Mini LED is mistake. It require complex active matrix to drive these hunderds of LED's zones (zone is group of LEDs), this is costly, and there are halos and trailing on finl image. Proper solution is Dual cell LCD, which is cheap, high speed (1ms or below), high contrast in range 1000000:1, fine color reproduction (12 bit with ease from two 6 bit LCD layers). Combined with in-front quantum dots, it give superior image to LCD, mini LED, OLED. Only very matured MicroLED can be better (decade away fron now at least)
AFAIK it's a tech that's been in R&D for over a decade and hyped by parts of the commentariat as the next big thing for almost as long; but for whatever reason has proven impossible to commercialize.
I dont know if TristanSDX has anything to do with Hisense but they are the only ones hyping this tech outside of the profesional space of extremely expensive monitors. It has got to be really hard to make these cheaply enough.
An LCD layer is very thin (a few hairs thickness), so adding a second layer would barely increase thickness at all. A monitor's thickness results largely from its backlight. FALD is particularly thick, because it requires the lights to be directly behind the screen rather than at its edges where most laptop monitors have them. A dual layer LCD could combine the thinness of laptop monitors with the performance of desktop monitors.
I'll remain skeptical until I see a test though.
. In fact, compared to the FALD alternative, it is likely to be much thinner as these monitors could
While I do like the dual cell LCD tech I do not know of a single monitor outside of the profesional space that are in the market. I know Hisense was showing some off at CES but those are not for sale yet.
I would like to see both dual cell and MicroLED's tested by third party reviews when they do come out to see how they really perform in monitors the masses can afford ie with whatever sacrifices each tech must make to make that possible.
Saying dual layer LCD is "cheap" is just nonsense. There is nothing cheap about it and yields have been so horrible that while it is amazing it has been limited to ultra reference monitors ($10K to $40K). If it was so easy and cheap as you say ... OEMs would just be using it over alternatives.
Professional monitors have their own pricing guide, usually with profits 10x larger than average monitor, while used tech is more refined but not that costly.
Not only is dual-panel more expensive than FALD backlights ('mini' LED or just regular LED) - due to the panel being the most expensive component in the display and double-panel doubling that cost - it also requires a truly monstrous backlight to drive peak brightness values through two panels. A monstrous backlight that, unless it is also FALD, will burn through both 'off' pixels of your stacked panels and kill your contrast anyway. Plus make the whole display unsuitable for any application where power draw and/or heat are a concern.
"Proper solution is Dual cell LCD". No, the proper solution is OLED. Local dimming is a low-res hack trying to add high contrast to a technology that just doesn't support it.
I wouldn't call it a mistake so much as a technology that has limitations in cost and ability that set in pretty quickly. Cost is already high at 60Hz and only gets less durable, less quality of image, and even MORE costly at 120-144Hz. So for professional uses it gets the job done, but OLED gets it done cheaper but with other issues in how it gets there. In the end I suspect only individual pixel lighting technologies will prevail, but there are a lot of reasons for using a steady light source and a varying aperture to achieve a good image. And of course, "best" varies in nature by price and just how much anyone can notice the improvement in quality.
Excluding the stand and then charging extra for it is trendsetting. I'd say it's a new idea, but f---ing Cisco has been doing it for years by not including rail kits with RACK MOUNTED networking equipment.
Yeah I'm expecting $4000+ at least for the inferior 32 inch monitor vs the Apple one. Apple's new monitor won't be beaten. I was more mad about the Mac Pro than the monitor.
Interesting, same thoughts while reading it. I think it was Hisense which has a demo TV last CES. On paper, seems cheapest tech for achieving close to OLED contrast though MicroLED can take on brighter environments with ease.
The price of previous model PC32UC was $1999, and a new one won't cost $4000+. Acer already announced similar (or practically the same) spec monitor ConceptD CM7321K and it's price is $2999. Asus should be the same price, just like 27" FALD gaming monitors. I'm getting Asus monitor as soon as it's released. So far Acer still hasn't mentioned at all about Dolby Vision on their new monitor. Maybe it doesn't support it.
The ProArt PA32UCX has a distinctive design of ProArt lines with lines ... The viewing angle of the screen is very wide, 178 degrees from the sides. ... to 384 direct-LED light areas to support HDR with ASUS LED Driving technology.
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
24 Comments
Back to Article
TristanSDX - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Mini LED is mistake. It require complex active matrix to drive these hunderds of LED's zones (zone is group of LEDs), this is costly, and there are halos and trailing on finl image.Proper solution is Dual cell LCD, which is cheap, high speed (1ms or below), high contrast in range 1000000:1, fine color reproduction (12 bit with ease from two 6 bit LCD layers). Combined with in-front quantum dots, it give superior image to LCD, mini LED, OLED. Only very matured MicroLED can be better (decade away fron now at least)
akvadrako - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
What are some of the best cheap dual cell LCD monitors?DanNeely - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Forget cheap. Are any for sale at all?AFAIK it's a tech that's been in R&D for over a decade and hyped by parts of the commentariat as the next big thing for almost as long; but for whatever reason has proven impossible to commercialize.
FreckledTrout - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
I dont know if TristanSDX has anything to do with Hisense but they are the only ones hyping this tech outside of the profesional space of extremely expensive monitors. It has got to be really hard to make these cheaply enough.Beaver M. - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Or just uncool. They would be thicker again after all!a5cent - Tuesday, June 18, 2019 - link
To my understanding this isn't correct.An LCD layer is very thin (a few hairs thickness), so adding a second layer would barely increase thickness at all. A monitor's thickness results largely from its backlight. FALD is particularly thick, because it requires the lights to be directly behind the screen rather than at its edges where most laptop monitors have them. A dual layer LCD could combine the thinness of laptop monitors with the performance of desktop monitors.
I'll remain skeptical until I see a test though.
. In fact, compared to the FALD alternative, it is likely to be much thinner as these monitors could
TheUnhandledException - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Currently available the cheapest one I am aware of is the Sony BVM-HX310 at a mere $30,000.FreckledTrout - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
While I do like the dual cell LCD tech I do not know of a single monitor outside of the profesional space that are in the market. I know Hisense was showing some off at CES but those are not for sale yet.I would like to see both dual cell and MicroLED's tested by third party reviews when they do come out to see how they really perform in monitors the masses can afford ie with whatever sacrifices each tech must make to make that possible.
TheUnhandledException - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Saying dual layer LCD is "cheap" is just nonsense. There is nothing cheap about it and yields have been so horrible that while it is amazing it has been limited to ultra reference monitors ($10K to $40K). If it was so easy and cheap as you say ... OEMs would just be using it over alternatives.TristanSDX - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Professional monitors have their own pricing guide, usually with profits 10x larger than average monitor, while used tech is more refined but not that costly.edzieba - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link
Not only is dual-panel more expensive than FALD backlights ('mini' LED or just regular LED) - due to the panel being the most expensive component in the display and double-panel doubling that cost - it also requires a truly monstrous backlight to drive peak brightness values through two panels. A monstrous backlight that, unless it is also FALD, will burn through both 'off' pixels of your stacked panels and kill your contrast anyway. Plus make the whole display unsuitable for any application where power draw and/or heat are a concern.ABR - Sunday, June 16, 2019 - link
"Proper solution is Dual cell LCD". No, the proper solution is OLED. Local dimming is a low-res hack trying to add high contrast to a technology that just doesn't support it.skavi - Monday, September 2, 2019 - link
OLED can't get the same brightness levels. Especially as PPI is reduced.FXi - Monday, June 17, 2019 - link
I wouldn't call it a mistake so much as a technology that has limitations in cost and ability that set in pretty quickly. Cost is already high at 60Hz and only gets less durable, less quality of image, and even MORE costly at 120-144Hz. So for professional uses it gets the job done, but OLED gets it done cheaper but with other issues in how it gets there. In the end I suspect only individual pixel lighting technologies will prevail, but there are a lot of reasons for using a steady light source and a varying aperture to achieve a good image. And of course, "best" varies in nature by price and just how much anyone can notice the improvement in quality.JEmlay - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Halos and trailing are moot with this many zones and with this type of back light.Bulat Ziganshin - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
I expect price of $1000 for the stand :)ksec - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Their previous model were $2K to 3K. This could easily be 4K+. Now people could at least compare what value Apple's Pro XDR is offering.imaheadcase - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
including the stand? ZING!PeachNCream - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Excluding the stand and then charging extra for it is trendsetting. I'd say it's a new idea, but f---ing Cisco has been doing it for years by not including rail kits with RACK MOUNTED networking equipment.Flunk - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link
Pro monitors quite often come without a stand, but they do come with a VESA mount. Without either is a scam.Alistair - Friday, June 14, 2019 - link
Yeah I'm expecting $4000+ at least for the inferior 32 inch monitor vs the Apple one. Apple's new monitor won't be beaten. I was more mad about the Mac Pro than the monitor.zodiacfml - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link
Interesting, same thoughts while reading it. I think it was Hisense which has a demo TV last CES. On paper, seems cheapest tech for achieving close to OLED contrast though MicroLED can take on brighter environments with ease.sitti - Saturday, June 15, 2019 - link
The price of previous model PC32UC was $1999, and a new one won't cost $4000+. Acer already announced similar (or practically the same) spec monitor ConceptD CM7321K and it's price is $2999. Asus should be the same price, just like 27" FALD gaming monitors. I'm getting Asus monitor as soon as it's released. So far Acer still hasn't mentioned at all about Dolby Vision on their new monitor. Maybe it doesn't support it.alicetaylor - Thursday, June 20, 2019 - link
The ProArt PA32UCX has a distinctive design of ProArt lines with lines ... The viewing angle of the screen is very wide, 178 degrees from the sides. ... to 384 direct-LED light areas to support HDR with ASUS LED Driving technology.http://theimpossiblequiz.xyz