Will Haswell be significantly better than Ivy Bridge?

Not to mention, image processing quality, and panel quality. 24" is the biggest I can do for a PC, but they don't make 2560x1600 24" LCDs lol. I just wind up downsampling.
 
Only in certain circumstances.

For instance, my Samsung secondary is 23" and 2048x1152 but it's not much better than 1080p where visual quality is concerned and my NEC beats it hands down in the color department. It also got discontinued rather quickly.

There are several expensive 27" LCDs that are 2560x1400 but those haven't been very popular because of price. 30" LCDs from Dell, HP, and NEC have a res of 2560x1600 but they are all usually over a grand. For another grand you can have a 31" Asus 4k screen when it comes out which makes more sense in my eyes. You also have Apple Retina displays and I haven't even looked to see what those cost. In most all cases, the standard res is 1080p for 22 and above.

I actually know some people that use 1080p large TVs for PC monitors and I don't see how they do it. Would drive my eyes insane with both the closeness of the large screen and the fuzzy text.

Going to go ahead and disagree here. 2560x1600 is almost the perfect pixel pitch. I tried going to 3 samsungs with that weird resolution you use on your 2nd monitor (same model I think) and ended up going back to the 30 because of the extra height of the monitor. I don't think a 30" monitor is really going to benefit much from going 4k other than making it even harder to max out the settings of a game. One the reasons I have always stayed bleeding edge with my video cards is because of the resolution of my 30. Going 4k is going to just be an even bigger pain. Now those new 50" 4k tvs being used as monitors, that makes sense. I just think trying to cram 4k into a 30" is going a bit overboard. Now if ATI would just hurry up and release a card that can actually handle 3 30" monitors without crying like a little ......

Oh and as far as tvs go, I'd love a 4k tv to replace my 67" 1080p Samsung. I sit around 10 feet from it, but some movies look better than others. A lot of this has to do with how they are actually encoded. Watching a normal dvd at that distance is painful.
 
Going to go ahead and disagree here. 2560x1600 is almost the perfect pixel pitch. I tried going to 3 samsungs with that weird resolution you use on your 2nd monitor (same model I think) and ended up going back to the 30 because of the extra height of the monitor. I don't think a 30" monitor is really going to benefit much from going 4k other than making it even harder to max out the settings of a game. One the reasons I have always stayed bleeding edge with my video cards is because of the resolution of my 30. Going 4k is going to just be an even bigger pain. Now those new 50" 4k tvs being used as monitors, that makes sense. I just think trying to cram 4k into a 30" is going a bit overboard. Now if ATI would just hurry up and release a card that can actually handle 3 30" monitors without crying like a little ......

Oh and as far as tvs go, I'd love a 4k tv to replace my 67" 1080p Samsung. I sit around 10 feet from it, but some movies look better than others. A lot of this has to do with how they are actually encoded. Watching a normal dvd at that distance is painful.
I never said it wasn't. What I said was the monitors that support that resolution are overpriced for how old they currently are. The Asus 31" 4k monitor should be coming out around 2000. It makes more sense to get it and the newer technology. I'm sure there will be other brands releasing similar displays for cheaper too. Funny thing is, I don't think those 30" beasts will really drop much in price due to them being IPS with the size and specs.

1920x1200 on my 24" looks rather good too, but if I could have a 4k 24" monitor I would much rather have that. The Samsung is my secondary for a reason lol. The res is ok, but the colors are terrible.
 
I have a friend who uses a 32" 1080p 3D TV for his monitor. Works surprisingly well when you're sitting up to it, as well as from across the room.
 
I have a friend who uses a 32" 1080p 3D TV for his monitor. Works surprisingly well when you're sitting up to it, as well as from across the room.
3D TVs typically come with better image processing due to the fact that it has to handle a higher refresh rate. This means that the image won't be as fuzzy as a cheaper screen.
 
I never said it wasn't. What I said was the monitors that support that resolution are overpriced for how old they currently are. The Asus 31" 4k monitor should be coming out around 2000. It makes more sense to get it and the newer technology. I'm sure there will be other brands releasing similar displays for cheaper too. Funny thing is, I don't think those 30" beasts will really drop much in price due to them being IPS with the size and specs.

1920x1200 on my 24" looks rather good too, but if I could have a 4k 24" monitor I would much rather have that. The Samsung is my secondary for a reason lol. The res is ok, but the colors are terrible.

If it is the same samsung 23 as what I have they are TN panels which is why the color sucks. What's really starting to annoy me is that it's almost impossible to find a monitor that has a higher resolution that 1920x1080. 1080 is not nearly enough vertical for gaming.

I'm tempted to just dump my 3 30s and buy 3 of these since maybe then my 690 will actually let me span, but I don't know if I'll like it only having 1080.
AOC 27" Widescreen FlatPanel IPS LED HD Monitor I2757FH - Best Buy

They have super tiny bezels.
 
Back
Top Bottom