|
I remember reading something about a monitor with a built in keyboard / mouse switch (Synergy functionality but built in) or did I just imagine that? I can't seem to find it.
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 12:45 |
|
|
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=26774389&sid=3d8dfc01d40e734dd9802102c1952d24#p26774389
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Right, keep it mind the whole part about it needing Thunderbolt for one of the machines. Otherwise there's this old one I just found: http://techreport.com/news/20569/30-inch-nec-monitor-boasts-built-in-kvm-functionality
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
rsjr posted:I remember reading something about a monitor with a built in keyboard / mouse switch (Synergy functionality but built in) or did I just imagine that? I can't seem to find it. Synergy isn't really the same thing as a KVM switch, is it? Synergy works over a network (and doesn't switch video).
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
So is there any reason why thunderbolt displays aren't gaining any support outside of Apple? Its an Intel technology right? Its not like any PC makers or component makers have to pay anyone but Intel a licensing fee? I'm just curious to see something -like- TB in the future but with even more power support. So something like a USFF computer or laptop can be connected to a display with a single cable that can send picture/audio/data/power. The first 3 are already covered by DP but not power. edit: oh it looks like this is close but not standard yet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DockPort edit2: As for power, it seems that Apple was able to push 100W over ADC back in the day. 100W is within the envelope of a quad core Mac Mini 2012. Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Jun 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:So is there any reason why thunderbolt displays aren't gaining any support outside of Apple? Its an Intel technology right? Its not like any PC makers or component makers have to pay anyone but Intel a licensing fee? I'm also not sure why it's helpful to be able to power a monitor over the same cable that carries the video signal. You'd need a thick cable and a big connector to carry that much power, which destroys a lot of the value of having a narrow signal cable with a small connector. You'd also need to add the expense to video sources to inject that much power into the cable, or go with an external power supply, in which case why not just put that next to the destination and not the source? Really, any situation where you need to run power along with the signal would work better by just running a separate power cable alongside. Edit: Also remember that most platforms don't have access to PCI-E 3.0 lanes without stealing them from the videocard, and not all platforms allow bifurcation of the CPU PCI-E 3.0 lanes. Thunderbolt also requires really expensive active cables. Alereon fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Jun 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
So it seems as though the OP is outdated by a little bit, except for the basic information. I'm looking to replace my old-rear end monitor that seems to finally be dying off, and I need some specific recommendations. I'm looking for a 23-24" (maybe a little higher if the price is right) monitor, 1920x1080, IPS with a 60hz refresh rate. I mostly do gaming, however colors are pretty important to me as a sperglord who watches cartoons all the time. I'm not looking to spend over $200 right now, though I'd potentially like to add a second monitor in the future for things like chatting on. And ideally I'd like to order it from some place that won't take 2 weeks to ship it to me, but I'm not that picky. I hope it's okay to ask for recommendations in this thread 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Alereon posted:I'm also not sure why it's helpful to be able to power a monitor over the same cable that carries the video signal. You'd need a thick cable and a big connector to carry that much power, which destroys a lot of the value of having a narrow signal cable with a small connector. You'd also need to add the expense to video sources to inject that much power into the cable, or go with an external power supply, in which case why not just put that next to the destination and not the source? Really, any situation where you need to run power along with the signal would work better by just running a separate power cable alongside. As far as power is concerned I was actually referring to the reverse scenario where the monitor could power the source. The source being something SFF like a Mac mini or NUC or laptop. edit: But I'll admit its a pretty niche usage scenario(?). Well, most people don't need anything more than a decked out quad core and a spinning drive which is still under 100W if you look at the Mac mini variants and high end NUCs plus most laptops are going to be under 100W full bore. Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Jun 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:As far as power is concerned I was actually referring to the reverse scenario where the monitor could power the source. The source being something SFF like a Mac mini or NUC or laptop. I don't mean to be making GBS threads all over your idea, but it just seems like the 10W you'll likely be able to pull over the standard DockPort connector is enough for most reasonable applications, and that to do anything higher would require compromising the value of the standard. It's not that hard to just run a power cable splitter to a second AC adapter, and snake its cable alongside your DisplayPort cable, and it gives you a lot more flexibility. It's almost like your idea is making the computer into a peripheral of the monitor, but I think monitors are on a faster replacement cycle than computers. On the other hand, all-in-ones seem poised to make a comeback on the PC side.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Apparently Intel has the same crazy idea if this is true: http://www.macrumors.com/2014/04/21/thunderbolt-third-generation-details/ 100W  and new thinner form factor  (I was hoping mini DP would be tiny enough to stick around a long rear end time)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
japtor posted:and new thinner form factor One more adapter to clutter up the house.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
japtor posted:Apparently Intel has the same crazy idea if this is true: The USB Power Delivery spec seems like an interesting solution to this via its profiles: Profile 1: 5V @ 2A, 10W. Probably wide support. Profile 2: 12V @ 1.5A, 18W. I thought this seemed kinda pointless but it's exactly what you need to support a 3.5" external HDD. You could maybe run two off the same host if they aren't both spinning up simultaneously (both can be spun up, but they draw 10W+ each during spinup) Profile 3: 12V @ 3A, 36W. I can see this being useful, and since there's already a 12V source in all computers and most monitors there likely would be almost no additional cost or routing effort. Profile 4: 20V @ 3A, 60W. Profile 5: 20V @ 5A, 100W. These are cool, but I just don't see anybody paying for the electronics to create or accept 20V. The important bit is that at least on the source side 12V is already there on most platforms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Why would we want power profiles for spinning magnetic disks? I get they have some consumer use in them yet, but only in very low-end devices, and in use cases which require multiple TB of data (home media centers, ... and?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 12:03
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Why would we want power profiles for spinning magnetic disks? I get they have some consumer use in them yet, but only in very low-end devices, and in use cases which require multiple TB of data (home media centers, ... and?) A 3.5" USB powered external would be great, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:A 3.5" USB powered external would be great, honestly. Not that relevant considering you can get 2TB 2.5" bus powered externals. I'm not disagreeing though, I'd love to be rid of 3.5" power supplies but also I've been trying to get rid of 3.5" externals unless I really really needed the bleeding edge space. Mostly in 2+ bay configurations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
I realize much of this comes down to personal preference, but I'm trying to decide between purchasing two Dell U2414Hs or one Asus PB278Q. I would be grateful if anyone who owned either of these monitors could provide a bit of insight as to which of the two setups they would prefer. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
DC-DC 20v@100w circuitry shouldn't be -that- expensive. Maybe like ~$10 on a mass production scale. Anyway if intel is rooting for 100w over TB I'm Not going to complain.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
vtlock posted:I realize much of this comes down to personal preference, but I'm trying to decide between purchasing two Dell U2414Hs or one Asus PB278Q. I would be grateful if anyone who owned either of these monitors could provide a bit of insight as to which of the two setups they would prefer. Thanks! Personally, I recommend getting both and going for a tri-monitor setup. You'd have to ensure that your video card has a DisplayPort out (or you have one of the newer Radeons like the 290(X) that can do three TMS displays "natively"), but I run 2x 24" + 27" and it's marvelous. Of course, you need to have a desk big enough for it, but if you do... well, I can't recommend it enough. tl;dr Personal choice. Pick between 2 vs 1 screen and then get the associated set--they're both great monitors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
I was looking for a 16:10 monitor with a refresh rate of 120hz, but it seems that none exists. Can someone recommend something similar? All I can find are monitors with 60hz.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
It's too early for anyone other than competitive gamers to go after 120 Hz. Almost every model is 1080p TN, and those that aren't aren't worth the cost. Also 16:10 is falling out of favor because it costs more to produce than 16:9 (economies of scale) and 2560x1440 leaves a lot fewer people regretting the missing 160 rows than 1920x1080p does. And with 1080p IPS being under $200 now, it's the least you should consider for a new PC or replacement. You can still find 1920x1200, and they're almost all not-TN now, but even if they're sRGB rather than wide-gamut (and you don't want wide-gamut for gaming) they're also closer to $300 and not always from the low side. And 1200h matters for 1600x1200 4:3 modes in a way that 1600h doesn't (since nothing really used 2048x1536). Shaocaholica posted:Not that relevant considering you can get 2TB 2.5" bus powered externals. I'm not disagreeing though, I'd love to be rid of 3.5" power supplies but also I've been trying to get rid of 3.5" externals unless I really really needed the bleeding edge space. Mostly in 2+ bay configurations. You want to build your own externals either way: Seagate's still using their own hard drives, which have reliability and transparency issues, and not the ones that they consider fit for independent sale. Toshiba does the bleeding-edge thing more than the others. Western Digital got a well-deserved ill reputation for encrypting drives for the sole purpose of making them impossible to recover data from if the SATA-to-USB interface died (because it sure didn't actually secure anything) - and later put only a USB port on the drive's controller board itself. And they're the only three drive manufacturers around anymore. If it's any consolation, you can get bus-powered 2.5" (12.5mm compatible) USB 3.0 enclosures for cheaper than 3.5" USB 3.0 enclosures now. And yes, I would go (and have gone) out of my way to do this rather than buy an off-the-shelf external hard drive for backups. dont be mean to me fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Action Jacktion posted:I was looking for a 16:10 monitor with a refresh rate of 120hz, but it seems that none exists. Can someone recommend something similar? All I can find are monitors with 60hz.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
With those using monitors over 120hz and actually have games running over 60 fps - do you actually notice a difference?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
Depending on the game it's very noticeable. In games with a lot of quick movement it's really obvious and makes me wish we had real 120hz IPS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
Elentor posted:Depending on the game it's very noticeable. In games with a lot of quick movement it's really obvious and makes me wish we had real 120hz IPS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Have you ever posted a picture of yours? I'm going to have to take mine apart and I suppose I can do other stuff while I'm at it if it's sweet. I must say I really enjoy the fact that it's not a 60 hz monitor, but the game I play the most I still cap at 60 fps. A real, actual, smooth 60 fps with even frame variance is more than I really ever need. But for games that are easier on my gpu its definitely nice to see an honest 80 or 90 fps on screen. It was interesting recently I reinstalled windows and lost the overclock profile. I forgot about that, I copy pasted a 61 fps frame cap config file and noticed immediate screen tearing on a single 780ti for bf4. Once I set it at 59 fps it was simply gone. I always figured that would be the case in theory, and there is much discussion about setting +1 or -1 below the screen refresh rate (or if it mattered at all), but now I can confidently say I'm always going to have it 1 below. When I overclocked it, there was no screen tearing at any fps frame cap as expected, until the card was getting stressed enough at around 80-90 fps. Which is a different reason for it
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
DrDork posted:tl;dr Personal choice. Pick between 2 vs 1 screen and then get the associated set--they're both great monitors. Your entire post is filled with great advice. Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Sir Unimaginative posted:You want to build your own externals either way Depends. For 2.5" externals I'm pretty good with buying off the shelf. Especially when you can pick up 2TB 2.5" drives with decent enclosures for ~$100. For 3.5" I would say its better to build yourself but mainly for me its being able to put 2 big rear end drives into a 2+ bay without shelling out for a 'premium' off the shelf solution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Ignoarints posted:Have you ever posted a picture of yours? I'm going to have to take mine apart and I suppose I can do other stuff while I'm at it if it's sweet. e; Honestly, this guide for the Qnix debezel/stand is pretty decent. The only trip-report notes I'd make are: (1) You by no means need to duplicate their list of materials exactly--the JB Weld stuff they used is great, but way over-specced for this (it supports something like 3200PSI--other types at half the price will do ~2000 and they'll work just fine for a roughly 10lbs monitor). (2) It's not really mentioned, but the monitor connects to the 'board in two locations: at the top, where the aluminum frame has a helpful hole cut for you already, and at the bottom left, where there is no hole. Don't be like me and think that you can run that cable out the hole in the bottom plate; it won't reach, it must come out from under the left side of the frame. (3) If you bought one of the $25 HP stands, or any other stand that comes with any mounting hardware, you don't need the M4 screws or nuts. The HP stand is really nice, incidentally. Very smooth, stable, and more than capable of supporting the monitor. (4) You can get the hardboard in almost any size you want, just as long as you can center the aluminum frame on it (I suggest using a pen or marker to draw the outline of the properly centered frame on the 'board so it's easier to slap down with the glue). I went with 10x10" because the dude at HomeDepot was having a hell of a time cutting 9 3/8" with the giant gently caress-off saw meant for cutting 2x4's. You also don't need more than maybe two of these, unless you somehow REALLY suck at life. Seriously, plop the frame on the back, center it, mark the 6 screw holes, drill, done. (5) 4-40 Phillips 3/4" screws are silly-long. 1/2" works just fine, and you could probably do 1/4" if you wanted. (6) I don't have a loving clue why the guy slathers most of a bottle of 3200PSI JB Weld all over the back of the mount and then tosses on two 1/2" wide strips of 3M tape like it'll make a difference. Don't do that. (7) Similarly, his solution to the button panel is ugly as gently caress. Just get some double-sided foam tape for like $2. If you want to be fancy, you can use the same tape to attach the buttons from the bezel to the actual button panel, and then attach THAT to somewhere reachable on the lower back side of the monitor so you don't have to crawl around behind the damned thing if you want to change the brightness (which is, after all, the only adjustments you can make to the monitor--also note that the brightness + and - buttons are actually reversed as marked on the board, because lol Korea or something). (8) Finding a big piece of foam or cloth is highly recommended for when you're laying it face-down on a table. (9) For painting, be careful when you remove the metal frame: once you do so, the interior plates are free to move about a bit. Not a big problem if you already have it on a table and don't need to move it until you put the frame back on, but don't be like me and find you need to cart it to the other side of the house and then spend 15 minutes making sure everything lines up again (which isn't too hard, btw). DrDork fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
That's some serious DIYing. I'm planning on getting a QNIX myself and apparently there's a couple versions. The original dvi-only PLS panel and the newer, multi-input AH-VA panel (True10 version). I was dead set on getting the PLS version because I just needed a new computer monitor and a lot of PLS panels have gotten good reviews but ebay prices have them almost identical in price, so now I'm waffling. I'm sure in the end I won't even be able to tell the difference between the two, someone flip a coin for me :/
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Is the de-bezeling just a necessary step to adding the vesa mount or do people also find the bezel ugly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Miko posted:That's some serious DIYing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
Miko posted:That's some serious DIYing. Unless I am misremembering, AH-VA doesn't have the viewing angles of IPS, so if you aren't looking at it dead on the colors distort like on TN.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
^^^ I think that's AM-VA. This is a confusing field of work. I'm sold. I don't need the extra connectivity 95% of the time, so that's not a deal-breaker for me. Miko fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Miko posted:^^^ I think that's AM-VA. This is a confusing field of work. I think you are right. Monitor tech naming is horrible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Is the de-bezeling just a necessary step to adding the vesa mount or do people also find the bezel ugly? Honestly, I'm a tad bit lost as well after going through that OP as to the "why" side of it. I mean it looks good
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Is the de-bezeling just a necessary step to adding the vesa mount or do people also find the bezel ugly? e; Another reason is the default stand blows goat turds. Not only is it tilt-only, but it's short, wobbles, and isn't even strong enough to actually do tilt correctly; mine wouldn't stay straight up and down, but would always tilt forward a few degrees because the damned thing wasn't strong enough to support the weight. If you do nothing else when you get one, you should buy that $25 HP stand and attach it to that (which, as said, requires you to crack open the case to disconnect the stand, but it takes about 10 minutes if you've got a $2 plastic spudger to help). Alereon posted:The scaler chip adds one frame of input lag for models with multiple inputs. To me I'd rather have lower latency and only one input. DrDork fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:With those using monitors over 120hz and actually have games running over 60 fps - do you actually notice a difference?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Diviance posted:Unless I am misremembering, AH-VA doesn't have the viewing angles of IPS, so if you aren't looking at it dead on the colors distort like on TN. AH-VA is AU Optronics' name for their version of IPS and it stands for "Advanced High Viewing Angle". It actually has nothing to do with "Vertical Alignment" technology. I had the chance to try out the cheap Korean monitor that uses the same panel as the BenQ BL2710PT (the RAEANtech TR-272) and found that pretty much everything about its picture quality resembled Samsung's PLS panels to me. Colors were vibrant, the AG coating was very unobtrusive, and glow was minimal. Honestly, I wish there were more true VA panels out there. The viewing angle of these panels is still really good, and there's a reason just about every TV uses them. Contrast is excellent, bleed is virtually unheard of, and things still look really good, even if your living room is weirdly shaped and requires you to put your couch placed at a really obtuse angle. The worst you get is some slight gamma shift, which is not really noticeable in most situations. Mostly, I just miss the good things about my old Dell 2007WFP. Unless you looked up the serial number to figure out whether you won or lost the panel lottery, you would have never known it wasn't IPS. The only other way to tell was that black levels were really good and had no bleed at all. Zorilla fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Jun 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Zorilla posted:AH-VA is AU Optronics' name for their version of IPS and it stands for "Advanced High Viewing Angle". It actually has nothing to do with "Vertical Alignment" technology. I had the chance to try out the cheap Korean monitor that uses the same panel as the BenQ BL2710PT (the RAEANtech TR-272) and found that pretty much everything about its picture quality resembled Samsung's PLS panels to me. Colors were vibrant, the AG coating was very unobtrusive, and glow was minimal. Yeah, I saw that after he responded. The amount of similarity in naming is really something they should have avoided, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 12:45 |
|
|
Anandtech reviewed the 34UM95: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8057/lg-34um95-monitor-review tl;dr color was good but thrown off a bit in the corners cause the weak backlight uniformity there, low input lag, 1440p ultrawides are cool. No internal LUT according to them though, which contradicts that guy from a while back. I asked about it in the comments for confirmation just in case though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 06:49
|
|