Can someone please explain the difference between grey-to-grey (GTG) response time and the "1 ms moving picture response time (MPRT)" that is mentioned in the article.
"Keeping in mind that Samsung’s announcement is focused around games and FreeSync 2 (and the latter uses its own HDR transport) the status of the HDR10 support isn't known at this time."
If AMD Freesynce2 HDR isn't using the open HDR10 standard then I want to know about it, anandtech!
Since these are also premium priced Samsung monitors, I very much want to know if they support HDR10+, i.e. the new HDR10 open standard that includes dynamic metadata (like dolbyvision).
If my understanding of the FreeSync 2 HDR pipeline is correct, HDR10 support should be as simple as implementing it as a front-end in the driver and letting the rest of the pipeline do the tone-mapping to the display's native colour space. Let's just say I have more faith in AMD doing this than a display manufacturer.
FreeSync 2 does not require any current HDR standards ( HDR10, HDR10+ or Dolby Vision ), I think it's just a way insure fair base prices, but in the same time allowing for more advanced panels.. sure I would love to see a standard being supported, being blind like this means we don't know how serious the HDR implementation is.
"If AMD Freesynce2 HDR isn't using the open HDR10 standard then I want to know about it, anandtech!"
FreeSync2 has its own HDR Transport standard. So it is possible to have a monitor that supports FS2, but not one of the common standards. Though unlikely, as you would want a fallback for games that don't support FreeSync 2's HDR.
as Samsung products, it would be interesting to see if these fallback methods include HDR10+ which are used in 2017 TV's, and being backported to 2016 TV firmware.
It would be nice to know an exact answer, but my understanding is HDR10/Dolby are standards, while FreeSync is about forgoing standards and outputing directly to native so the monitor does not need to reconvert from the standard.
Should be illegal to charge 1500$ for that 49 inch display, it's just the equivalent of 2x27 inchers and 500$ would be fine but more than that is not worth even if it was 2160p.
You are welcome to express your opinion by not buying one.
But allow me point out to you that the world is larger than your bedroom, and other people have different priorities as to how they spend their money...
Ah marketing, so what are they going to call the QLED products when they are truly LED screens versus LCD with LED backlighting? I have always disliked them marketing such products as LED where you have difficulty even finding LCD associated with it at all. Really, go to Samsung's site about their QLED, I don't remember being able to find even 1 reference to LCD on those pages.
Nope, still not a true LED screen. It's an LCD screen with LED backlight and a tri-color quantum dot "filter" between them to enhance the colors. All of these technologies are just stop gaps until OLED monitors become affordable and burn-in is further reduced.
I don't think we'll ever get to the point where they'll be able to cram 8,294,400 RGB LEDs onto a 32" display with no gaps between them and without a very large, very loud liquid cooling system.
I guess it can replace a double monitor work setup. A few of our execs have been making us pull their monitors and replace with equivalent single curved screens. That use case has no need for 144hz and likely HDR and expanded color spaces are worthless too. For gaming not nearly enough vertical resolution, even 1440 would be a nice improvement. Maybe if you watch a lot of wide format movies at your desk? Seems pretty bad for that though really since you can't get 4K native, might as well buy a nice shiny tv for that for a heck of a lot less.
It's the equivalent of 2x27" monitors so judging by your comment about 1440 on a 27" the text would be too small if the 49" monitor had 1440 vertical resolution. It would also be extremely difficult for a single GPU to drive that 2X 1440p resolution. 1080p was the right choice for gamers though I think it would work better if it was a bit smaller and was the equivalent of 2 X 25" monitors. 1080p on a 27" isn't the greatest pixel density. I would need to push the display back on my desk a bit.
I like them, but really having freesync 2 makes no difference to me and probably most as nvidia pretty much owns the market that these monitors would be targeted at. Plus no Dolby Vision makes it DOA for me.
The FreeSync 2 idea, IIUC, is for the display to not need to support any specific format. The GPU will do whatever conversion necessary to get to the monitor's native format.
At 49" this is not a travel rig. This essentially looks like a 55" 4k 120Hz HDR TV cut in half horizontally. So, why not just buy the 55" 4k HDR TV and have software set the reso to 3240x1080 with the content at the bottom of the screen. It'll be cheaper, and as a bonus, you have the option of native 4k. For the uber wide screen to take off, it will need to be cheaper than the single larger panel they cut in half to make it.
That they didn't make a 32" 21:9 1440p version of this simply baffles me. Honestly, what were they thinking with that 32:9 oddity? It's not like that resolution will be supported by 99% of games anyway. I guess it's a monitor made specifically for racing game players?
The prices for the smaller versions are great, though. Now, I want a $699 21:9 version with all the same features and 3440x1440 resolution. Please and thank you.
Well, on paper the C32HG70 is the monitor I've been waiting for. I rather doubt it can do 144hz competently without smearing, though. However, if you can cap it at 120hz with good image quality I'm still game.
The DPI on the 49" model is horrendous. The fix isn't that hard though. Just buy 2 C32HG70s and put them together. You can even set them up together side-by-side vertically to change the bezels. For the same price as the 49" model you can vastly increase your resolution and still enjoy all the other bells and whistles that come with these monitors. And that's what Samsung should have done. They should have combined two of the C32HG70s to eliminate the bezel providing a resolution of 5120 x 1440 or maybe even 5120 x 2160. Now THAT I would drop $1,500 on.
Positive evolution of monitors towards better color accuracy while keeping native resolutions reasonable: 4K does not make sense on a 27-inch screen, other than for gaming. Everything is too small. 2560 × 1440 or 2560 × 1600 makes much more sense.
But there are deal breakers on these models: no Thunderbolt 3 / USB-C support. It's 2017. They are also keeping the very unstable stand design from the current 28 inch 4K monitor.
Cannot find the spec for input lag on these new Samsung QLED monitors? someone said in another forum the input lag is 4ms. does anyone know if this is true ? Seen on display lag site that the best Samsung input lag monitor is 11ms and the best input lag monitor was Acer at 9ms. all hep finding out what is the correct information would be appreciated.
Cannot find the spec for input lag on these new Samsung QLED monitors? someone said in another forum the input lag is 4ms. does anyone know if this is true ? Seen on display lag site that the best Samsung input lag monitor is 11ms and the best input lag monitor was Acer at 9ms. all help finding out what is the correct information would be appreciated.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
50 Comments
Back to Article
seamonkey79 - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Have the prices for the 27" and 32" reversed in either the text or the table, threw me offDanNeely - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Typo. In the linked press release the 32" one is $699 and the 27" $599 as would normally be expected.SunnyNW - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Can someone please explain the difference between grey-to-grey (GTG) response time and the "1 ms moving picture response time (MPRT)" that is mentioned in the article.nathanddrews - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Everything you never wanted to know:http://informationdisplay.org/IDArchive/2005/Octob...
R3MF - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
"Keeping in mind that Samsung’s announcement is focused around games and FreeSync 2 (and the latter uses its own HDR transport) the status of the HDR10 support isn't known at this time."If AMD Freesynce2 HDR isn't using the open HDR10 standard then I want to know about it, anandtech!
Since these are also premium priced Samsung monitors, I very much want to know if they support HDR10+, i.e. the new HDR10 open standard that includes dynamic metadata (like dolbyvision).
r3loaded - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
If my understanding of the FreeSync 2 HDR pipeline is correct, HDR10 support should be as simple as implementing it as a front-end in the driver and letting the rest of the pipeline do the tone-mapping to the display's native colour space. Let's just say I have more faith in AMD doing this than a display manufacturer.Xajel - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
FreeSync 2 does not require any current HDR standards ( HDR10, HDR10+ or Dolby Vision ), I think it's just a way insure fair base prices, but in the same time allowing for more advanced panels.. sure I would love to see a standard being supported, being blind like this means we don't know how serious the HDR implementation is.Ryan Smith - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
"If AMD Freesynce2 HDR isn't using the open HDR10 standard then I want to know about it, anandtech!"FreeSync2 has its own HDR Transport standard. So it is possible to have a monitor that supports FS2, but not one of the common standards. Though unlikely, as you would want a fallback for games that don't support FreeSync 2's HDR.
R3MF - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
interesting, Ryan. thank you.as Samsung products, it would be interesting to see if these fallback methods include HDR10+ which are used in 2017 TV's, and being backported to 2016 TV firmware.
bcronce - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
It would be nice to know an exact answer, but my understanding is HDR10/Dolby are standards, while FreeSync is about forgoing standards and outputing directly to native so the monitor does not need to reconvert from the standard.Jax Omen - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Wow, a 32" 144hz non-TN monitor with a release date! Color me interestedDug - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
I agree. And it's 1440p, which is the sweet spot for me.jjj - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Should be illegal to charge 1500$ for that 49 inch display, it's just the equivalent of 2x27 inchers and 500$ would be fine but more than that is not worth even if it was 2160p.Venya - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Exactly! You can purchase 2x 27" 4K IPS display with Freesync (not v2) for less than $900...Notmyusualid - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
@ jjj & VenyaBolsheviks.
There is no way on this plant that two monitors pushed together are even half as cool as this, whatever their resolution.
Ultra-wide is here to stay, and I'm in love with my X34 Predator.
Notmyusualid - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
*planet.Despoiler - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
These aren't IPS panels though. They are using VA. The only VA gaming monitor that I am aware of is the Eizo FG2421. @ 23.5" 1080p it was $600.name99 - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
You are welcome to express your opinion by not buying one.But allow me point out to you that the world is larger than your bedroom, and other people have different priorities as to how they spend their money...
Iketh - Saturday, June 24, 2017 - link
Manufacturing one large panel is > 2x as complex and costly as manufacturing 2 smaller displays half the size.MikhailT - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
If only it was 4K for 32/27, it would be nice to pair this with the new Xbox1X.Alistair - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Since the new xbox supports supersampling, maybe 1440p downscaled from 4k will be a supported resolution? One can hope :)Nottheface - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Ah marketing, so what are they going to call the QLED products when they are truly LED screens versus LCD with LED backlighting? I have always disliked them marketing such products as LED where you have difficulty even finding LCD associated with it at all. Really, go to Samsung's site about their QLED, I don't remember being able to find even 1 reference to LCD on those pages.Sergio526 - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Nope, still not a true LED screen. It's an LCD screen with LED backlight and a tri-color quantum dot "filter" between them to enhance the colors. All of these technologies are just stop gaps until OLED monitors become affordable and burn-in is further reduced.I don't think we'll ever get to the point where they'll be able to cram 8,294,400 RGB LEDs onto a 32" display with no gaps between them and without a very large, very loud liquid cooling system.
Notmyusualid - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
I was looking at the pics thinking 'wow'...I was feeling my pockets for my wallet - 'till I read the 49" had a verticle resolution of 1080.
That'll be a 'no' from me then...
zodiacfml - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
I agree. The aspect ratio is so wide and short that the 49" spec is exaggerated compared to 16:9 screenIcehawk - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
I guess it can replace a double monitor work setup. A few of our execs have been making us pull their monitors and replace with equivalent single curved screens. That use case has no need for 144hz and likely HDR and expanded color spaces are worthless too. For gaming not nearly enough vertical resolution, even 1440 would be a nice improvement. Maybe if you watch a lot of wide format movies at your desk? Seems pretty bad for that though really since you can't get 4K native, might as well buy a nice shiny tv for that for a heck of a lot less.Makaveli - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
This ^^^ the vertical resolution is too low 1080p yuck.If was in the market for a new screen I would go with the 32 1440p model.
27 and 1440 is abit small for text.
Hubb1e - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
It's the equivalent of 2x27" monitors so judging by your comment about 1440 on a 27" the text would be too small if the 49" monitor had 1440 vertical resolution. It would also be extremely difficult for a single GPU to drive that 2X 1440p resolution. 1080p was the right choice for gamers though I think it would work better if it was a bit smaller and was the equivalent of 2 X 25" monitors. 1080p on a 27" isn't the greatest pixel density. I would need to push the display back on my desk a bit.zodiacfml - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
C32HG70 is interesting. Not 4K but decently priced compared to upcoming 4K monitors with the same specsBrokenCrayons - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
That's a bit too wide for my tastes and I'm still not entirely sold on the idea of a curved panel.at80eighty - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
the curved panel is exactly the best thing considering the width - less need to turn head around back and forth to counter loss of peripheral viewSpartanJet - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
I like them, but really having freesync 2 makes no difference to me and probably most as nvidia pretty much owns the market that these monitors would be targeted at. Plus no Dolby Vision makes it DOA for me.petteyg359 - Monday, June 19, 2017 - link
The FreeSync 2 idea, IIUC, is for the display to not need to support any specific format. The GPU will do whatever conversion necessary to get to the monitor's native format.Xajel - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Damn, they should make C34HG70 as an Ultrawide 21:9 1440p version of C32HG70Cloakstar - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
At 49" this is not a travel rig.This essentially looks like a 55" 4k 120Hz HDR TV cut in half horizontally. So, why not just buy the 55" 4k HDR TV and have software set the reso to 3240x1080 with the content at the bottom of the screen. It'll be cheaper, and as a bonus, you have the option of native 4k.
For the uber wide screen to take off, it will need to be cheaper than the single larger panel they cut in half to make it.
Valantar - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
That they didn't make a 32" 21:9 1440p version of this simply baffles me. Honestly, what were they thinking with that 32:9 oddity? It's not like that resolution will be supported by 99% of games anyway. I guess it's a monitor made specifically for racing game players?The prices for the smaller versions are great, though. Now, I want a $699 21:9 version with all the same features and 3440x1440 resolution. Please and thank you.
Kvaern1 - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
"t's not like that resolution will be supported by 99% of games anyway. I guess it's a monitor made specifically for racing game players?"Actually it's more like 99% of games support a fullscreen borderless window these days.
GoodRevrnd - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Well, on paper the C32HG70 is the monitor I've been waiting for. I rather doubt it can do 144hz competently without smearing, though. However, if you can cap it at 120hz with good image quality I'm still game.GoodRevrnd - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
Also, hopefully Vega brings the goods to actually power this thing.Frenetic Pony - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
That's a lot of money for something that hits neither 1k nits (HDR 10 standard for non mobile devices) nor 4k. Still, 144hz and Freesync (2).Magichands8 - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link
The DPI on the 49" model is horrendous. The fix isn't that hard though. Just buy 2 C32HG70s and put them together. You can even set them up together side-by-side vertically to change the bezels. For the same price as the 49" model you can vastly increase your resolution and still enjoy all the other bells and whistles that come with these monitors. And that's what Samsung should have done. They should have combined two of the C32HG70s to eliminate the bezel providing a resolution of 5120 x 1440 or maybe even 5120 x 2160. Now THAT I would drop $1,500 on.milkod2001 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
Dear Samsung. Make that 32 incher 4k NOT CURVED, put all tech there and we have a deal at: $799.R3MF - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
Dear Samsung, make a 35" curved ultrawide (12:9) and we have a deal.But for ~£750 I expect it to support HDR10+ just like your TV's do. ;)
nikkko - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link
Positive evolution of monitors towards better color accuracy while keeping native resolutions reasonable: 4K does not make sense on a 27-inch screen, other than for gaming. Everything is too small. 2560 × 1440 or 2560 × 1600 makes much more sense.But there are deal breakers on these models: no Thunderbolt 3 / USB-C support. It's 2017. They are also keeping the very unstable stand design from the current 28 inch 4K monitor.
Ahnilated - Tuesday, June 20, 2017 - link
As soon as it said "curved" they lost me. I will never purchase a niche curved display, they are useless no matter what the price.37gmanlfc - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Cannot find the spec for input lag on these new Samsung QLED monitors? someone said in another forum the input lag is 4ms. does anyone know if this is true ? Seen on display lag site that the best Samsung input lag monitor is 11ms and the best input lag monitor was Acer at 9ms. all hep finding out what is the correct information would be appreciated.37gmanlfc - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Cannot find the spec for input lag on these new Samsung QLED monitors? someone said in another forum the input lag is 4ms. does anyone know if this is true ? Seen on display lag site that the best Samsung input lag monitor is 11ms and the best input lag monitor was Acer at 9ms. all help finding out what is the correct information would be appreciated.