Overclock.net banner

[PCMonitors] Philips BDM4037UW Curved VA 4k 40” Monitor

64K views 493 replies 92 participants last post by  D4NI3L3 
#1 ·

Quote:
The monitor features a 40" '4K' UHD (3860 x 2160) VA panel, with a 3000R curve as mentioned previously. This will almost certainly be a TPV panel, one which we believe is purpose-built for monitors rather than TVs this time around. This is accompanied by a 60Hz refresh rate, 4000:1 static contrast ratio and specified viewing angles of 178°/178°. The screen surface is similar to the older models - very low haze (3-4%), essentially glossy. 10-bit colour is supported by way of 8-bits per subpixel plus 2-bit FRC dithering. A flicker-free (DC dimming not PWM) WLED backlight is employed which offers 85% NTSC gamut coverage. This means it is not a 'wide gamut' model in the traditional sense as it will only cover the sRGB colour space, but will do so comprehensively with some over-extension. This is an increase over the older models where a 68-72% NTSC gamut was specified, so you can expect a bit of extra vibrancy. Not that the older models were really lacking in that respect.
Source
 
See less See more
1
#3 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuscleBound View Post

price?
A bit too big for desktop use.
It's amazing. I have the original. Yes this one is an improvement but it's to have a lot more. FreeSync should have been included and we should be seeing 120Hz models.
 
#5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by axiumone View Post

We're inching closer to monitor nirvana. I can almost feel it.
Yeah. With recent 3440x1440 144Hz, 1ms, IPS, FreeSync its getting closer.
 
#7 ·
It's nice to see companies still making large UHD monitors, and I hope this trend continues. Monitors smaller than 40" feel like toys to me now
biggrin.gif


Hopefully, TFTCentral will do an in-depth review of this monitor whenever it releases because I'm interested to see what the input lag is and what response times this monitor has in the dark greys to blacks and the whites - areas VA-type panels traditionally have trouble in.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberrero View Post

SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY
Yeah, but just how much is the question. Don't exactly see this thing being "affordable"...
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Yeah, but just how much is the question. Don't exactly see this thing being "affordable"...
$1000 probably. I bought mine in 2014 for $700 CAD which is $500 USD.
 
#11 ·
Still can't muster the resolve to spen $1000 on a monitor when my dual 27" Korean IPS ones still work so well for me. Would love to upgrade to something like this for $400-500 but that's still a ways off.
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Yeah, but just how much is the question. Don't exactly see this thing being "affordable"...
Lets just hope this does not follow the current monitor trend of doubling the price for no reason. These 40" 4k VA panels from TPV could be had for $500 shipped before (got mine for $498). Now that they add a curve to it Phillips will probably sell them for $1,000+...
mad.gif
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Still can't muster the resolve to spen $1000 on a monitor when my dual 27" Korean IPS ones still work so well for me. Would love to upgrade to something like this for $400-500 but that's still a ways off.
$1000 is a bit much. I would not spend that much unless its the perfect monitor which right now would be 40" 4K 120Hz, OLED. Only bought my current monitor because I wanted the space and hate dual screen. 34" 3440x1440p was not for me. Most games I play are easy to run 4K so it's not a problem.
 
#14 ·
+1 to the list of things the 40" 4K monitors needed.

Still need 120Hz, MUCH faster response, and gsync. but we all know something like that would cost your first 3 children and a left arm. Can still dream..

And for the faster response comment, i had some WEIRD issues with my 40" 4K. It was like some game engines just hated 4K and took forever to render frames. This is without vsync or any of the other settings that cause lag enabled. I just gave up and have been loving my 27" 1440p monitor ever since. Also been playing a lot of fast paced pvp games lately.
 
#15 ·
i really wanted that last 42" philips but i managed 2 get a hi end sony 42" 1080p instead, with 3d. seeing as the 4k content is still none existent i have no regrets, and 1 big ass monitor.

no free sync, no hdr, what have philips been doing all year? why is this monitor smaller than the 1 it replaces? where are the ultra wide LARGE screens? come on! i couldnt do curved with a 40" either, needs 2 be BIGGER
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by PostalTwinkie View Post

THIS!!!

I am completely ready for 4K 120/144 /w VRR.
GPUs are not. 4K is a monster in new games.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

GPUs are not. 4K is a monster in new games.
Use little to no AA, or FXAA and 2 Pascal cards can run 4K around 100fps in many games, Gsync for the rest of it. Plus now days there is not a big visual difference from Ultra to medium settings in a lot of these console ported games. So the user is able to choose from super fast frames or complete max settings.
 
#22 ·
That size, resolution and 4000:1 contrast sure are appealing and I wouldn't mind spend more than 1000€ for monitor, but so far all those expensive monitors have too many short comings.

In this case, no freesync and not enough Hz. This should be at MINIMUM 100Hz model, and preferably 120-144Hz. 60Hz today's world is just no go. Sorry philips, too little too late again.
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberrero View Post

Why does anybody care about having more than around 70 or 80hz? Can you really notice a difference?
Yes. The smoothness of 144Hz compared to 60Hz is VERY noticable.

But if i'm going to have higher refresh rate, the input lag of these 40" 4K monitors has to come down more.

My crossover 44K (which uses the same panel as the phillips panel) has very noticably higher input lag compared to my 1440p 144Hz 1ms panel. To the point where i literally am unable to even play any PvP or FPS competitive games on it at all. But the 40" 4K is really great for the visual games that don't need the instant response. Because of how good the 1440p 144Hz 1ms is, and how beautiful 4K @ 40" is, that is why there are so many wanting the best of both worlds. 4K and 100Hz+ and 1ms response times is the holy grail. The curved panel and gsync is just gravy really but those are relatively easier to implement. Right now you can only get bits and pieces.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberrero View Post

Why does anybody care about having more than around 70 or 80hz? Can you really notice a difference?
Don't know if you have had any experience, but no offence if you can't tell the difference between 60Hz and for example 100Hz, you'll have to get your eyes examined.

I had one of those korean OC monitors and I can spot even between 60 vs 75 hz. 90Hz over 60 is already a big step and 120Hz is really smooth after that you don't want to go back. Although now I have 75Hz VA because couldn't stand the IPS glow.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top