• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Huawei Readies Unorthodox 3:2 Aspect-Ratio 32-inch Monitor with 4.5K Resolution

Joined
Nov 23, 2020
Messages
543 (0.37/day)
Location
Not Chicago, Illinois
System Name Desktop-TJ84TBK
Processor Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard Asus ROG Strix B350-F Gaming
Cooling ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 120mm, Noctua NF-F12
Memory B-Die 2x8GB 3200 CL14, Vengeance LPX 2x8GB 3200 CL16, OC'd to 3333 MT/s C16-16-16-32 tRC 48
Video Card(s) PNY GTX 690
Storage Crucial MX500 1TB, MX500 500GB, WD Blue 1TB, WD Black 2TB, WD Caviar Green 3TB, Intel Optane 16GB
Display(s) Sceptre M25 1080p200, ASUS 1080p74, Apple Studio Display M7649 17"
Case Rosewill CRUISER Black Gaming
Audio Device(s) SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Seasonic FOCUS GM-750
Mouse Kensington K72369
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow Ultimate 2013
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit, macOS 11.7.8
Benchmark Scores are good
I love it.
I can keep my 16:9 1080p60 monitor as secondary for YouTube/movies, etc., and this monitor (or similar) can be main monitor for project work (Mario Bros. Wii hack, Hackintoshing setup, etc.)
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
3,562 (2.48/day)
Location
Slovenia
Processor i5-6600K
Motherboard Asus Z170A
Cooling some cheap Cooler Master Hyper 103 or similar
Memory 16GB DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) IGP
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250GB
Display(s) 2x Oldell 24" 1920x1200
Case Bitfenix Nova white windowless non-mesh
Audio Device(s) E-mu 1212m PCI
Power Supply Seasonic G-360
Mouse Logitech Marble trackball, never had a mouse
Keyboard Key Tronic KT2000, no Win key because 1994
Software Oldwin
I don't remember anyone making monitors with "7:5"/"14:10" aspect ratio.
Those "monitors" are 11" iPads and iPad Pros. Maybe some phones too, they have countless different aspect ratios.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
3,859 (0.59/day)
Location
Northern Ontario Canada
Processor Ryzen 5700x
Motherboard Gigabyte X570S Aero G R1.1 BiosF5g
Cooling Noctua NH-C12P SE14 w/ NF-A15 HS-PWM Fan 1500rpm
Memory Micron DDR4-3200 2x32GB D.S. D.R. (CT2K32G4DFD832A)
Video Card(s) AMD RX 6800 - Asus Tuf
Storage Kingston KC3000 1TB & 2TB & 4TB Corsair MP600 Pro LPX
Display(s) LG 27UL550-W (27" 4k)
Case Be Quiet Pure Base 600 (no window)
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220-VB
Power Supply SuperFlower Leadex V Gold Pro 850W ATX Ver2.52
Mouse Mionix Naos Pro
Keyboard Corsair Strafe with browns
Software W10 22H2 Pro x64
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
159 (0.06/day)
Location
Finland
Processor i7 4770K
Motherboard Asus Z87-Expert
Cooling Noctua NH-U12S, &case fans all controlled by Aquaero 6
Memory 2x8GB TeamGroup Xtreem LV 2133MHz
Video Card(s) Vega 64
Storage Samsung 840 Pro + 2x 5GB WD Red@RAID1
Display(s) Dell U3014
Case Lian Li PC-A71B
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster ZxR, Objective2 (2x), AKG K702&712, Beyerdynamic DT990
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Titanium 650 (+Eaton 5P 1550 as "backup power")
Mouse Logitech G700
Keyboard Logitech G810
3:2 is just not a popular aspect ratio with the general public.
You mean that general public brainwashed and starched in marketing to believe that spending more desk space for lower height image is good?

16:9 is especially catastrophic in laptops:
You don't get half decent image height for working, reading content etc without laptop becoming huge, while in compact laptops image height is poor.
3:2 would be good compromise between old 4:3 and current lowered image height ratios for laptops.
On desktop 16:10 is quite good golden middle.
Also being close to golden ratio.


To add my opinion to this nice bunch of opinions: wider aspect ratios go together well with large sizes. It may be so because of the way human sight works, or maybe because nothing is too wide once you have enough vertical pixels. I've had two 1920x1200 24" LCDs at home and at work for years, and I felt, um, compressed when I had to use two 1920x1080 24" monitors. At larger sizes, I'd pick 16:9 or even 21:9 without second thoughts. (The only affordable options for larger 16:10 LCDs seem to be ancient used 30" Dells and HPs, anyway.)
Except that about 99% of those don't have vertical size or pixel resolution making them just low screens, not wide screens.
Shorter viewing distance would help only to first problem.

I bought Dell U3014 in December 2013 and still there's no viable upgrade available from shops.
4K would be only one not downgrading vertical resolution and 32" size is needed for having roughly same vertical image size.
But high refresh rate capable models are just completely MIA.
Even LG's 27" models, which would need shortening viewing distance, have only nominal availability.

Personally as a PC screen that would be way better than 16:9. As someone that does cad dwgs from time to time, 16:9 kinda stinks for that. I hope we see more options and variety in the PC monitor space in the future.
Hopefully new flat monitor techs (be it OLED or microLED) with less different parts in construction than in LCDs would bring more choise.
 

Solaris17

Super Dainty Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
27,044 (3.83/day)
Location
Alabama
System Name RogueOne
Processor Xeon W9-3495x
Motherboard ASUS w790E Sage SE
Cooling SilverStone XE360-4677
Memory 128gb Gskill Zeta R5 DDR5 RDIMMs
Video Card(s) MSI SUPRIM Liquid X 4090
Storage 1x 2TB WD SN850X | 2x 8TB GAMMIX S70
Display(s) 49" Philips Evnia OLED (49M2C8900)
Case Thermaltake Core P3 Pro Snow
Audio Device(s) Moondrop S8's on schitt Gunnr
Power Supply Seasonic Prime TX-1600
Mouse Razer Viper mini signature edition (mercury white)
Keyboard Monsgeek M3 Lavender, Moondrop Luna lights
VR HMD Quest 3
Software Windows 11 Pro Workstation
Benchmark Scores I dont have time for that.
I love my matebook x pros panel, if this is anything like it and just as thin bezeled Id like it
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
28,107 (6.73/day)
You mean that general public brainwashed and starched in marketing to believe that spending more desk space for lower height image is good?
Nope, I mean that people have solid reasons for not liking 3:2. Personal preferences are just that, personal. And you along with all of the other users in this tread trying(and failing) to justify their personal opinions against the rest of the public does not change the minds of the rest of the public.
16:9 is especially catastrophic in laptops
No, it's perfectly appropriate and well loved, which is why it is almost universally adopted.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
671 (0.18/day)
System Name Work in progress
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard Asus PRIME B350M-A
Cooling Wraith Stealth Cooler, 4x140mm Noctua NF-A14 FLX 1200RPM Case Fans
Memory Corsair 16GB (2x8GB) CMK16GX4M2A2400C14R DDR4 2400MHz Vengeance LPX DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 1050 2GB (for now) 3060 12GB on order
Storage Samsung 860 EVO 500GB, Lots of HDD storage
Display(s) 32 inch 4K LG, 55 & 48 inch LG OLED, 40 inch Panasonic LED LCD
Case Cooler Master Silencio S400
Audio Device(s) Sound: LG Monitor Built-in speakers (currently), Mike: Marantz MaZ
Power Supply Corsair CS550M 550W ATX Power Supply, 80+ Gold Certified, Semi-Modular Design
Mouse Logitech M280
Keyboard Logitech Wireless Solar Keyboard K750R (works best in summer)
VR HMD none
Software Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64bit OEM, Captur 1 21
Benchmark Scores Cinebench R20: 3508 (WIP)
Nope, I mean that people have solid reasons for not liking 3:2. Personal preferences are just that, personal. And you along with all of the other users in this tread trying(and failing) to justify their personal opinions against the rest of the public does not change the minds of the rest of the public.

No, it's perfectly appropriate and well loved, which is why it is almost universally adopted.
In your opinion based on owning a shop?
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
28,107 (6.73/day)
In your opinion based on owning a shop?
Based on working in and directly with the general public in the tech industry for more than 3 decades. Since widescreen LCD displays became a thing in 2005/2006, the public has flocked to them and few ever look back. The exceptions seem to be making their opinions known here, trying to express those opinions as fact instead of simply expressing their preference and approval of the product focused on in this above article.

16:9 is well love for many reasons. 16:10 is also well loved for many similar reasons. 3:2 and 4:3 are seen by most as relics of a bygone era in electronics. Apple iPad seems to be the stand-out exception to that rule, but even with those devices people complain about the 4:3 aspect ratio.

3:2 is going to appeal only to a very specific(and small) market sector, generally those who primarily don't need or want a widescreen ratio.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
3,859 (0.59/day)
Location
Northern Ontario Canada
Processor Ryzen 5700x
Motherboard Gigabyte X570S Aero G R1.1 BiosF5g
Cooling Noctua NH-C12P SE14 w/ NF-A15 HS-PWM Fan 1500rpm
Memory Micron DDR4-3200 2x32GB D.S. D.R. (CT2K32G4DFD832A)
Video Card(s) AMD RX 6800 - Asus Tuf
Storage Kingston KC3000 1TB & 2TB & 4TB Corsair MP600 Pro LPX
Display(s) LG 27UL550-W (27" 4k)
Case Be Quiet Pure Base 600 (no window)
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220-VB
Power Supply SuperFlower Leadex V Gold Pro 850W ATX Ver2.52
Mouse Mionix Naos Pro
Keyboard Corsair Strafe with browns
Software W10 22H2 Pro x64
Based on working in and directly with the general public in the tech industry for more than 3 decades. Since widescreen LCD displays became a thing in 2005/2006, the public has flocked to them and few ever look back. The exceptions seem to be making their opinions known here, trying to express those opinions as fact instead of simply expressing their preference and approval of the product focused on in this above article.

16:9 is well love for many reasons. 16:10 is also well loved for many similar reasons. 3:2 and 4:3 are seen by most as relics of a bygone era in electronics. Apple iPad seems to be the stand-out exception to that rule, but even with those devices people complain about the 4:3 aspect ratio.

3:2 is going to appeal only to a very specific(and small) market sector, generally those who primarily don't need or want a widescreen ratio.
Well, LCDs started at 5:4, then 16:10, then 16:9 came out and was kind of forced because it was about all you could get. It's not that its bad, 16:9 is just more suited to certain things. The PC is used for so many different tasks having 1 aspect ratio monitor just doesn't do it justice. At work where I have dual screens, I have one in portrait mode for reviewing word/pdf docs, the other in landscape for cad, and it's not well suited for that purpose, for that a 3:2 ratio would be way better. Odd thing is 3:2 (16:10.67) isn't far off 16:9 or 16:10, whereas 4:3 & 5:4 is a lot more square. ANSI D paper is 34"x22" so about 1.54 ratio, very close to the 1.5 of 3:2.

Why? 16:10 is a little taller than 16:9. And 3:2 is just further little taller than 16:10.

Hey you forgot the 5:4 ratio. My old 19" 1280x1024 viewsonic LCD isn't impressed................well it wouldn't be if it was still alive ;)
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
28,107 (6.73/day)
Well, LCDs started at 5:4, then 16:10, then 16:9 came out and was kind of forced because it was about all you could get. It's not that its bad, 16:9 is just more suited to certain things. The PC is used for so many different tasks having 1 aspect ratio monitor just doesn't do it justice. At work where I have dual screens, I have one in portrait mode for reviewing word/pdf docs, the other in landscape for cad, and it's not well suited for that purpose, for that a 3:2 ratio would be way better. Odd thing is 3:2 (16:10.67) isn't far off 16:9 or 16:10, whereas 4:3 & 5:4 is a lot more square. ANSI D paper is 34"x22" so about 1.54 ratio, very close to the 1.5 of 3:2.
You're right about the point of there being no "one-size-fits-all" aspect ratio screens. What one has to consider is overall use-case-scenarios. Most people do more video watching and game playing than anything else and they want that great experience. 16:9/16:10 widescreen ratio's fit more of those needs than anything else and have since they were introduced. They were instantly popular and have dominated display sales since.

I'm not saying that 3:2 is crap, it's just not ideal for general use. It's a specialty ratio. 16:9 fits most peoples needs a lot better.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
981 (0.22/day)
System Name Poor Man's PC
Processor Ryzen 7 9800X3D
Motherboard MSI B650M Mortar WiFi
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 with Arctic P12 Max fan
Memory 32GB GSkill Flare X5 DDR5 6000Mhz
Video Card(s) XFX Merc 310 Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage XPG Gammix S70 Blade 2TB + 8 TB WD Ultrastar DC HC320
Display(s) Xiaomi G Pro 27i MiniLED
Case Asus A21 Case
Audio Device(s) MPow Air Wireless + Mi Soundbar
Power Supply Enermax Revolution DF 650W Gold
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 3
Keyboard Logitech Pro X + Kailh box heavy pale blue switch + Durock stabilizers
VR HMD Meta Quest 2
Benchmark Scores Who need bench when everything already fast?
21:9 user here and I do want one, give me that with IPS and FreeSync!
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
6,748 (1.40/day)
Processor Intel® Core™ i7-13700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 32GB(2x16) DDR5@6600MHz G-Skill Trident Z5
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo
Storage 2TB SK Platinum P41 SSD + 4TB SanDisk Ultra SSD + 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Logitech Hero G502 SE
Software Windows 11 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
You can all say whatever about the "ideal" aspect ration monitor, but me since I've got my 34" 21:9 monitor, cannot go back to any other one...
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
28,107 (6.73/day)
You can all say whatever about the "ideal" aspect ration monitor, but me since I've got my 34" 21:9 monitor, cannot go back to any other one...
That's actually the point I was leaning into with what I was saying previously in the thread. What people want and prefer depends greatly on what use-case-scenario they find most important.
 
Last edited:
Top