines to their screens, and have done if for years without touching HDMI that doesn't even support 1440p or having to wait for HDMI 2.0?
2.0 released less than 30 days ago, how could it be ready for a production monitor already? It is HDMI 1.4 at best, and you should be happy to even have that.
30Hz that don't flicker are perfectly fine for graphic work, but again, professionals would use DP that is readily available in many cards (some AMD cards have 6 of them).
Originally Posted by GTR Mclaren
32inch is too small for all that res
36 or more !!
Have you sat in a desk with a 36 or bigger screen against you? Is it easy to work with? Do you realize that working on a monitor that you need to be able to see and control from edge to edge / corner to corner requires you to be roughly its diagonal away? How big do desks need to be to accommodate 36-40" screens?
Professionals require as much real estate as possible to work on..having a crapload of toolbars and 2-3 apps running at the same time to multitask, not to interpolate their full screen games.
Pixel density buys real estate = more pixels to do that. Getting a bigger screen with the same resolution doesn't buy you more pixels, only bigger pixels.
Asking for a 60" or bigger screen to have in your living room, it is ok, as you will be situated definitely more than 5ft away from it most of the time. Maybe even more than 20ft away, so you want it to fill as much of your field of view as possible. In a working-on-a-desktop scenario, you want to fit as much pixels as you can within your field of view as possible, so bigger pixels are a self-defeating.
Originally Posted by jetsam
hold on, they can do 4k on entire laptops for ~$1.5k
how is it harder to make pixels bigger and do under $1k?
Ehm...cause silicon and its production line cares about physical dimensions? The manufacturing process is not 100% scalable without glitches, it takes time to perfect the production of something many times bigger in physical dimensions, ontop of the extra material cost. There should be way more 32" 4K panels failing QC than 13" 4K panels failing QC. You can produce 6x 13" 16:10 panels in the area a sigle 31.5" 16:9 panel occupies. Materials should also be in the 6x range (doesn't scale like that for materials, but w/e).