Feeds

back to article Samsung, Chipzilla in 4K monitor price cut pact

Intel and Samsung have created a “collaboration” to help the latter company slice the price of 4K monitors. In a pre-Computex briefing call Lisa Graff, Chipzilla's PC Client Group veep and general manager of the Desktop Client Platforms Group opined that PC buyers are aware of 4K but that monitor costs are so high they're …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

Size matters...

...not ultra high DPI.

Few folk can work at distances from a monitor where the current DPI is terribly noticeable, certainly not for any length of time. Hence in my humble opinion the really useful market for 4k monitors in the 30" (or a bit more) where having in effect 4 x 15" HD monitors patched together is going to give you useful space for images, text, etc.

3
7
Bronze badge

Re: Size matters...

DPI does matter.

Particularly working with a lot of text, and imaging (photographers, designers etc). Current 1080p displays, even at sub-24inch are absolutely terrible and a massive backward step from where we were with CRT.

Then they go and start packing in outrageous DPI's on mobile phone displays, like anyone actually uses those for work?

IMO, 4K monitors are not good enough and have taken FAR too long to get this far. It's not like we haven't had the technology or ability to mass produce it cheaply for the past 5 years. Pure price fixing by the panel manufacturers, and this article points quite clearly to that.

7
2
Silver badge

Re: Greg D

I find that I work at around 60cm from my monitor, so for a 24" HD monitor that is about 0.5mm per pixel. According to Wikipedia the limit of human eye resolution is about 0.21mm at that distance, so I would hardly call that "terrible" resolution.

However, I heartily agree with you that modern monitors are piss-poor and have worse capabilities than ~2002 CRT devices. So yes, 4k is welcome and long overdue, but I still would argue that most folk (OK, those of my age range) will not be working close enough with comfort to benefit so much from the "retina" style DPI.

2
1
Silver badge

4K screen prices are already dropping

I got an email this weekend with an offer on a 40" Samsung 4K screen for under a grand, puts it in the same ball park as a 30" 2560x1600 screen. Perhaps still a little high but now at a point where I might be tempted. 40" is perhaps a little large to have on the desk.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: 4K screen prices are already dropping

Having tried it in the past, 40" is waaaay too big for desktop use. I find 30" is the comfortable limit. Nowdays I have a pair of 22" 3840x2400 monitors on my desk (separate VMs), as by far the best compromise available.

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: 4K screen prices are already dropping

> I have a pair of 22" 3840x2400 monitors on my desk

want, Want, WANT

Where do you get these types of displays?

I use a 27" 2560x1440 at the moment, 22" would be a bit small, I'd need to have it closer so would need reading glasses. 40" is probably too large, I'd need to have the screen a lot further away. The 32" inch display on the kids PC (ok HD TV) seems fine.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: 4K screen prices are already dropping

> I have a pair of 22" 3840x2400 monitors on my desk

Damn, there goes my "graphics cards for gaming" budget. To run that at 60 fps on gaming is no cheap feat. That's over 8 megapixels. Does it run anything beyond DisplayPort, as in, does it take HDMI?

0
0
Silver badge

In the end,

it doesn't matter if Samsung's competitors also do well out of the deal. All that matters is if Samsung and Intel do better out of having the deal than from not having the deal. Business is about making money, not hamstringing oneself so spite the 'competition'. Samsung probably knows this.

3
0

So the takeaway from this is..

..don't buy one of these monitors now as we're expecting to slash the price in half? Which is a handy news article as I was considering one for photo-editing (though the 24" 1080p IPS panel I have is still pretty...well...pretty when it comes to that).

0
0

4k

For photography work, current screen resolutions are pretty underwhelming. 20 - 24" 4K monitor should prove a big step forward.

4
0

laptops

any chance to get half of the resolution as a standard for laptops ?

I keep hearing about HD or higher resolution tablets but would be really happy to find a decent resolution 15 inch laptop that does not require the sale of a first born son. The only place I have seen 1080 laptops consistently is at system76. Too bad their shipping cost to Japan makes it too expensive.

1
0
Bronze badge

Not convinced

I have a pair of 2560 x 1440 monitors. If I use a magnifying glass, I can make out individual pixels. If I don't, I can't. I'm not convinced that 4K would make a noticeable difference, and I'm absolutely certain that it would mean reduced fps in my video games.

0
1

WQHD

Good news, as I have been watching (and putting off) getting a WQHD (2560x1440) monitor thinking 4K displays should be getting cheaper soon. I can wait a little longer and I hope they are serious about a true 4K monitor (4096 x 2160) instead of the "virtual" 4K (UHD) 3840 x 2160 units shipping now.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

"Graff said cheaper 4K monitors will mean users whose phones start to include 4K cameras will consider new PCs to display their newly-captured images can be seen in all their glory."

Erm, rly? Our 4k cameraphones won't just plug in to or 4k tellies? Chipzilla's great strategy if to expect me to carry a workstation around with me as an interface? Nifty!

:D))))))))))))))))))))))))) <--can't tell if I'm supposed to be laughing hysterically or morbidly obese. probably both.

0
1
Silver badge

Driving PC demand

The idea that it will drive demand because people take 4K pictures is laughable. Professional/avid amateur photographers, sure. People taking 4K selfies or vacation photos with their iPhone or GS? Yeah, right!

I will be forced to finally upgrade my nearly six year old Q9400 based PC when I can buy a quality 32" 4K monitor/TV at a reasonable price. But I'll probably just toss in a $70 graphics card, since I can't see any reason why I should care about upgrading the rest of the system. Sometimes 8GB is tight, and that's as high I can go with the 945G chipset, but that's because Firefox sucks, not because I actually need more than 8GB.

Sorry Intel, but the idea that you'll sell Broadwell based PCs because of 4K support is a huge stretch.

0
0
Silver badge

Quiet you!

I'd really like decently high resolution monitors on my computers, and if Intel are willing to bankroll Samsung to bring the price down to an affordable level I'm happy to let them think it'll mean buying better Intelgrated, rather than a better GPU.

Sssh!

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Quiet you!

It wouldn't matter if Intel is bankrolling it, the big TV makers are all pushing to 4K for several reasons. One, because it is actually more expensive to make the large pixels necessary for "only" 2K once you exceed 60" or so. But far more importantly, because they think it will drive upgrades of TVs as people see their old HD sets as obsolete. It won't, of course, 4K is 3D part deux, but in a couple years 4K will be a "for free" feature in TVs, just like 1080p displays went from a premium feature to something included even in all but the very lowest end TVs.

Of course we paid for that by Panasonic dropping plasma, which was a heavy price to pay...

1
0
This topic is closed for new posts.