Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

press.asus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 282 posts

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#231

Post by cosmic_cheese »

piker wrote: post #75

The problem with using this kind of monitor for any work that others will view on their own monitors is that your perception of what looks good will be way off. For example, it's clear that a lot of the Rust UI framework developers have been working on Macs for the last few years. The font rendering on many of those look bad once you plug them into a more normal DPI monitor. If they hadn't been using Macs with Retina…

I make a point of keeping my secondary monitor a "normal" DPI 2560x1440 display precisely to avoid this kind of problem. The loss of legibility has little impact on secondary monitor use cases, and I can easily spot-check my UI and UI graphics work by simply dragging the window over.

High quality normal DPI monitors are so cheap these days that even if multi-monitor isn't one's cup of tea there's not really a good reason to not have one (except maybe space restrictions, in which case a cheap ~16" 1080p/1200p portable monitor from Amazon will serve the purpose nicely).

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#232

Post by 4ggr0 »

simoncion wrote: post #194
4ggr0 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm actually going to do the reverse move, was gaming on a 4K display, but going to downgrade to 3440x1440 to get more performance. but of course the gaming displays i find apparently aren't ideal for working, because text looks worse. add to that that the internet seems to be split if wide-monitors are the best thing ever or actually horrible. why is it all so complicated, man.

If the game offers it [0], set the output resolution to 4K, and the render resolution to something smaller. A multiplier of ~0.66 is roughly 1440p output, and 0.5 is 1080p. If the game doesn't offer that, then I've found that the HUD/UI uglification isn't too bad when one sets the output resolution to 1440p. If Windows is getting in the way of doing this, and most or all of your games have been purchased through Stea…

> set the output resolution to 4K, and the render resolution to something smaller

doesn't that make everything blurry? that's the gripe i have with circa post-2020 PC gaming, barely any pc can run a AAA or AA game in native resolution and instead has to use artificial upscaling and whatnot. haven't specifically tried it.

also can't test it anymore, as my gaming monitor is now our TV (48 inch OLED gaming TV, what a blast it was). now using my "old" 32in 2560x1440 IPS display, really miss OLED :( which is why i want to buy a new monitor. but i can't decide if i should take a 27in one (seems to be the 16:9 standard right now, but seems so small to me) or a ultrawide one. i switch games very frequently and also sometimes like to play old(er) games, so a bit scared of the "ultrawides are cool if your game supports it"-vibe...

> I've heard good things about the Fedora variant known as Bazzite

haha, this message was written on Bazzite, so i got that part covered :D switched about a month ago, funny to get the recommendation now.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#233

Post by 4ggr0 »

zamadatix wrote: post #180
4ggr0 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm actually going to do the reverse move, was gaming on a 4K display, but going to downgrade to 3440x1440 to get more performance. but of course the gaming displays i find apparently aren't ideal for working, because text looks worse. add to that that the internet seems to be split if wide-monitors are the best thing ever or actually horrible. why is it all so complicated, man.

My only gripe is nearly all common "ultrawide" models should really be thought of as "ultrashort" in that they don't offer more width, just less height. E.g. a 21:9 ultrawide variant of 4k should really be 5040x2160. Instead they are nearly all 3840x1600. That may well be cost/price optimal for certain folks, I'm not saying it's bad for the product itself to exist, but nobody was looking at a 1600p monitor thinking "…

yeah, that really confused me as well. the whole 4K, 2K, 2.5K, ultrawide, ultrahigh, microwide, 8K shit just gets confusing, especially because it's neither accurate nor standardized.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#234

Post by r0b05 »

dmayle wrote: post #221
Kon5ole wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> You can get 8K TVs for >8K at jumbo TV size has relatively large pixels compared to an 8K desktop monitor. It’s easier to manufacture. I don't think that's true. I've been using a 8k 55" TV as my main monitor for years now. It was available for sub-800 USD before all such tv's vanished from the market. Smaller pixels were not more expensive even then, the 55"s were the cheapest. 4k monitors can be had for sub-200…

I've been using an 8k 65" TV as a monitor for four years now. When I bought it, you could buy the Samsung QN700B 55" 8k, but at the time it was 50% more than the 65" I bought (TCL). I wish the 55" 8k TVs still existed (or that the announced 55" 8k monitors were ever shipped). I make do with 65", but it's just a tad too large. I would never switch back to 4k, however.

What is the model number and how has the experience been?

I've mostly read that TV's don't make great monitors. I have a TLC Mini LED TV which is great as a TV though.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#236

Post by mrguyorama »

dmayle wrote: post #221
Kon5ole wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> You can get 8K TVs for >8K at jumbo TV size has relatively large pixels compared to an 8K desktop monitor. It’s easier to manufacture. I don't think that's true. I've been using a 8k 55" TV as my main monitor for years now. It was available for sub-800 USD before all such tv's vanished from the market. Smaller pixels were not more expensive even then, the 55"s were the cheapest. 4k monitors can be had for sub-200…

I've been using an 8k 65" TV as a monitor for four years now. When I bought it, you could buy the Samsung QN700B 55" 8k, but at the time it was 50% more than the 65" I bought (TCL). I wish the 55" 8k TVs still existed (or that the announced 55" 8k monitors were ever shipped). I make do with 65", but it's just a tad too large. I would never switch back to 4k, however.

What do you watch on an 8K TV?

There's no content

Average bitrate from anything not a Bluray for even HD is not good, so you do not benefit from more pixels anyway. Sure, you are decompressing and displaying 8K worth of pixels, but the actual resolution of your content is more like 1080p anyway, especially in color space.

Normally, games are the place where arbitrarily high pixel counts could shine, because you could literally ensure that every pixel is calculated and make real use of it, but that's actually stupidly hard at 4k and above, so nvidia just told people to eat smeary and AI garbage instead, throwing away the entire point of having a beefy GPU.

I was even skeptical of 1440p at higher refresh rates, but bought a nice monitor with those specs anyway and was happily surprised with the improvement, but it's obvious diminishing returns.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#237

Post by cubefox »

I wonder why local dimming zones remain so limited in LCDs. This one has 4032, which corresponds to a background LED resolution of only 84×48. That's about 90×90 (over 8000) colored LCD pixels per white background LED.

This is far too coarse to accurately resolve fine differences in HDR brightness, e.g. from lamps, car lights, street lights, specular highlights etc.

Perhaps the background LEDs are still relatively costly? Or customers just don't care enough to justify putting in significantly more? Which is unfortunate, since although OLED monitors have perfect fine HDR contrast, the overall achievable screen brightness is quite low compared to LED LCDs.

Which makes both technologies suboptimal for HDR content, for different reasons.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#238

Post by tombert »

puzzlingcaptcha wrote: post #111
sim7c00 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

high latency on TVs make it bad for games etc. as anyhting thats sensitive on IO timings can feel a bit off. even 5ms compared to 1 or 2ms response times is noticable by a lot in hand-eye coordination across io -> monitor.

It sort of depends on what you perceive as 'high'. Many TVs have a special low-latency "game" display mode. My LG OLED does, and it's a 2021 model. But OLED in general (in a PC monitor as well) is going to have higher latency than IPS for example, regardless of input delay.

I have a MiSTer Laggy thing to measure TV latency. In my bedroom Vizio LCD thing, in Game Mode, is between 18-24ms, a bit more than a frame of latency (assuming 60fps).

I don’t play a lot of fast paced games and I am not good enough at any of them to where a frame of latency would drastically affect my performance in any game, and I don’t think two frames of latency is really noticeable when typing in Vim or something.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#239

Post by simoncion »

4ggr0 wrote: post #232
simoncion wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the game offers it [0], set the output resolution to 4K, and the render resolution to something smaller. A multiplier of ~0.66 is roughly 1440p output, and 0.5 is 1080p. If the game doesn't offer that, then I've found that the HUD/UI uglification isn't too bad when one sets the output resolution to 1440p. If Windows is getting in the way of doing this, and most or all of your games have been purchased through Stea…

> set the output resolution to 4K, and the render resolution to something smaller doesn't that make everything blurry? that's the gripe i have with circa post-2020 PC gaming, barely any pc can run a AAA or AA game in native resolution and instead has to use artificial upscaling and whatnot. haven't specifically tried it. also can't test it anymore, as my gaming monitor is now our TV (48 inch OLED gaming TV, what a bl…

> doesn't that make everything blurry?

My experience for the 3D parts of a great many games that my 5700 XT can't reasonably run at panel-native resolution is that the game's art style is to blur up the picture with all sorts of postprocessing (and sometimes (especially with UE5 games) with the ever-more-popular "it looks so bad it makes you wonder if the renderer is totally busted unless you leave TAA on" rendering technique). Sometimes this blurring ends up looking absolutely great, and other times it's just lazy, obnoxious, and awful.

So, not that I notice? For the games that permit it, the HUD and menus stay nice and sharp, and the 3D stuff that's going to be all smudged up no matter what you do just renders at a higher frame rate.

For games that don't have independent 2D and 3D render resolutions, I find 1440p to be quite tolerable, and (weirdly) 1080p to be much less tolerable... despite the fact that you'd expect it to fit nicely on the panel. I guess I'm expecting a much more crisp picture with integer scaling than I get? Or maybe this is like what some games did way back when where they totally change the font and render style of the UI once they get past some specific breakpoint. [0] I haven't looked closely at what's going on, so I don't have any even vaguely-reasonable explanation for it.

> [ultrawide monitors]

I like the comment someone else made somewhere that described them as "ultrashort" monitors. Personally, even if I was willing to move my head around enough to scan the whole damn monitor, I'm unwilling to lose so much vertical resolution. But as always, one should definitely choose what one likes.

Personally, I find a 32" 3840 pixel wide monitor to be good. It's really great for doing work on, and perfectly acceptable for playing video games.

> [Linux]

Gratz on moving to Linux for gaming. Hope you don't have much trouble with it, and any trouble you have is either caused by super-invasive kernel-level anticheat that will never, ever work on Linux, or is trouble that's easy and/or fun to resolve.

[0] One such game that sticks out in my memory is the OG Deus Ex game. At 1024x768, the font for the in-game UI switched from what -at lower resolutions- seemed a lot like a bitmapped font to what seemed a lot like a proper vector font. The difference was dramatic.

Re: Asus Announces October Availability of ProArt Display 8K PA32KCX

#240

Post by chrismorgan »

alsetmusic wrote: post #189
zerkten wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can nerf network performance in the browser devtools or underprovision a VM relatively easily on these machines. People sometimes choose not to and others are ignorant. Most of the time, it's just the case that they are dealing with too many things that are vague making it difficult to prioritize seemingly less important things. A number of times I've had to have a framing discussion with a dev that eventually ge…

> Other times, I've heard devs comment negatively after the holidays when they've tried their product on a family computer. I worked for a popular company and went to visit family during the winter holidays. I couldn't believe how many commercials there were for said company's hot consumer product (I haven't had cable or over-air television since well before streaming was a thing, so this was a new experience in the…

I’ve never had TV, and have used ad blockers as long as they’ve been a thing. (Until 1⅓ years ago I even lived in a rural area where the closest billboard of any description was 40km away, and the second-closest 100km away.) On very odd occasions, I would get exposed to a television, and what I find uncomfortable at the best of times (notably: how do they cut so frequently!?) becomes a wretched experience as soon as it gets to ads, which it does with mindboggling frequency. I’m confident that if I tried actually watching that frenetic, oversaturated, noisy mess on someone’s gigantic, far-too-bright TV, I would be sick to the stomach and head within a few minutes.
Post reply on HN