Didn't see a link to the monitor in the article so here it is: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=7674736&CatId=4717

 

wow great price,,,,, wish i had the cash.

 

I think that Seiki is like the first of the cheap Korean 1440p monitors. You can spend a bunch and get a Dell Ultrasharp/Apple Cinema/Sony 4k TV or you can spend something a bit more reasonable but with more question marks and get a Catleap/Seiki.

Interested to see how this thing reviews.

 

I wouldn't expect real, but I wonder what type of 120hz they do, inserted black, interpolation, ..? That and what's the input lag and scaling ability.

 

At that price it's likely to a be a very poor performer in all areas.

 

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/6658/1299-uhdtv-seiki-50-se50uy04-/p1

According to this, only does 30Hz at 4k.

More discussion on 30Hz. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1466270/seiki-se50uy04-first-low-cost-4k-ultra-hd-tv

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by keiths

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/6658/1299-uhdtv-seiki-50-se50uy04-/p1

According to this, only does 30Hz at 4k.

More discussion on 30Hz. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1466270/seiki-se50uy04-first-low-cost-4k-ultra-hd-tv

Yup. It's an HDMI limitation. Not enough bandwidth.

 

Even it performs well enough, it's still kinda pointless to buy...there's next to no content at that res.

 

Content is PC gaming.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by keiths

Content is PC gaming.

It's a TV, not a monitor...

 

It's whatever you use it for.

 

Someone care to explain how they can afford to do this?

You'd think it'd be $15,000. Is it low quality with a high failure rate or something?

 

I would think only doing 30 Hz at 4k resolution has something to do with it.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by keiths

I would think only doing 30 Hz at 4k resolution has something to do with it.

Its same with other 4K TV's that cost 1*,***.

 

I would imagine that its not their best tv but that the quality is better than grey market vendors. if this article did what people wanted it to do and thats draw buckets of attention away from the big brands. so if they dont put their best foot forward on the quality aspect. id assume that people would relegate it to trash or immediately assume that they are one of those off brand marketing scheme companies. if i can muster the cash ill brave it out. and review it as a computer monitor more so than a tv. but id give it a fair run through at both to gauge quality. and if the 30hz full res is the biggest con i can see worst comes to worst it becomes my one year olds monitor.

 

If it were able to do scaled up 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 @60Hz, it wouldn't be all that bad, decent resolution matched to field of view a 50" screen offers.

 

30FPS is all my cards could push at that res anyway so I wouldnt complain. I have the money but my car is more important to me right now

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minnetonka16

Someone care to explain how they can afford to do this?

You'd think it'd be $15,000. Is it low quality with a high failure rate or something?

Maybe it's the LED panel being used.

Aren't all these expensive 4K TVs being released using new panels like OLED? Maybe the current technology LED panel just at a higher resolution isn't that much of a big deal cost wise.

Regardless, if they could have included inputs that actually support the bandwidth required for 4K content at 60FPS and not a laughable 30FPS, I would have already ordered one. Could care less about 4K for TV. I want a 40inch for my PC to replace my surround set-up. Guess I'm going to be waiting a long time for one with a display port input.

 

I wonder how well this video card from the same site will drive that monitor?

NVIDIA Quadro 6000 - Graphics card - Price:$5,138.87

or maybe the AMD one is better?

AMD FirePro S10000 Video Card - Price: $3,249.99

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead

I wonder how well this video card from the same site will drive that monitor?

NVIDIA Quadro 6000 - Graphics card - Price:$5,138.87

or maybe the AMD one is better?

AMD FirePro S10000 Video Card - Price: $3,249.99

Nonsense. Clearly you need one of these 32MB PCI GPU's for $120.....

 

Pretty much we need a full review before anyone begins to think about purchasing one of these. It is interesting I will give them that. Granted the 30Hz at 4K res is a big turn off to me. I am not really into the 120Hz thing, but I would like at least a 60Hz refresh rate through all resolutions.

Too bad the tech limitaion due to HDMI. I am thinking the input lag on this will be pretty bad.

 

People might say we don't need 4k but the fact of the matter of fact is that 1080p can only go so far on 60+ inch TV's, so 4K really helps with that to carry us to 100 inches, etc.

 

YES!! Bring on affordable 4K sets!! Now some 30" monitors and we are set.

 

Some opinions from early adopters of the TV for anyone interested:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?98027-1299-Seiki-UHDTV-50-quot-SE50UY04-Bought-it-today

 

Here's a link to the review for Sony's 4k LED.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/sony-bravia-xbr-84x900-3d-lcd-ultra-hdtv

It's $25,000 for an edge lit LED set.

It has worse black levels than my $3,500 Panasonic 65VT50 Plasma, worse motion handling, screen un-uniformity, flash lighting, etc. All the normal LED flaws. The only plus is that has more resolution.

This TV is basically going to produce 4K worth of crappy looking pixels. Whether you'd rather have more pixels or a better image is up to you.