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

[cvaldes]

Ever since I bought a 55" LG C2 OLED television set (4K@120Hz, VRR + HDR10) back in 2020, I don't game anymore on computer monitors. That makes life a little simpler. I use a 27" LG 27UL850W (4K@60Hz, IPS) purchased in 2017 for desktop productivity tasks.

There's a 32" 1440p@165Hz gaming monitor on a secondary gaming PC that gets little use these days. The bedroom also has a 1080p@60Hz television set that's probably ten years old.

One thing for sure, text is far easier to read on 4K computer monitors in HiDPI mode (what Apple calls Retina Display). I refuse to use the 32" 1440p monitor for web surfing, productivity, etc. This is far more noticeable when viewing logographic writing systems (like Japanese, Chinese, etc.) but is still valid for Western alphabets. And my tired old eyes aren't getting younger. Text reading is less joyful on the 4K television set, but I'm okay with that. The LG C2 is for media consumption.

Very pleased with the display choices I have made over the past 10-15 years. My previous PC monitor was a 24" Dell 1920x1200p monitor that gave 13 years of service before it died in 2017. I should have upgraded to 4K a few years earlier. When I finally did, my eyes felt like they had gone to a spa.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Perfectly happy with mine, but it's not 32", nor curved.

If you can live with a flat model

Some of us feel flat screens are superior and for many very basic reasons, viewing angles for one... I tried curved, couldn't stand it. Very irritating.

Good luck finding one outside of Asia though.

Weird. Maybe Sweden is different? Stateside we have an even mix of models.

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 Sidekick Auto-Update & 6 ...

www.gigabyte.com

Those are good!

 

[TheLostSwede]

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.

That's VA, the OP specifically stated IPS.

 

[Vayra86]

Parts of it, I believe, is that most people 1) think that scaling options either don't exist or are still as bad as 10 years ago and 2) think that they absolutely have to play everything at native. I haven't seen anyone in the industry (except Apple quite a while back) address these concerns or include in their marketing slides a mention that things are perfectly fine on all these fronts now, so people keep buying 1440 or 1080 monitors.
Another part is that the market is just smaller than TVs and monitors are overpriced relative to TVs both in low- and high-end.

Nah, its also the fact that scaling destroys the real estate gain. You can't get around that issue.

4K has a PPI that either forces a larger panel, meaning you'd also have to sit further away to have a comfortable experience, which makes the need for scaling higher, so you might effectively really just be having 1440-1080p ish real estate after all.

And if you sit very close to a 4K panel, its likely smaller, and you'll still want to use scaling because you simply can't read text proper otherwise. Or you don't use scaling on a large panel sitting close, and you'll have horrible ergonomics.

1080p was too coarse, but 1440p is really an ideal middle ground for a 100% scaling affair at 27 inch - 34 inch UW. Both do 1440p height. Both are not too hard to drive in games. Its not at all the lack of advertising, heck, 4K was pushed hard since the beginning and 1080p does lose terrain, its just not really beneficial on a desktop setting. And once you're past 110 ish PPI the pixel density is really quite comfortable viewing. No jaggies to speak of, while 4K from that point suffers from diminishing returns. Yes, its slightly more smoothed and sharp, but its very slight, for example with simple text. Much more often though you can't even see the difference.

Another aspect sometimes forgotten is the bandwidth requirement vs display I/O. PCs often want high refresh especially if they're already spending big on monitors; 4K high refresh is not only unattainable in gaming (unless you drop gfx hard; which leaves one to wonder why you'd not rather play at lower res), you also need the latest spec for I/O to get sufficient bandwidth for it. It gets even worse if you also want 10 bit color / HDR. Its much easier doing all of that at 1440p/UW.

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.

Yeah I would certainly not go 3440x1440 with a 3060ti. The 1080 was really not enough for it, and by quite a margin too. I wouldn't even recommend going lower than the 7900XT I have rn.

 

[Sithaer]

Yeah I would certainly not go 3440x1440 with a 3060ti. The 1080 was really not enough for it, and by quite a margin too. I wouldn't even recommend going lower than the 7900XT I have rn.

4070S/Ti S or the ~5070/60 Ti is my target depending on the prices and the performance, thats the highest I'm willing to go even with a new job so ye we will see how that goes later in 2025.
I aso have no issues with using upscaling/DLSS so that does help my case.

 

[AleXXX666]

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!"

That Alienware isn't 4K...

 

[Dr. Dro]

My opinion is that the RTX 4080 is the bare minimum for high-end 4K/120 gaming today. The 7900 XTX will mostly do if you're playing raster-only games and the AMD driver happens to work with whatever game you're trying to run. Otherwise, entire Radeon lineup is summarily disqualified. The 4080 still cannot offer a perfect experience and more often than not you'll be using DLSS in rather unhealthy amounts to match that 120 fps target - no wonder the RTX 4090 outsold the whole bunch by so much. The RTX 50 series can't get here soon enough.

 

[lexluthermiester]

That Alienware isn't 4K...

No, but it's close for an ultra-wide.

 

[lepudruk]

That Alienware isn't 4K...

Dude, read with understanding: I've said I recently switched to 4k 42" TV from that Alienware monitor...

 

[GhostRyder]

That's VA, the OP specifically stated IPS.

My bad you are right, forgot these were not IPS panels.

 

[Dristun]

Nah, its also the fact that scaling destroys the real estate gain. You can't get around that issue.

4K has a PPI that either forces a larger panel, meaning you'd also have to sit further away to have a comfortable experience, which makes the need for scaling higher, so you might effectively really just be having 1440-1080p ish real estate after all.

Huh? You're not really forced to do anything, it's just crisper picture on the screen of the same size. For me that's the whole point. What real estate? Everything on my screen is scaled to look more or less like it did before I switched to 4K from 1080p but now it's just not blurry.

 

[Chrispy_]

That's VA, the OP specifically stated IPS.

Are there any curved IPS screens though?

I though manufacturers gave up on curved IPS because the tightest radius anyone successfully made was LG at 3000R and all of them had woeful backlight bleeding.
IPS just doesn't bend well, whilst VA monitors exist with a very tight bend radius and acceptable uniformity. The uniformity definitely isn't as good as VA flat panels can be, but they're good enough.

 

[Macro Device]

Didn't read the whole thread and since the curvature had been already mentioned I don't have much to add.

I myself own a basic 4K60 display with no fancy stuff going on and it's hard chilling in the back of my huge desk while I'm enjoying 160 FPS gaming on my 1080p display with proper VRR despite colours being worse on the latter.

With the circus method existing and upscalers doing their job pretty well nowadays, I don't see a reason to buy 4K for a gaming-oriented system. Just DSR your way to "fake" 4K and then apply DLSS/FSR/XeSS if you're framerate starved and it already looks almost as great as true 4K but for a lot less cash spent. If you're more concerned about work then yes, smoother fonts and potentially extended real estate are really handy. I'd pick an ultra wide for productivity anyway, allows more optimal space management and sometimes makes additional displays pointless. 1440p, even ultrawide, isn't perfect but 21:9 beats 16:9 in almost anything.

Today is the age of 1440p144 being the highest bandwidth average Joes' GPUs can reasonably utilise. 4K144 becoming as common is possibly not the story of 2020s I'm afraid.

 

[jarablue]

I gave up on monitors. LG TVs are better than most monitors. G4 or C4 for a pc monitor or a S95D will blow away anything or any monitor out there. And those are TVs.

 

[Chrispy_]

Nah, its also the fact that scaling destroys the real estate gain. You can't get around that issue.

Not just the real estate gain, it screws up loads of stuff - mostly application interfaces but even Microsoft can't get the most basic stuff right in their own OS

Here's the desktop at 200% on the left and the ideal 100% (pixel resized) on the right. The 100% on the right is the truth, and anything that doesn't look identical but higher resolution is plain wrong.

• Text is the wrong size
• Kerning is wrong
• Drop shadow has shrunk, reducing legibility of white text on light backgrounds
• Font weight is wrong.

Each of those mistakes is a failure, and there's FOUR of them all compounded into one mega-failure.

Windows DPI scaling is garbage and if you can't see a problem with it then you've never worked on a UI or in graphic design. Whoever was responsible for font scaling at Microsoft is a clueless moron who slapped a bunch of mistakes on top of each other and fudged a whole bunch of stuff rather than actually scaling it by the correct percentage. They clearly didn't think about the untold headaches each fudge would cause UI developers for decades to come, even within Microsoft.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Windows DPI scaling is garbage and if you can't see a problem with it then you've never worked on a UI or in graphic design.

I have. Never bothered me much.

Whoever was responsible for font scaling at Microsoft is a clueless moron who slapped a bunch of mistakes on top of each other and fudged a whole bunch of stuff rather than actually scaling it by the correct percentage.

That's a much more difficult thing than you might imagine. Remember, the Windows UI has to remain compatible with programs and apps that were not written with current technology in mind and do not(can not) utilize modern scaling. Backward compatibility is very important and with that come sacrifices. We get one or the other, not both.

It sucks but it the reality we have and I'll take compatibility over scaling perfection all day, every day.

 

[Kapone33]

My FV43U is 4K 144hz and i love it. There is no issue with modern hardware running 4K native at High settings.

 

[lexluthermiester]

My FV43U is 4K 144hz and i love it. There is no issue with modern hardware running 4K native at High settings.

Just the one? I thought you had two displays, or am I thinking of someone else?

 

[Kapone33]

Just the one? I thought you had two displays, or am I thinking of someone else?

Probably my other Display is a 55" 4K TV that supports 120Hz so it is great for Gaming as well. Batocera is great for emulation.

 

[Chrispy_]

Remember, the Windows UI has to remain compatible with programs and apps that were not written with current technology in mind and do not(can not) utilize modern scaling. Backward compatibility is very important and with that come sacrifices. We get one or the other, not both.

If the scaling was done properly (ie, accurately and proportionately), backwards compatibility wouldn't be an issue at all - it would AUTOMATICALLY be 100% backwards compatible.

It's the four mistakes I just highlighted that cause all these backwards-compatibility woes, and they are needless.

Look at my screenshot. The layout and size and number of lines changes FOR NO REASON.

A 1-pixel wide line at 100% should be 2 pixels wide at 200%
A 3-pixel wide space should be 6 pixels of space at 200%.

It's not rocket science; stuff doesn't fit and applications look like garbage because Microsoft can't do math properly and tries to fit an object scaled up to 213.5% into a space that's been scaled up to 200%. They kludged it and that's why we're even having this discussion in the first place. Integer scaling factors should always be perfect, anything that was one pixel wide is now two. Things get complicated at non-integer scaling because 150% of 1 pixel wide is 1.5 pixels. Well I'm sorry to accuse Microsoft of screwing up again, but they have - we've had a way of sampling points that don't line up with pixels since 1972 and it's been extremely common in just about every game and CAD application for close to 25 years now. Basic MSAA would have solved scaling properly but did Microsoft do that? No, they just fudged it, incorrectly, and caused a bucketload of problems with old applications (and plenty of modern ones that still use raster-based interfaces).

 

[lexluthermiester]

If the scaling was done properly (ie, accurately and proportionately), backwards compatibility wouldn't be an issue at all - it would AUTOMATICALLY be 100% backwards compatible.

While that may seem reasonable, it doesn't work that way, programmatically.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Are there any curved IPS screens though?

I though manufacturers gave up on curved IPS because the tightest radius anyone successfully made was LG at 3000R and all of them had woeful backlight bleeding.
IPS just doesn't bend well, whilst VA monitors exist with a very tight bend radius and acceptable uniformity. The uniformity definitely isn't as good as VA flat panels can be, but they're good enough.

There are some rare specimens out there, like this Dell and LG still makes some panels, but none appear to be 4K resolution.

Dell UltraSharp 40 Curved Thunderbolt™ Hub Monitor - U4025QW | Dell USA

Shop the UltraSharp 40 Curved Thunderbolt Hub Monitor - U4025QW featuring a stunning 5K display with a 120Hz refresh rate.

www.dell.com

 

[Caring1]

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.

Umm, no, that may be the case for some, but my eye sight is perfect for reading and up close, I only use glasses to see slightly better long distance.

 

[Chrispy_]

There are some rare specimens out there, like this Dell and LG still makes some panels, but none appear to be 4K resolution.

Dell UltraSharp 40 Curved Thunderbolt™ Hub Monitor - U4025QW | Dell USA

Shop the UltraSharp 40 Curved Thunderbolt Hub Monitor - U4025QW featuring a stunning 5K display with a 120Hz refresh rate.

www.dell.com

2500R; better than I remember but still a very shallow curve by VA and OLED standards.

While that may seem reasonable, it doesn't work that way, programmatically.

Yeah, it doesn't work that way but it should, is the exact point I'm making.

Games have managed UI scaling and resolution scaling for decades. Stuff doesn't move around in games when you change resolution because unlike windows it scales everything proportionally by rendering the intent as a vector and then mapping that intent to pixels proportionately. With Windows 8 Microsoft made a huge effort to redesign everything that used to be raster as a vector explicitly for this reason but they stopped short of doing it for text, instead relying on the janky old kludge of 1990's era TrueType font weights with raster features - which is extra dumb because TTFs are vector based fonts anyway. Microsoft could scale them proportionally but they don't, as a band-aid for Windows Vista and 7 which were half-baked, mostly-raster systems. We're still living with those band-aids when they should have been ripped clean off years ago.

Windows' old janky kludges are the "programmatically" that are the problem. You understand there's a problem, I understand there's a problem, even Microsoft understands there's a problem, but they haven't done anything about it - we're just limping on with Windows scaling issues well into our second decade of affordable consumer HighDPI displays with the broken old system that iOS, Android, and Linux have already fixed.

Umm, no, that may be the case for some, but my eye sight is perfect for reading and up close, I only use glasses to see slightly better long distance.

Age-related long-sightedness is a natural part of aging called presbyopia.
Google it, you're just not old enough for it to have caught up with you yet, or you are short-sighted (not age-related) more than your presbyopia, so the net result is still short-sighted.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Umm, no, that may be the case for some, but my eye sight is perfect for reading and up close, I only use glasses to see slightly better long distance.

I have astigmatism, so up close is no problem, but I'm starting to have issues now at medium distance, whereas far away is fine with my current glasses. I've had to get a new pair of glasses every 2-3 years due to my astigmatism changing and now I guess some age related issues will start to happen as well...

Age-related long-sightedness is a natural part of aging called presbyopia.
Google it, you're just not old enough for it to have caught up with you yet, or you are short-sighted (not age-related) more than your presbyopia, so the net result is still short-sighted.

It affects people differently though and not everyone gets it, or at least not at the same age. I actually have to hold small print closer than before and my near-sightedness is so slight I was questioned by an optician as to why I need glasses...
What I do notice though is that it's getting harder to read in low light as well as really tiny print, even when up close, especially when not well illuminated.

However, so far, I'm still at 125% scaling on my 27" 4K monitor.