It's nearly 2025 and the selection of 4K monitors remains abysmal. Let's discuss this sad state of affairs.

[sneekypeet]

96dpi is the golden standard for desktop monitors if you want to avoid scaling, which means 46" at 4K resolution. That makes sense when you think about it, because it's just four 23" 1080p displays and 23" is a great size for a 1080p desktop monitor.

32" is a natural fit for 1440p (30.5" would be ideal but they've stopped making that size, so 32" is the closest you'll get at 93dpi instead of 96dpi)

I've bought several (about 40-50) 32" 4K screens at work for people of various ages and eyesight and nobody, not even the perfect-vision young interns like using 32" 4K screens without scaling, so scaling is just a wart on the experience that you have to learn to live with unless you do go for a larger display, which then runs into the problem of extreme viewing angles and focal-length variance - if you have a 46" TV with the centre at arms length, the edges are significantly further than arms length away from your eyes.

In case you're wondering where 96dpi comes from, it's calculated from systems and data that existed long before most of us were born - and is based on the correct size of print to read comfortably with 20/20 vision (corrected with glasses or otherwise) at arms length. Publishers and printers worked out what size font to use based purely on human feedback from mass population and that's why most books use the same size font regardless of what size the pages are. Microsoft simply translated the widely-accepted gold standard for font size at specific viewing distances and translated them to screen distance and pixels per inch - that's why we arrive at 96dpi for 100% scaling.

You can eschew this 96dpi if you sit closer or further than ergonomically recommended from your display, but the ergonomics of the eyeball are that your muscles are most relaxed for things at arms length. That's not coincidence, that's hundreds of millions of years of evolution from the first tool-wielding apes - so unless you want to fight your own eyeballs the recommendation for a long-term display is to view 96dpi at arms length.

As you get older, the closer things are, the harder they are to focus on, at least for me.

 

[Chrispy_]

As you get older, the closer things are, the harder they are to focus on, at least for me.

That's typical for almost everyone. As your lens gets stiffer with age and your eye muscles get weaker, you get long-sighted.
Eyestrain is just like bad posture; it's not something you worry about when you're young but you're causing damage that you'll pay for later in life.

 

[Eskimonster]

Meh,, i´m more then happy with 1080p lol. I wonder how many bother using 4k as monitor.

 

[Onasi]

the recommendation for a long-term display is to view 96dpi at arms length.

There is slight variation on this, though. Arms length, arms length plus fist, arms length plus outstretched palm are all options that I’ve hears of and seen implemented. Suppose varies on the size of the monitor. Well, that and everyone having different length arms.

 

[Gasaraki]

I just wonder about support for anything gaming. Are you doomed to have black blocks on either side, or do you mod titles for said resolution? I seriously don't know, asking to be enlightened.

I have 2x 3440x1440 monitors one on top of the other. Most new games support ultra-wide resolutions and if they don't, I run the games at 2560x1440 with scaling done by the graphics card. Since my ultrawide is an QD-OLED, the "black bars" on the side just disappears. It's like running a 27" 2560x1440 monitor at that time.

 

[AleXXX666]

I have six simple criteria for a new monitor:

• 4K
• 32"
• > 60Hz
• 1800R curvature
• USB-C display connectivity (no need for monitor to be powered over this link, or to offer PD)
• sane price

and yet I cannot find a single display on the market that satisfies all of them. So far the two (!) I've narrowed it down to are:

• MSI MPG 321CURX: 4.5/6 because it's 1700R not 1800R, and as a "gaming" monitor will be stupidly overpriced - but it also doesn't seem to be available to buy, despite being announced 2 months ago
• Dell S3221QS(A): 4/6 because 60Hz and no USB-C; if Dell were to release a USB-C version for not too much more moola, I would probably be willing to bite

What really gets me is the lack of refresh rates in general for 4K. For 1080p and 1440p we have a multitude of 75Hz and 90Hz panels that give a nice range of options for buyers, but for 4K there's just a barren wasteland between 60Hz and 120Hz, and this doesn't seem to have improved since 4K monitors first came on the scene half a decade ago. Sure you can get up to 240Hz 4K panels now, but that's just bigger numbers for the sake of bigger numbers, not something actually useful to consumers. There also seems to be a push towards 1000R monitors in the "gaming" space which is also totally nonsensical to me... you aren't supposed to have your face plastered against the screen!

Thoughts? Prayers? Is the display industry becoming as feature bankrupt as every other PC segment, or is this just a case of old man yells at sky?

well if you SO NEED 4K USB-C for you fancy iFruit lappie... https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/del...3qe/apd/210-bdph/monitors-monitor-accessories
otherwise, I don't see the need for USB-C connector, NORMAL laptops and desktop video outputs prone to stay away from this "fancy" stupidity, you don't need a monitor for tablet/smartphone, don't you?

 

[lexluthermiester]

You would assume that until actual desktop usage at 100% scale. IMHO you have to bump up scaling on apps and desktop to where it looks 1440-1080p anyways.

The scaling issues I'm talking about are not with Windows. App scaling doesn't work well. It's much easier to go back to 1080p.

Just my 2 cents, but I would go 32" as the minimum, and ponder a way to slide back from the desk a bit. Or, a deeper desk in general.

Neither of those options work well in my situation.

120 is twice as much as 60. Pretty bad for 4K when I'm struggling for 60 with a GPU that is around #13 of Fastest GPU currently available.

That's another reason many people are staying with 1080p.

As you get older, the closer things are, the harder they are to focus on, at least for me.

I'm feeling some of that, but I use reading glasses.

I have 2x 3440x1440 monitors one on top of the other. Most new games support ultra-wide resolutions and if they don't, I run the games at 2560x1440 with scaling done by the graphics card. Since my ultrawide is an QD-OLED, the "black bars" on the side just disappears. It's like running a 27" 2560x1440 monitor at that time.

That's a nice setup.

 

[Wirko]

The scaling issues I'm talking about are not with Windows. App scaling doesn't work well.

True. I've set 125% scaling everywhere since ever. Scaling in Windows UI, including built-in apps, worked very well even in XP. Probably in 2000 and 98 too but my memory is a little myopic here. We also had candies like the ability to set icon size in pixels independently of everything else. That's science fiction in 2024.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

I just use a TV. It is only 4K/60 but its smooth..

I have a Samsung 4K 60 monitor connected to the same system that has 11 24H2. It only supports 8 BPC, IIRC.
I likely get better gradients from a 1080p 60 CCFL LCD TV built in the very-early-2010s, LOL.

I could od 4K60 with a 1080ti or a 2080.

I could with Navi10 as well with Halo MCC. (RX 5600 XT) It's pretty much games after that, where I struggle with a GPU that's much better than that, at 1440p.
Yeah, not that long ago, it seemed, an RX 5600 XT could do 4K @ 60 FPS.

Now, I'm like, "I'm not going for anything less than an RX 6750 XT!" Because now it struggles some, at 1440p.

 

[Assimilator]

well if you SO NEED 4K USB-C for you fancy iFruit lappie... https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/del...3qe/apd/210-bdph/monitors-monitor-accessories
otherwise, I don't see the need for USB-C connector, NORMAL laptops and desktop video outputs prone to stay away from this "fancy" stupidity, you don't need a monitor for tablet/smartphone, don't you?

USB-C is the future of connectivity and if I'm going to lay down hundreds of pounds on a new monitor, I want it to be somewhat future-proof.

And no, I don't own Apple products.

 

[Chrispy_]

There is slight variation on this, though. Arms length, arms length plus fist, arms length plus outstretched palm are all options that I’ve hears of and seen implemented. Suppose varies on the size of the monitor. Well, that and everyone having different length arms.

It's an approximate value, given that different people have a pretty wide range of different heights and proportions anyway.

Also, the natural, relaxed focal distance of your eye isn't an exact value - the graph of muscle engagement to focal distance will be an inverted parabola with the absolutely relaxed focus at roughly arms length, but likely several inches either side of that that require near-zero effort for all muscles involved.

Ergonomics guides are just that - only guides. Everyone is different and if the recommendations don't work for an individual, that's okay. When it comes to eyestrain, all the matters for long-term usage is that your eyes are relaxed, so just do what feels comfortable. If you ever catch yourself leaning in to your screen or consciously catch yourself trying to focus, then it's probably too small.

USB-C is the future of connectivity and if I'm going to lay down hundreds of pounds on a new monitor, I want it to be somewhat future-proof.

USB-C is just a physical connector, the standard is DisplayPort and even if the physical DisplayPort standard becomes obsolete in the future, the protocol remains unchanged so USB-C isn't a future-proofing advantage, it's just an additional constraint that's limiting your choice of screens right now.

What I'm basically saying is that if displayport becomes obsolete, USB-C monitors are just as f*cked as DisplayPort monitors, making USB-C connectivity a limitation and an expense to you right now, not a benefit. USB-C to DP cables have been around for as long as DisplayPort Alt mode, and they're dramatically cheaper than paying a £100+ premium for a monitor with a USB-C input

 

[Sithaer]

16:9 curved I think, especially at higher display res/diagonal, is getting pretty large pretty quickly. The availability is a lot better if you remove the curve, isn't it? It also opens up TVs.

Whereas a 34 inch UW 21:9 curved relatively takes less space, but you lose some height. I'm getting the idea the market slowly is settling on that difference, and applies curvature more focused in the places where it sells best.

Also in a desktop setting I think anything larger than 27 inch 'in height' (34 inch UW is the same height) is just about the top end of what a neck wants to move around for, vertically. 32 inch 16:9 is quite a stretch on the vertical plane sitting in close proximity. And if you're not sitting in close proximity, you can just get a TV. The curve also doesn't help the height issue, because its not curved top to bottom The additional height and more angled view on it also adds to geometrical warping.

34" 3440x1440 is also the only option I'm considering as a possible upgrade in the future since I'm a fan of the UW aspect ever since 2019. 'my 2560x1080 is a dead path, no worthy upgrades there from my current one'
Slightly curved or not is fine with me same with the refresh rate it can be whatever, my only big concern is driving that thing for years with the same ~mid range GPU cause I aint in the market for anything higher up. 'those are already stupid expensive where I live..'
Dunno, I guess once I find a proper full time job and start saving up I will come back to this idea and check whats on the market. 'along with a new GPU ofc..'
Luckily I have plenty of desk space so thats a non issue.

 

[Assimilator]

USB-C to DP cables have been around for as long as DisplayPort Alt mode, and they're dramatically cheaper than paying a £100+ premium for a monitor with a USB-C input

Problem is finding one that actually works. I know, you're gonna say "how is it possible to build a USB-C-to-DP cable/adapter that doesn't do the one job it is designed to?" and I don't have a good answer for you; I can however personally attest that this is, unfortunately, A Thing.

 

[Chomiq]

16:9 curve is your problem:

Without USB-C you have 13 curved screens matching your criteria.

 

[AleXXX666]

Problem is finding one that actually works. I know, you're gonna say "how is it possible to build a USB-C-to-DP cable/adapter that doesn't do the one job it is designed to?" and I don't have a good answer for you; I can however personally attest that this is, unfortunately, A Thing.

have bought one from Aliex**** and it worked with iFruitbook and other Windows-book without a problem. Monitor was 2K 144 Hz.

 

[Chrispy_]

Problem is finding one that actually works. I know, you're gonna say "how is it possible to build a USB-C-to-DP cable/adapter that doesn't do the one job it is designed to?" and I don't have a good answer for you; I can however personally attest that this is, unfortunately, A Thing.

Same issues as with USB data speeds most likely. USB-C video is either DisplayPort Alt-mode 1.2, or 1.4, depending on the quality of the adapter and cable, which without enough bandwidth for 4K60 also requires both ends to support DSC and other optional features of DisplayPort if you want anything more than the most basic 4K60 8-bit, no audio, no anything else.


The fact that Displayport can be shoehorned into USB-C doesn't mean that USB-C is the preferred, or likely future connector; Compromises to Displayport along with a non-trivial number of caveats are already being made, and since you want 4K > 60Hz you're already well outside the norm that the bulk of cables, adapters, and laptops are designed and tested for. Just because the marketing goons put it on the box doesn't mean it's going to work flawlessly.

I'm not here to defend DisplayPort or USB-C, but's it not a black-and-white issue, even with the most standard DisplayPort cable, since you have max bandwidth, max length limitations, and both GPU and display need to handshake and agree on the protocol, res, (including porches) bit-depth, and optional features like DSC, HDCP, audio passthrough etc. When you want to add the complexity of shoehorning that into USB-C whilst also still supporting USB functionality on that cable, you're never going to get guaranteed plug & play compatibility, no matter what it says on the box.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Perfectly happy with mine, but it's not 32", nor curved.
It does the rest though.
Good luck finding one outside of Asia though.

If you can live with a flat model, Acer has these models.

Acer Predator X32Q FS with 32" 4K IPS Panel, 150Hz and 1152-zone Mini LED Backlight - TFTCentral

Share this contentA new display from Acer has appeared on Chinese retailer Taobao’s website recently. The X32Q FS display sits in Acer’s popular Predator gaming line-up. It’s a 32″ sized....[click link for more]

tftcentral.co.uk

31.5" Acer Predator XB323K RV - Specifications

Specifications of Acer Predator XB323K RV. Display: 31.5 in, AHVA IPS, Direct LED, 3840 x 2160 pixels, Viewing angles (H/V): 178 ° / 178 °, Brightness: 400 cd/m², Static contrast: 1000 : 1, Dynamic contrast: 100000000 : 1, Refresh rate: 48 Hz - 160 Hz, Weight: 5.8 kg.

www.displayspecifications.com

Gigabyte also has this one, again flat.

M32U Gaming Monitor Key Features | Monitor - GIGABYTE Global

Features Multi-Platform built-in KVM SS IPS panel with 1ms MPRT & 144Hz 10-bit color with HDR400 Black Equalizer & Aim Stabilizer Sync GameAssist & OSD Side...

www.gigabyte.com

Problem is finding one that actually works. I know, you're gonna say "how is it possible to build a USB-C-to-DP cable/adapter that doesn't do the one job it is designed to?" and I don't have a good answer for you; I can however personally attest that this is, unfortunately, A Thing.

Monitors that have USB-C display connectivity comes with one that works and to simplify things for you, all 10 Gbps and up cables work, but I'd suggest going with a 20 Gbps cable if you want to do data over the same cable.

 

[lepudruk]

Anything Alienware gets black-holed in my brain because there's no fucking way I'm ever buying that overpriced rubbish. Also it looks to be basically identical to the MSI MPG 321CURX I already mentioned and while I expect MSI to shaft consumers on that model, there's no world in which they do it as much as Alienware. God I despise Alienware.

As a happy owner of Alienware AW3423DWF I honestly don't know what are you talking about. If it wasn't that I've been gifted a new Philips 42OLED809 4k TV, I most probably been still using Alienware because it was simply great. However once you start playing with full Ambilight there is no turning back..

On a sidenote: switching to 4k gaming hurts.. "A kingdom (and a horse) for 5090!"

 

[TheLostSwede]

Same issues as with USB data speeds most likely. USB-C video is either DisplayPort Alt-mode 1.2, or 1.4, depending on the quality of the adapter and cable, which without enough bandwidth for 4K60 also requires both ends to support DSC and other optional features of DisplayPort if you want anything more than the most basic 4K60 8-bit, no audio, no anything else.


The fact that Displayport can be shoehorned into USB-C doesn't mean that USB-C is the preferred, or likely future connector; Compromises to Displayport along with a non-trivial number of caveats are already being made, and since you want 4K > 60Hz you're already well outside the norm that the bulk of cables, adapters, and laptops are designed and tested for. Just because the marketing goons put it on the box doesn't mean it's going to work flawlessly.

I'm not here to defend DisplayPort or USB-C, but's it not a black-and-white issue, even with the most standard DisplayPort cable, since you have max bandwidth, max length limitations, and both GPU and display need to handshake and agree on the protocol, res, (including porches) bit-depth, and optional features like DSC, HDCP, audio passthrough etc. When you want to add the complexity of shoehorning that into USB-C whilst also still supporting USB functionality on that cable, you're never going to get guaranteed plug & play compatibility, no matter what it says on the box.

I think you misunderstand how DP over USB-C works. It's not shoehorned, it's using Alt mode, which means the second pair of data pins are used for DP and the primary pair for USB 3.x, or all four pairs of data pins are used for DP, with USB 2.0 still being available for data.
Any 20 Gbps cable can do 4K 144 Hz in DP Alt mode, since it's DP 1.4, but it obviously requires DSC to be supported.
That said, I'm not aware of any monitors that do anything higher of USB-C as of today and you'd also need a 40 or 80 Gbps cable to go higher.
This is the same as for DP cables though, as they have a data rate, although the DP standards uses various HBR modes instead of putting the actual throughput numbers on the cables.
So there's actually zero difference here if you use a DP cable or a USB-C cable, assuming all you're looking for is getting a display signal from your computer to a display.
Yes, you're correct that you might not get USB 3.x speeds on that same cable, but that's the only trade-off.

With USB4, assuming we get USB4 monitors, the DP is tunneled and it makes the entire thing a bit simpler, even though similar limitations apply, there's less need to think about what goes with what, since the tunneling will handle that automagically and more dynamically compared to USB 3.x. This is assuming you have a USB4 chip in the monitor, something like VLI VL830/VL832 would do the trick, even though it doesn't do PCIe or onwards USB4.
However, until things move over to USB4, it'll remain a bit messy, but it's not nearly as bad as you're making it out to be.

 

[Code3]

Hello, I hope to help by sharing my experience with this https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/acer/predator-x32-fpbmiiiiphuzx which has become my new monitor for 6 months and since then I have seen a doubling of fps thanks to being able to disable vsync in games configured on 120Hz a remarkable less effort in reading for the eyes and an important fidelity of colors also thanks to the profile of rtings, After months of comparisons this even if niche seemed to me the right compromise between expense and performance as the lacking qualities in general are the scams related to HDR certification Local Dimming and VRR , it suffers from the usual problems of LEDs despite being an IPS panel, but for me it was not a problem as I think that an OLED for PC monitors is not a good choice for maximum life, burn in, heat emitted and cost for this is better to have an OLED TV I have had an LG OLED C3 for 2 years and it's fantastic nothing to say.
In fact, having a c4 as the main monitor given the support at 144hz would be great if you have space and want an oled as a main monitor impeccable in every aspect including cost, but I'm not a big fan of curves so I can invite you if you haven't already done so to sift through rtings to find what you like best

 

[Chrispy_]

I think you misunderstand how DP over USB-C works. It's not shoehorned, it's using Alt mode, which means the second pair of data pins are used for DP and the primary pair for USB 3.x, or all four pairs of data pins are used for DP, with USB 2.0 still being available for data.
Any 20 Gbps cable can do 4K 144 Hz in DP Alt mode, since it's DP 1.4, but it obviously requires DSC to be supported.
That said, I'm not aware of any monitors that do anything higher of USB-C as of today and you'd also need a 40 or 80 Gbps cable to go higher.
This is the same as for DP cables though, as they have a data rate, although the DP standards uses various HBR modes instead of putting the actual throughput numbers on the cables.
So there's actually zero difference here if you use a DP cable or a USB-C cable, assuming all you're looking for is getting a display signal from your computer to a display.
Yes, you're correct that you might not get USB 3.x speeds on that same cable, but that's the only trade-off.

With USB4, assuming we get USB4 monitors, the DP is tunneled and it makes the entire thing a bit simpler, even though similar limitations apply, there's less need to think about what goes with what, since the tunneling will handle that automagically and more dynamically compared to USB 3.x. This is assuming you have a USB4 chip in the monitor, something like VLI VL830/VL832 would do the trick, even though it doesn't do PCIe or onwards USB4.
However, until things move over to USB4, it'll remain a bit messy, but it's not nearly as bad as you're making it out to be.

View attachment 368879

Ah okay, so it's not quite what I thought, but still a mess and USB4 monitors are likely not going to be available for a while, and unlikely to be launched at the affordable end of the spectrum first?

 

[TheLostSwede]

Ah okay, so it's not quite what I thought, but still a mess and USB4 monitors are likely not going to be available for a while, and unlikely to be launched at the affordable end of the spectrum first?

Well, that specific VLI USB4 solution doesn't really add a lot of cost, since it's only USB4 input, which makes it a fairly cost effective solution for something like a monitor. I would guesstimate that it won't add more than $20 to the MSRP of a monitor if it swapped out the equivalent USB 3.x parts.
However, so far, I have seen no indications of any kind of USB4 monitor.
Realtek has a USB4 hub as well, but that requires another chip to do the display part, which adds a lot more cost, comparatively speaking, but then you also gain USB4 outputs.

Realtek Demos First USB4 Hub Controller at Computex 2023

So far it has been very quiet on the market when it comes to USB4 hubs, with most products being based on Intel Thunderbolt hardware costing Thunderbolt money. Realtek was demoing its RTS5490 "hub router controller" at Computex and it's as far as we're aware, the first USB4 hub IC that has been...

www.techpowerup.com

The obvious advantage of USB4 is that it's compatible with Thunderbolt 3+ which means a lot of current devices could take advantage of it as well.

 

[chrcoluk]

What I'm basically saying is that if displayport becomes obsolete, USB-C monitors are just as f*cked as DisplayPort monitors, making USB-C connectivity a limitation and an expense to you right now, not a benefit. USB-C to DP cables have been around for as long as DisplayPort Alt mode, and they're dramatically cheaper than paying a £100+ premium for a monitor with a USB-C input

This is a good point, I still use my dell 2209WA in the other room, this has no HDMI or DP, but I simply purchased a DVI to HDMI cable and boom obsolescence gone. (what a display it kick started IPS in consumer space.)

 

[GhostRyder]

I think the only ones close to what you are searching for right now are MSI based.

MSI G321CU 32 Inch UHD Curved Gaming Monitor - 1500R 3840 x 2160 VA Panel, 144Hz / 1ms, FreeSync

MAG321CUP​

They are the older version of the one you listed and with a slightly less curvature but I see them listed as available.

I know its not the right curvature (1500R), but it does have everything else and I have seen them going in the range of 300-500 at least around here.

No one seems to want to invest much into Type-C input which is kind of weird because its a pretty nice easy connector. As for the refresh rate part, it maybe because they are making most of these for gamers who really want the numbers everyone sees posted all the time I guess. 4k is still kind of viewed as a premium option.

 

[Chrispy_]

I would guesstimate that it won't add more than $20 to the MSRP of a monitor if it swapped out the equivalent USB 3.x parts.

That's optimism for you

Since USB4 monitors don't really exist yet, you can bet that the first company to add it will charge silly money, like Apple charging $100 for an extra 128GB of NAND or Nvidia charging $100 for another 8GB of GDDR6.

"What are you going to do, buy from the competi... oh wait, there is no competition!"