Dough Announces New Spectrum Black Model Featuring a 4K 240Hz OLED Panel at 32-inch

[Upgrayedd]

It’s a shame it’s Dough. 27” 4K monitors need to go the way of the dodo, 32” 4K OLED is the only acceptable end game for monitors.

And here I was looking at my 27in thinking about replacing with a 24in. No way could I enjoy a 32in at my viewing distance. I'd love to see 27in 1800p but the 4K push was just too strong. No mainstream GPU is still really capable of 4K high refresh.

 

[trsttte]

Are there any good reviews of their monitors?

I don't think there that many, I only remember seeing one on Linus Tech Tips before the original 4k glossy was launched where the monitor was good but the firmware was still very "pre production".

I think their monitors are good, not amazing but they're mostly using good LG Nano IPS panels, not much can go wrong there, and they also added some cool features like integer scaling on the monitor, the problem is you're tossing an expensive coin at a company known to not keep their promises and known to provide a terrible customer service to the point of it being fraud.

Here's one, TLW it's good but it's expensive and shipped so late it's not competitive with what was able to come to market before it.

This supposed 32'' 4k OLED will be more of the same, there's no known panel being made with those specs, they're promising to ship something and accepting pre-orders from it and it's pretty certain others monitors will come to market sooner than them, just like what happened with the 4k spectrum or the new 1440p OLED's.

Put the pre order price in an index fund and whenever this actually is available you'll be ready to pay full price

 

[Tek-Check]

And here I was looking at my 27in thinking about replacing with a 24in. No way could I enjoy a 32in at my viewing distance. I'd love to see 27in 1800p but the 4K push was just too strong. No mainstream GPU is still really capable of 4K high refresh.

4090 and 7900XTX can do 4K/120 in many games, 4090 even more. I use 7900XTX on my 4K/120 OLED TV. It's fantastic.

 

[rv8000]

4090 and 7900XTX can do 4K/120 in many games, 4090 even more. I use 7900XTX on my 4K/120 OLED TV. It's fantastic.

He did specify mainstream, and the 4090/7900XTX are definitely not mainstream.

Either way, hopefully 2024 won’t disappoint when it comes to OLED monitors. The 27” 1440p and ultra wide releases this year are just a waste.

 

[Upgrayedd]

He did specify mainstream, and the 4090/7900XTX are definitely not mainstream.

Either way, hopefully 2024 won’t disappoint when it comes to OLED monitors. The 27” 1440p and ultra wide releases this year are just a waste.

To me it's all about desk size. A desk needs to be big enough to accommodate larger screens to where you can push it back to an acceptable viewing distance or bring it closer for whatever you're doing. Some desks aren't quite deep enough to comfortably sit a 32in screen on. If you got the real estate then it's definitely nicer to have bigger if you can afford it.
1800p 27in is 135ppi 5.76m pixels . . . 2160p 32in is 137ppi 8.30m pixels . . . 2160p 42in is 105ppi 48in is 92ppi . . . 1440p 27in is 108ppi 3.69m pixels
1800p 27in would not only be much easier to run but sit better on a smaller desk too.

My bad, I just wrote all that and realized I can't tell if you think they're a waste because of the size and resolution or something else but I'll leave it anyways. My only real problem with the OLED monitors was the matte finish, terrible choice, price didn't help either. I am a little concerned about the glass screens on the OLEDs from Dough. It'll look sharp but I'm worried about it chipping on the edges or something.

 

[rv8000]

To me it's all about desk size. A desk needs to be big enough to accommodate larger screens to where you can push it back to an acceptable viewing distance or bring it closer for whatever you're doing. Some desks aren't quite deep enough to comfortably sit a 32in screen on. If you got the real estate then it's definitely nicer to have bigger if you can afford it.
1800p 27in is 135ppi 5.76m pixels . . . 2160p 32in is 137ppi 8.30m pixels . . . 2160p 42in is 105ppi 48in is 92ppi . . . 1440p 27in is 108ppi 3.69m pixels
1800p 27in would not only be much easier to run but sit better on a smaller desk too.

My bad, I just wrote all that and realized I can't tell if you think they're a waste because of the size and resolution or something else but I'll leave it anyways. My only real problem with the OLED monitors was the matte finish, terrible choice, price didn't help either. I am a little concerned about the glass screens on the OLEDs from Dough. It'll look sharp but I'm worried about it chipping on the edges or something.

Size difference between 32” and 27” always comes across as an overstatement to me. It’s also very beneficial to buy some type of monitor arm, wether straight, adjustable or wall mount. You gain 6-8+ inches of viewing distance making a lot those complaints a moot point, not to mention you get lots of valuable desk space back because there’s no massive monitor stand eating desk space.

Scaling and ui elements require less fiddling at 32” 4K and are a much better experience out of the box. You make it sound like everyone is using an 18” deep deal with a monitor in their face.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Size difference between 32” and 27” always comes across as an overstatement to me. It’s also very beneficial to buy some type of monitor arm, wether straight, adjustable or wall mount. You gain 6-8+ inches of viewing distance making a lot those complaints a moot point, not to mention you get lots of valuable desk space back because there’s no massive monitor stand eating desk space.

Scaling and ui elements require less fiddling at 32” 4K and are a much better experience out of the box. You make it sound like everyone is using an 18” deep deal with a monitor in their face.

I'll have to measure it again but it's pretty normal depth. Which isn't really all that deep in the first place. I got a 27in on an arm, desk pulled from the wall about 6 inches and the screen pushed all the way back against the wall. I don't want to pull the desk out further from the wall that'll just be in the way then. I think the common depths are like 24in and 30in. I'd like one about 40in deep.

If it's such an overstatement then why push for 32in 4K if they have the exact same pixel density and we can push our monitors back or forwards for our own needs? You could just not push a 27in 1800p monitor back as far as a 32in 4K and have the exact same experience with a higher framerate and less bandwidth needs and probably cost less.

 

[rv8000]

I'll have to measure it again but it's pretty normal depth. Which isn't really all that deep in the first place. I got a 27in on an arm, desk pulled from the wall about 6 inches and the screen pushed all the way back against the wall. I don't want to pull the desk out further from the wall that'll just be in the way then. I think the common depths are like 24in and 30in. I'd like one about 40in deep.

If it's such an overstatement then why push for 32in 4K if they have the exact same pixel density and we can push our monitors back or forwards for our own needs? You could just not push a 27in 1800p monitor back as far as a 32in 4K and have the exact same experience with a higher framerate and less bandwidth needs and probably cost less.

In the sense that 32” is somehow so massive it’ll never fit on an average de

The native experience and desktop real estate is better with a 32” monitor with the upside of not having to mess with scaling if you use your pc for more than just playing games. At a 22-24” viewing depth everything is in my field of view without requiring and sort of physical movement, the more screen I have to use the better

If you’re buying expensive oled, 4K, or high refresh monitors of any size you’re probably spending an equal amount of dough on a top GPU. Most of these GPUs don’t really struggle to cover 90%+ games @4k 120 with a few AAA being difficult to run and potentially being 50/50 chance to be worth playing or buying in the first place.

Anything higher than 1440p at 27” quickly becomes too small.

 

[Upgrayedd]

In the sense that 32” is somehow so massive it’ll never fit on an average de

The native experience and desktop real estate is better with a 32” monitor with the upside of not having to mess with scaling if you use your pc for more than just playing games. At a 22-24” viewing depth everything is in my field of view without requiring and sort of physical movement, the more screen I have to use the better

If you’re buying expensive oled, 4K, or high refresh monitors of any size you’re probably spending an equal amount of dough on a top GPU. Most of these GPUs don’t really struggle to cover 90%+ games @4k 120 with a few AAA being difficult to run and potentially being 50/50 chance to be worth playing or buying in the first place.

Anything higher than 1440p at 27” quickly becomes too small.

I understand the scaling debate but that's whatever, these are gaming screens meant to display games and 1800p is much more feasible to power than 4K. Not that we'll ever see 1800p screens but the push for 4K is still to soon in the gaming space. And no DLSS performance doesn't cut it. There's much much more people that could run 1800p than 4K at decent settings.

 

[rv8000]

I understand the scaling debate but that's whatever, these are gaming screens meant to display games and 1800p is much more feasible to power than 4K. Not that we'll ever see 1800p screens but the push for 4K is still to soon in the gaming space. And no DLSS performance doesn't cut it. There's much much more people that could run 1800p than 4K at decent settings.

“Gaming screens” are meant to display whatever the purchaser wants, there’s no penalty under law to restrict you from, ya know, using your monitor as a monitor. There are multiple times more titles being actively played that can run 4k120 than not, even before upscalers.

 

[Upgrayedd]

“Gaming screens” are meant to display whatever the purchaser wants, there’s no penalty under law to restrict you from, ya know, using your monitor as a monitor. There are multiple times more titles being actively played that can run 4k120 than not, even before upscalers.

Let's take the #2 game on steam for example Baulders gate 3, RTX 3070 is getting 53fps at 4K. E-sport titles could do 4K 120 with mainstream hardware or older titles but the AAA releases in the last few years just aren't happening 4K120 on anything affordable.

They have professional monitors that are trash at gaming but great for other stuff. They're designed for a specific use. If it's great at gaming and sucks at the desktop then it's a gaming monitor. Sports cars are rough and confined but that's but the point of them, is designed to perform, that was the whole gaming screen point I was trying to make.

The push for 4K is just too much still is all I'm saying. I'm not saying 4K isn't sweet. We skipped the middle step of 1800p. For us 27in users 1800p would be ideal to me. I think it'd be fine for 32in, it'd be a higher ppi than 1440p at 27in but still be easier to run than 4K especially for the mainstream in long run. The 4K 32in 240Hz screen is cool but it's just pointless currently for gaming, nobody can use that unless they have DP 2.0 and are going to play CSGO.