Jump to content

32 Inch Monitors... Why such a dearth?


JoeSchmuckatelli

Recommended Posts

I've been gaming for years on a 24 inch HP IPS panel and have been looking at upgrading to 4k at some point.  I ran some numbers, did some comparison shopping and decided that at the distance I sit from my screen, a 32 inch monitor would be ideal.

CC Card ready, I went looking for the perfect monitor: a 4k IPS panel with decent input lag, refresh rate, inputs and HDR.

Oddly - I can find all of those things in a 27 inch panel... but not in a 32.  (The actual screen real-estate of going from a 24 to a 27 isn't that great, so I'm not all that interested in paying the squeeze without getting the juice)

 

Anyone know why 32 is apparently not a 'target' size by the industry?

 

(As an aside, and FWIW - I'm not interested in curved, ultrawide or VA panels...  In the first part, curved are a neat idea but very limiting if you don't stay within the 'optimal distance', while ultrawide lose the vertical real-estate that matters for work / production (even if they look good for movies / games)... and VA panels are just gross.)

Edited by JoeSchmuckatelli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it has a lot to do with the manufacturing process and availability and size of stock materials. for example the glass sheets that makes up the substrate of the monitor. its very similar to the way that cpus are made on a silicon wafer, except with the wafer replaced by a massive piece of glass stock from a glass manufactuer. multiple displays are fitted into the stock sheet in the most efficient way possible, to maximize yield and minimize waste.

however it does seem like 32" is a popular size, i was able to find many 4k displays on newegg, not as many as in the 27 inch bracket, but still quite a bit more than other oddball sizes. it might be difficult to find one with all the bells and whistles you might want. there are usually tradeoffs involved, like if you want resolution it usually trades off with refresh rate due to bandwidth limits of the video interface. im not sure how response time or contrast ratios or hdr trade off with any of the other features, including price. i was able to find this one if you want to drop some cash, it is not cheap. dropping the need for 4k or hdr might net you something at a better price point.

i would also point out that if you want to do 4k gaming you are going to need some gpu horsepower to back it up. i was rather disappointed by my 4k display until i upgraded to an rtx2070 super. in retrospect i think i should have gone for refresh rate instead of resolution. im not a videophile and i grew up on some really crappy displays (my first pc had this crappy 13 inch crt monitor that had trouble with 800x600), so its not as big a deal to me as it might be to others.

 

Edited by Nuke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nuke said:

... <good stuff> ...

i would also point out that if you want to do 4k gaming you are going to need some gpu horsepower to back it up. i was rather disappointed by my 4k display until i upgraded to an rtx2070 super. in retrospect i think i should have gone for refresh rate instead of resolution. im not a videophile and i grew up on some really crappy displays (my first pc had this crappy 13 inch crt monitor that had trouble with 800x600), so its not as big a deal to me as it might be to others.

 

I started out as one of those guys who refused to give up my high-end CRT until flat panels actually exceeded performance.  For a relatively short while - I was also the guy with the bleeding edge GPU.  I started out gaming LOVING good graphics.  That was before things got really ridiculous.

Lately I've been a price-performance 'sweet spot' guy vis GPUs and running a high-quality HP 16:10 24inch HD panel (and yes, that additional vertical space is fantastic)... The other thing I've done in the last decade is wait for technology to mature just enough for content to be filling out the space before leaping.

IMO we're finally getting there with 4k.  As you pointed out, absent a good GPU, a 4k monitor is a heavy, costly disappointment.  Yet the power of last gen's upper tier GPUs is there for 4k, and the next gen is coming out in the next 4 months or so... where even the mid-tier should provide solid 4k performance.

The problem I have with a 27, is that all the new monitors are 16:9 and the vertical real-estate is literally 0.3 of an inch bigger than my current monitor with the 16:10 aspect ratio.. with only an inch and a half more space on either side of the bezel edge - thus, a 27" just doesn't excite.

Anyway - thanks for the link to NewEgg. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

any online store with a good parametric sorting capabilities will do. even if you dont buy from them its useful for finding the exact product you want, and then search around for who has the best price. im usually not so picky about my displays. i really only care about resolution, size, and refresh.

Edited by Nuke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For office work and non FPS games (which includes KSP) a 4K 32 inch is great even with a basic video card like a GTX 1060. I myself bought an IIYAMA Prolite XB3288UHSU which only cost $400. Despite it low cost I have not seen it in any local PC shops.

Edited by FreeThinker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...