Buy a new $900 monitor? or wait for relatively cheaper 4K?

Hi guys.....im currently in a purchase dilemma.

Would it be stupid to buy a dell U3011 now when waiting for say a year would probably allow me to purchase a 4K monitor for the same if not slightly higher price??

I remember when the HD format turned from Car industry pricing to 1500 for a 50 inch samsung TV.

More or less it all happened in a year and a half.....Noticing that companies like LG and Sharp have presented 80 inch 4K LEDs at CES for $20000.....in a year or two a 30 inch 4K monitor should approx cost as much as a modern day2560x1600 capable monitor...right?

Buying a new monitor now would be like getting a very expensive 3G phone right?

Should i persevere and wait?

Good luck running games a 4096x2160...

the 7970 and 680 handles 4K quite well according to both AMD and Nvidia.

the new 8000 series from AMD handles 4K even better.

I remember people saying the same thing when 1080P became mainstream......i went directly to 1920X1200 with no problems.

I am planning on getting a new GPU in a couple of months anyways....but the question is, would you drop $1000+ on a 1600 res screen now though?

I know new tech can be very confusing at times.....but all the 4K fuss is quite simple and doable.....the problem at the moment is....money.

Here's an example of what you can actually do today:

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2012/6/18/the-4k-graphics-card-shootout.aspx

and Video example of battlefield3:

http://youtu.be/J-zBuiq8RTU

I am sick of my 1920X1200 Samsung......but getting a U3011 seems like throwing money out of the window.

30 fps, eww.C_Rule

Everything goes down in price and there is always new stuff coming out, especially when it comes to tech.

You'll find something else to consider waiting for in a years time. Just how it is :)

obenns

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]30 fps, eww.Modbetto

[QUOTE="Modbetto"][QUOTE="C_Rule"]30 fps, eww.mitu123

In any case we are also not considering that new CPU will surely improve all of that...not to mention the fact that this article is almost a year old....in a years time we will be 2 years ahead.....4K 80 inch tvs now cost $10000 less than that 36 inch behemoth.....after only an approx 8 months period.....in a year's time 4K TVs should be slashed down to a third of the price with 80 inch sets going at 7-8000 and 30s to the 2000 range....

That is exactly what happened with HD TVs in 2009-2010.

Buy a $300 27" 2560x1440 montor now and wait for 4K t.vs to drop in price and actually support at least 60hz at there native resolution personally I'm sticking to 1080p now as I like to be able to easily clone my pc to multiple displays and they have to be the same resolution for that to work. Once 4K drops alot in price I'll upgrade then to a 4K projector and large 4K OLED T.V to use as monitor a 4K lcd display doesn't interest me as I want my next monitor to have a really high contrast ratio and very deep blacks lcd tech can't do that its no where near plasma or crt let alone oled.

Buy a $300 27" 2560x1440 montor now and wait for 4K t.vs to drop in price and actually support at least 60hz at there native resolution personally I'm sticking to 1080p now as I like to be able to easily clone my pc to multiple displays and they have to be the same resolution for that to work. Once 4K drops alot in price I'll upgrade then to a 4K projector and large 4K HDTV as a monitor.DJ_Headshot

Buy a $300 27" 2560x1440 montor now and wait for 4K t.vs to drop in price and actually support at least 60hz at there native resolution personally I'm sticking to 1080p now as I like to be able to easily clone my pc to multiple displays and they have to be the same resolution for that to work. Once 4K drops alot in price I'll upgrade then to a 4K projector and large 4K HDTV as a monitor.DJ_Headshot

[QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]Buy a $300 27" 2560x1440 montor now and wait for 4K t.vs to drop in price and actually support at least 60hz at there native resolution personally I'm sticking to 1080p now as I like to be able to easily clone my pc to multiple displays and they have to be the same resolution for that to work. Once 4K drops alot in price I'll upgrade then to a 4K projector and large 4K HDTV as a monitor.Modbetto

If consider 1920x1200 from 1920x1080 such a big jump then 1920x1200 to 2560x1440 will be a huge jump.

[QUOTE="Modbetto"][QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]Buy a $300 27" 2560x1440 montor now and wait for 4K t.vs to drop in price and actually support at least 60hz at there native resolution personally I'm sticking to 1080p now as I like to be able to easily clone my pc to multiple displays and they have to be the same resolution for that to work. Once 4K drops alot in price I'll upgrade then to a 4K projector and large 4K HDTV as a monitor.DJ_Headshot

If consider 1920x1200 from 1920x1080 such a big jump then 1920x1200 to 2560x1440 will be a huge jump.

People are missing the logistics - 4k or Ultra TVs where shown last year at CES as well, now why arent they getting mass produced or taking off? Well 1st of all no one is going to make mainstream 4k stuff for a while so its all going to be upscaled until then, most movies/tv stations have only just upgraded to 1080 they arent going to change again anytime soon, this along with sat and cable companies wont use up more bandwidth. Secondly i think i read somewhere that TVs need to really be over 80" for 4k to become viable as there are really only so many pixels you can have in 1 inch square before it doesnt matter or you see so little difference.

People are missing the logistics - 4k or Ultra TVs where shown last year at CES as well, now why arent they getting mass produced or taking off? Well 1st of all no one is going to make mainstream 4k stuff for a while so its all going to be upscaled until then, most movies/tv stations have only just upgraded to 1080 they arent going to change again anytime soon, this along with sat and cable companies wont use up more bandwidth. Secondly i think i read somewhere that TVs need to really be over 80" for 4k to become viable as there are really only so many pixels you can have in 1 inch square before it doesnt matter or you see so little difference.

5SI-GonePostal

Sharp is already mass producing a 32 inch for 5000USD

Video cards support it

Games support it

Mid-high A/V receivers fully support it (Mine does)

Cable and sat content is already available in europe (where i currently live)

movies will all be streamed with 500mbps internet connection.

http://youtu.be/9fa5AXMUI-o

Im not shure you know what you're taliking about i guess.....

Plus im talking about monitors......NOT TVs.....according to you my 1920x1200 monitor, i'm looking to upgrade from the looks of this thread, shouldnt exist since "there is no content for it."

LMAO yes ofc.......................500mb internet.................LOL

Maybe in 5 years

LMAO yes ofc.......................500mb internet.................LOL

Maybe in 5 years

5SI-GonePostal

[QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

LMAO yes ofc.......................500mb internet.................LOL

Maybe in 5 years

Modbetto

And you are in a very small % congratulations - it is 3-5 years before 100mb becomes mainstream, companies very rarely do anything for the minority

[QUOTE="Modbetto"][QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

LMAO yes ofc.......................500mb internet.................LOL

Maybe in 5 years

5SI-GonePostal

And you are in a very small % congratulations - it is 3-5 years before 100mb becomes mainstream, companies very rarely do anything for the minority

and again-----im talking about montors not TVs........theres no 1440p 1600p content.....still, im not seeing companies stopped from producing 1440p and 1600p monitors----

[QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

[QUOTE="Modbetto"] i'm on 100mbps and in Tokyo there's 300mbps Next year Fastweb in europe is starting the new 300mbps european grid.Modbetto

And you are in a very small % congratulations - it is 3-5 years before 100mb becomes mainstream, companies very rarely do anything for the minority

Certainly isnt in the UK

Maybe in Sweden and that area, but the rest of EU nope sorry, it is no where near.

[QUOTE="Modbetto"][QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

And you are in a very small % congratulations - it is 3-5 years before 100mb becomes mainstream, companies very rarely do anything for the minority

5SI-GonePostal

Certainly isnt in the UK

Maybe in Sweden and that area, but the rest of EU nope sorry, it is no where near.

Virgin already has 100mbps on their site for only 12 pounds a month!!!!! where the heck do you live? on the isle of white?

http://store.virginmedia.com/broadband/compare-broadband/index.html

or maybe youre to young to decide what to do in your house i guess.....that would explain most of it....

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]Have fun with that. The current standard cabling for 4K is HDMI and that can only do 4k @sub-30 frames per second. DisplayPort 1.2 can do it at 60fps, but that isn't standard with the TV companies. They haven't even announced a 4k monitor. Production for these higher resolutions display's are only in their beginnings. It will be 2 to 3 years before we start seeing them being used in monitor-centric screens. I just bought a 1440p monitor that is capable of doing 120 frames per second for $550. I think I'm good.Modbetto

But production for the two are similar. Anyways, I just saw the Sharp monitor. Looks nice but I doubt it will drop in price so fast within a year. You are going to have to wait for more producers to make similar monitors and have competition. I give it 2 years for them to drop below $2000 USD.

And I still have my triple eyefinity 1080p setup.

so you went from 1080p to 1440p?Modbetto

[QUOTE="Modbetto"]so you went from 1080p to 1440p?ShadowDeathX

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"][QUOTE="Modbetto"]so you went from 1080p to 1440p?Modbetto

When my new monitor gets here, I'm going to do a 3 Over 1 Config. Meaning that I will move the TV somewhere else, elevate the three monitors I have by 15 inches more, and place my new 1440p/120hz monitor below it.

I want the option to use both setups to play games. Playing in Eyefinity is amazing but I also want to try out playing at 120fps. I get both worlds in this option.

Before I was thinking of putting the different montiors in different places, but nah...I would have to buy a new Keyboard and mouse and make room.

Another option was to do something like this; but I would lose the option for Eyefinity gaming.

(Random pic I found on Google Images)

[QUOTE="Modbetto"][QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]

No. I bought a 1440p monitor to add to my Eyefinity setup. My eyefinity rez is 6032 x 1080.ShadowDeathX

When my new monitor gets here, I'm going to do a 3 Over 1 Config. Meaning that I will move the TV somewhere else, elevate the three monitors I have by 15 inches more, and place my new 1440p/120hz monitor below it.

I want the option to use both setups to play games. Playing in Eyefinity is amazing but I also want to try out playing at 120fps. I get both worlds in this option.

Before I was thinking of putting the different montiors in different places, but nah...I would have to buy a new Keyboard and mouse and make room.

Another option was to do something like this; but I would lose the option for Eyefinity gaming.

(Random pic I found on Google Images)

just buy a new monitor now, you will always be waiting for the next thing... plus the what uses 4k? if anything that high quality will make current games look crappy by showing too much inperfections.

i hate waiting for stuff, buy what you need now.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]Another option Monoprice.com is selling a 27" 1440p IPS monitor for $390.Modbetto

If you don't mind customs and gambling than you can fetch one on ebay for around the same or close.

**** why is the cost of internet so cheap there. $30-50 for 30mbits here sad, sad. There is 100mbits+ fios close to here, but it cost an arm for that.

[QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

People are missing the logistics - 4k or Ultra TVs where shown last year at CES as well, now why arent they getting mass produced or taking off? Well 1st of all no one is going to make mainstream 4k stuff for a while so its all going to be upscaled until then, most movies/tv stations have only just upgraded to 1080 they arent going to change again anytime soon, this along with sat and cable companies wont use up more bandwidth. Secondly i think i read somewhere that TVs need to really be over 80" for 4k to become viable as there are really only so many pixels you can have in 1 inch square before it doesnt matter or you see so little difference.

Modbetto

Sharp is already mass producing a 32 inch for 5000USD

Video cards support it

Games support it

Mid-high A/V receivers fully support it (Mine does)

Cable and sat content is already available in europe (where i currently live)

movies will all be streamed with 500mbps internet connection.

http://youtu.be/9fa5AXMUI-o

Im not shure you know what you're taliking about i guess.....

Plus im talking about monitors......NOT TVs.....according to you my 1920x1200 monitor, i'm looking to upgrade from the looks of this thread, shouldnt exist since "there is no content for it."

[QUOTE="Modbetto"]

[QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

People are missing the logistics - 4k or Ultra TVs where shown last year at CES as well, now why arent they getting mass produced or taking off? Well 1st of all no one is going to make mainstream 4k stuff for a while so its all going to be upscaled until then, most movies/tv stations have only just upgraded to 1080 they arent going to change again anytime soon, this along with sat and cable companies wont use up more bandwidth. Secondly i think i read somewhere that TVs need to really be over 80" for 4k to become viable as there are really only so many pixels you can have in 1 inch square before it doesnt matter or you see so little difference.

yachtboy

Sharp is already mass producing a 32 inch for 5000USD

Video cards support it

Games support it

Mid-high A/V receivers fully support it (Mine does)

Cable and sat content is already available in europe (where i currently live)

movies will all be streamed with 500mbps internet connection.

http://youtu.be/9fa5AXMUI-o

Im not shure you know what you're taliking about i guess.....

Plus im talking about monitors......NOT TVs.....according to you my 1920x1200 monitor, i'm looking to upgrade from the looks of this thread, shouldnt exist since "there is no content for it."

4096*2160 = 8,847,360

1920*1080 = 2,073,600

8,847,360/2,073,600 = 4.267

Maths is good. 4k is 4.267 times the pixels of 1080p.

I am not sure you really know what you are talking about.

[QUOTE="yachtboy"][QUOTE="Modbetto"] 4K is viewable right infront of the screen since it's "pixelless".

Sharp is already mass producing a 32 inch for 5000USD

Video cards support it

Games support it

Mid-high A/V receivers fully support it (Mine does)

Cable and sat content is already available in europe (where i currently live)

movies will all be streamed with 500mbps internet connection.

http://youtu.be/9fa5AXMUI-o

Im not shure you know what you're taliking about i guess.....

Plus im talking about monitors......NOT TVs.....according to you my 1920x1200 monitor, i'm looking to upgrade from the looks of this thread, shouldnt exist since "there is no content for it."

kraken2109

[QUOTE="Modbetto"]

[QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

People are missing the logistics - 4k or Ultra TVs where shown last year at CES as well, now why arent they getting mass produced or taking off? Well 1st of all no one is going to make mainstream 4k stuff for a while so its all going to be upscaled until then, most movies/tv stations have only just upgraded to 1080 they arent going to change again anytime soon, this along with sat and cable companies wont use up more bandwidth. Secondly i think i read somewhere that TVs need to really be over 80" for 4k to become viable as there are really only so many pixels you can have in 1 inch square before it doesnt matter or you see so little difference.

yachtboy

Sharp is already mass producing a 32 inch for 5000USD

Video cards support it

Games support it

Mid-high A/V receivers fully support it (Mine does)

Cable and sat content is already available in europe (where i currently live)

movies will all be streamed with 500mbps internet connection.

http://youtu.be/9fa5AXMUI-o

Im not shure you know what you're taliking about i guess.....

Plus im talking about monitors......NOT TVs.....according to you my 1920x1200 monitor, i'm looking to upgrade from the looks of this thread, shouldnt exist since "there is no content for it."

Read... It is good for you...

http://gizmodo.com/5944270/how-4k-tv-works

"At 2160p, 4K UHDTV is DOUBLE the resolution of the current 1080p Full HD standard. So at 3840 x 2160, it's twice as wide, twice as tallwith an 8.3MP image that's quadruple the 2.1MP image found on current HD. Interestingly, the term "4K" actually refers to the horizontal pixel count, even though the industry standard counts along the vertical axis."

Read... It is good for you...

http://gizmodo.com/5944270/how-4k-tv-works

"At 2160p, 4K UHDTV is DOUBLE the resolution of the current 1080p Full HD standard. So at 3840 x 2160, it's twice as wide, twice as tallwith an 8.3MP image that's quadruple the 2.1MP image found on current HD. Interestingly, the term "4K" actually refers to the horizontal pixel count, even though the industry standard counts along the vertical axis."

yachtboy

Nice september 2012 article by the way......don't know if you noticed but it's 2013 now.

And for your information i probably read 8K more than you (sarcasm), since i'm a doctor in Political sciences and International Relations.

I was wrong, I misread a biased story on 4k some time ago and it stuck with me. You are all right.... BTW, idk about you, but when I was reading realist perspectives from political scientists like John Mearsheimer they were much older than a few months...

Let's get back on topic

I was wrong, I misread a biased story on 4k some time ago and it stuck with me. You are all right.... BTW, idk about you, but when I was reading realist perspectives from political scientists like John Mearsheimer they were much older than a few months...

yachtboy

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]

[QUOTE="Modbetto"]

sorry if i ask....your going with 2 1080 and a 1440 screen? or three vertical 1440 screens?Modbetto

When my new monitor gets here, I'm going to do a 3 Over 1 Config. Meaning that I will move the TV somewhere else, elevate the three monitors I have by 15 inches more, and place my new 1440p/120hz monitor below it.

I want the option to use both setups to play games. Playing in Eyefinity is amazing but I also want to try out playing at 120fps. I get both worlds in this option.

Before I was thinking of putting the different montiors in different places, but nah...I would have to buy a new Keyboard and mouse and make room.

Another option was to do something like this; but I would lose the option for Eyefinity gaming.

(Random pic I found on Google Images)

This is a Dell u2711 Eyefinity rig:

...and a much messier desk.

-Byshop