Blur Busters Forums

I'd buy a 16:10 obviously as a programmer, but as a businessman I would consider 16:9 to reduce costs (so you don't go bankrupt) and I'd buy it anyway if you hit those numbers you already quoted. A 16:9 monitor is better than zero monitor, you know? Frankly, even if you get pixel noise and contouring potentially worse than a plasma (a friendly advance warning for your engineers to solve), the numbers such as 1000Hz are just too delicious to resist at that pricing -- for a Blur Busters motion lover and low lag nuts like some of us. I welcome any 1000Hz overlords to the consumer gaming monitor market, blowing away LCD in several areas, even if it has a couple of tradeoffs here and there.

as a crt tech lover, (specially for the motion clarity and non native resolution image scaling clarity) that sed technology sound very interesting to me.

rabidz7, a question i have is: would it be posible to use those monitors at a refresh rate of 60hz? or the the refreshes you mentioned would be the minimum posible?.

I'd buy several...monitors are exasperatingly slow with quality improvements compared to everything else it seems...and I don't care about paper thin or stylish monitors anyway, and the ratios are a moot point cause i'm still using an 8 year old 16:10 1680x1050 monitor
and if not for g/freesyncs and lightboost coming out there would only be a small improvement from upgrading.

3dfan wrote:as a crt tech lover, (specially for the motion clarity and non native resolution image scaling clarity) that sed technology sound very interesting to me.

rabidz7, a question i have is: would it be posible to use those monitors at a refresh rate of 60hz? or the the refreshes you mentioned would be the minimum posible?.

In theory, yes, they could used at 60Hz, but they'd flicker like a CRT or LightBoost LCD at 60Hz.

I know they have 4k on 24" now but 4k on 50cm would be

.

definitely +1, would donate


my minimum (but rather better):
matte 24" 1920x1080@144Hz+ (ofc 1920x1200 is ok)


For me (gaming monitor) and you (money), I would not go much crazy about PPI (pixel-per-inch), because UI can get easly broken and people can get wtf-is-this if you start pushing "big res" to "small monitor" or otherwise, so I would stay in current PPI standarts (1920x1080-24"), (2560x1440-27"), ... And I don't know how these SEDs/FEDs works, but on CRT (EIZO F931) if you have 1600x1200@104 on desktop and 1280x1024@120 in-game and alt-tabs, refresh-rate downgrades to lower one, sometimes helps to change it back in menu, but it is a pain (got even autohotkey macro for that )

Imho for succesful business, depends on release date, but monitor 6 looks like gamers choice for now and I think it will for some time, because at least in gaming 1920x1080 will be there as a standart (HW of next-gen consoles must catch up with in-game graphics demand), plus you will have superior refresh rate, no latency, no input lag, no ghosting, epic colors advantage, so no need for 2560x1440, maybe even no G-Sync and people will buy it.


If you want cover DTP, go second monitor, because you don't need high refresh rate, on other side size of a monitor and resolution is NUMBER ONE. If you try to pull both monitors together and make compromise, people will go wtf-is-this again feeling and your monitor will lose the edge.


Don't want masturbate my ego here, rather trying to point out my experience, of course it does not guarantee my observation skill, but... anyway tryharding in increasing manner BF2/BC2/BF3/BF4 last 8 years on ESL, went thru National Championships, zillions cups, 2x ESL One Season in BF4, and ofc many other games for fun like Quake...

My monitor experience: CRT 17" 1280x1024@85Hz > LCD 19" 1280x1024@60Hz (for a week) > CRT 19" 1280x1024@100Hz > Acer gd245hq 1920x1080@120Hz > CRT 21" (EIZO F931) 1600x1200@104Hz > BenQ XL2420T 1920x1080@120Hz > BenQ XL2411T rev1 1920x1080@144Hz > BenQ XL2411T rev2 1920x1080@144Hz > BenQ XL2411Z 1920x1080@144Hz

My mouse experience (not in this order): MS IMO 1.1a, MS IE 3.0, Razer DA 3.5, Ikari Laser, Logitech MX 518, G5, Razer Lachesis, SS Kana (winner), Zowie AM, tested for short time others...

Plus another tweaks to make my gaming smoother...

Hi,

I would really engjoy having one of those monitors (with a few additions) :

First display : Monitor 4, matte, 70cm OR Monitor 5, matte, 80cm

Additional request :
=> support Full HD 1920x1080@144Hz (or @120Hz if not possible)
=> additional HDMI input (even if it's limited to 60Hz or 120Hz) to plug a gaming console (PS4)

Second display : Monitor 8, matte, 80cm (or really more, like 65'' style)

Additional request :
=> support Full HD 1920x1080@144Hz (or @120Hz if not possible)
=> support Quad HD 3840x2160@100Hz (or 90Hz if not possible)
=> additional HDMI input (even if it's limited to 60Hz in QHD or 120Hz in FHD) to plug a gaming console (PS4)

I'm eager to seeing these screens on the market !

Regards

How small could you get the bezel on the edge of these monitors? It's a niche market (like SED/FED high-hz wanters) but there are folks willing to shell out cash for this kind of setup:
http://youtu.be/hsEsIXPkLAU
And they'd be just the type to buy a bezel-free monitor, just FYI.

If these monitors did exist, I'd pay up to 2399 dollars for one (at least 150Hz, 2560x1600, 60cm.)

I support entirely the production of SED/FED.

The previous attempt at producing SED/FED were stopped by patent trolls, watch out.

Please excuse my english.