Comments Locked

66 Comments

Back to Article

  • kliend - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    At 1080p, the only viable option is the 24inch model. *yawn*
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    and 24" is laughably small for a curved panel. Not that 31" 16:9 is much better.💩
  • Freeb!rd - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Maybe they want you to buy 3 of them and go Eyefinity (and beyond)
  • CityBlue - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    @Anandtech - have you ever thought about refusing to cover product announcements when the price is not known? It's only the most important spec item.

    "This looks nice, I wonder if I can afford it?"
    <scrolls down>
    "Oh, so nobody has a frigging clue what it costs. How utterly pointless - forget it, then."
  • Beaver M. - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Well, at least they now tell you what panel is used. They didnt do that for a very long time.
  • niva - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    I agree with this. Why post advertisements when you don't even have a reasonable set of specs or price to publish to the viewers? Is this another revenue stream?
  • s.yu - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Anandtech coverage is generally among the best, imagine what spec sheet you get from Engadget etc.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    To be sure, this is not an advertisement, nor is it another revenue stream.
  • Questor - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    They are not reviewing or recommending the product. They are simply reporting its existence. If they post a review and fail to include pricing, then you have a fair complaint.
  • CityBlue - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Nobody is forcing them to cover it. If the vendor can't provide pricing information, then don't cover it. It's not a hard concept to grasp, is it?
  • p1esk - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    I personally don't care much about pricing. I'm interested in new products even if I don't intend to buy them.
  • Andrei Frumusanu - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    If AMD or Intel announce a new CPU microarchitecture or lineup, should we also not cover it for 5 months till they announce pricing? Technology coverage isn't only about pure consumer guidance.
  • CityBlue - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    @Andrei Frumusanu A microarch announcement is completely different from an actual product announcement, particularly when the latter is for something as humdrum as a display, or hard disk, or keyboard - is it so difficult to demand approximate pricing info? @Anandtech routinely posts e-waste announcements without any attempt to clarify pricing. This article (and the many others sans pricing) are basically just for clicks, we get that, but maybe show some integrity and demand pricing from the vendors before agreeing to regurgitate whatever you next receive in the mail. A product announcement without any indication of pricing becomes a lot less interesting, to the point of being utterly forgettable.
  • Questor - Thursday, March 5, 2020 - link

    Are they not a PC tech and related topic site? Are they supposed to ignore products announcements where a price is not readily available? Do you complain this much about everything else? The old and appropriate saying is, "If you have to ask, you probably can't afford it."
    Start saving your pennies now. In about ten years maybe you can buy one.
  • yetanotherhuman - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Let's be honest - none of these look interesting. A 16:9 curved panel at 1080p, the only "ok" of which at that size is 24", which should never be curved anyway.

    Why is AnandTech posting this junk?
  • CityBlue - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Clicks.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Hi CityBlue,

    You definitely bring up a good point, and it's a matter we've discussed internally before.

    The issue from our end is that hardware vendors have adopted a strategy of not deciding on prices for a lot of items until the last minute. Especially with commodity hardware like displays, they want to see what the competition is charging, what their production costs are, and make a decision from there.

    We can demand pricing info all we want, but vendors can't give us what they don't have. Nor do we have the leverage to force their hand otherwise.

    Now should we post articles noting new products when the prices aren't available? Ideally we wouldn't have this problem to begin with, but since we are in fact here, our options are either to do this, or withhold articles until after a product is on store shelves and pricing has been determined. The issue for us is that by the time a product is on store shelves, it's too late - people read about it months ago, when it was first announced. So from that perspective, our coverage is late and inconsequential to many, including the almighty Google.

    To be sure, I'd rather have pricing information. But it's extremely difficult to justify ignoring product announcements just because the price hasn't been set yet. It's simply not in sync with how products are being announced and released to retailers.
  • CityBlue - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    I understand and appreciate your dilemma, I really do. What about a price range? Some sort of indicative pricing? Having absolutely NO price is just not helpful, and results in instant buzzkill/loss of interest, so even though you think you're providing a service your price-free coverage *is already* inconsequential because it lacks pricing.

    If some sort of indicative price is not possible/forth coming, then yes - delay the post until pricing becomes available, don't be click whores (no offence). Maybe then vendors will start providing prices, or at least an approximate price range.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Unfortunately I think you overestimate our leverage. Vendors like Samsung really don't care whether we post news pieces about new products. Their business plans do not hinge on AnandTech.
  • Holliday75 - Thursday, March 5, 2020 - link

    For what its worth I'd rather be in the know in regards to new products so I can watch for pricing announcements if I am interested whether for work or pleasure.

    Sure pricing is definitely preferred, but beggars can't be choosers.
  • Sivar - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    1080p on a 32" screen? Even my previous generation curved 32" Samsung CH711 is 1440P, though it's undesirable for reasons other than resolution (it aggressively flickers when displaying horizontal lines, uses a proprietary HDMI cable is far too short, etc.)
    At least these new units support basic FreeSync and refresh at a perfectly serviceable 75Hz.
  • milkywayer - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Yup this is crappy at best. 1080p at these big sizes should be illegal in 2020 IMHO
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    it makes more sense for an office screen than a gaming one IMO. About 13 years ago my previous employer bought 24" 1920x1200 monitors for all the managers (we peons had a mix of 19: 1280x1024 and 22" 1680x1050's). A lot of them immediately changed the resolution to 1280x1024 to make the text bigger. 32" 1080p is the same half blind but too stubborn to admit it and wear glasses ~70 DPI.

    At the time I wasn't able to convince any of the bat-eyed management to switch to 1280x800 or 1450x1050 so they'd have square pixels and not have everything distorted all out of shape; so I suspect today getting them to use DPI scaling would also be a lost cause. /sigh
  • surt - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Who is buying something without 4k & 120hz in this day and age? 3rd world office workers?
  • Beaver M. - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    4K for what? You cant even get a graphics card that will make those 120 Hz useful at 4K. They are ~2 generations behind.
    But yeah, 1440p minimum for 27" monitors. It still even works fine on 32" ones. 1080p is ugly on everything beyond 24".
  • p1esk - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    What do you mean you can’t get a graphics card? I’m driving two Asus PG27UQ with a an RTX 2060, works fine for reading. You only need more if you want to play games.
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Why would you buy 120 Hz for office use?
    120 Hz is useless if you cant even get much beyond 60 FPS on even the fastest graphics card.
  • p1esk - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Because most of my “office use” involves looking at moving text, and moving text is blurry at 60hz. As soon as 4k at 240hz come me out I’ll be first in line to buy them, because I can easily tell the difference between 120hz and 240hz at 1080p.
  • surt - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Every graphics card (including embedded) made in the last 5 years is fine for 4k 120 unless you want to game.
  • boeush - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Unless you want to game, there's zero point in a 120 Hz refresh rate. I work all day long with 60 Hz monitors, and they are more than suffucient for any sort of productivity/office workloads.
  • lilkwarrior - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    That’s extremely narrow-minded with anecdotal fallacies why 120hz+ isn’t useful beyond gaming; most UX professionals, animators, & creative pros in general will strongly disagree with you.

    There’s a reason why the PA32UCG exists & so on. 4K@120hz+ is hard to quality control but strongly preferred by creative pros
  • p1esk - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    He's trolling, ignore him.
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Yeah thats why even the best professional monitors rarely have more than 60 Hz, yet are still extremely expensive. That last one here on Andandtech even only has 10 ms reaction. For that even 60 Hz is too fast. 120 Hz would be completely useless. I think you dont know how refresh rate and panel reaction time are tied together. If one of both cant reach the others specs, then its as stupid as putting a Ferrari transmission into a 60 HP diesel car.
  • jabber - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    You have to remember most here have never had a 'proper job'. The mostly live in some IT fantasy land.
  • surt - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Except for eye fatigue. But hey, it's your health if you don't want to care.
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Eye fatigue doesnt happen from scrolling while trying to read the scrolled stuff.
    It happens because of crappy lighting, or, on CRTs, because of low refresh rate. Refresh rate on CRTs and LCDs is not the same, though, unless youre using ULMB. And who uses that in an office?
  • p1esk - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    It’s strange that you have the need to convince people that reading blurry text is ok. Why?
  • drgigolo - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Been running a 4K monitor for years myself. 3 years this spring (with the launch of the 1080Ti). Besides, I doubt somebody who buys these does any kind of gaming?

    And, it is possible to use a computer for other things than gaming.

    It is to me, a big mystery, why so many on the PC front don't do high res and most of all, high PPI. When you think about how high res mobiles have gotten. We now have 8K TV's. But desktops are stuck at 1080p and some 1440p. The PPI is horrible there.

    It's been 8 years since Macs started coming with "Retina" displays. After about one new OS release, basically all Mac software supported these retina displays and the scaling is perfect.

    Take a look at Windows, and that is hardly the case. Reading text on a sub-200 PPI display that is relatively close to your face is fugly.
  • boeush - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    I agree... up to a point.

    Smartphone screens are typically held about 10 inches from the eyes, so high PPI is important there.

    Desktop monitors, on the other hand, are supposed to be viewed at roughly arm's-length. If you are pressing your nose against your monitor, you're doing it wrong (and actively ruining your eyes). So, having smartphone-like pixel densities on computer screens is overkill, and is nothing but a giant waste of money, power, and performance - in other words, perfect marketing specs for the typical Apple user.

    I think for desktop monitors a PPI in the range of 150-180 is about as much as one could realistically need, even with perfect 20/20 vision (as compared to 300+ PPI for "retina" displays.)
  • lilkwarrior - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Again, that’s extremely narrow minded. Heck a optometrist would disagree w/ you; a high PPI panel like the Pro Display XDR is invaluable for optimal eye health.

    It’s expensive but invaluable to creative pros and those who care about their health. Just like how a mechanical keyboard—like a $300+ Kenesis Advantage 2—is so worth it
  • lilkwarrior - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    *Worth it to some; to each their own always for how people balance quality, ergonomics, & design for their panel needs
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    I was talking about 4K at 120 hz. You dont need 120 Hz at 4K. It doesnt make sense in gaming, because the GPUs are too slow. And in office work it doesnt make sense either, because you simply dont need higher refreshrate and office GPUs are too slow for smooth 4K at 120 FPS even in office use where it would be helping.
  • p1esk - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    I’m scrolling this comment thread right now on my PG27UQ running at 144hz, and the text is still a bit blurry. I can’t wait to order a pair of XG27UQ because they offer ULMB, so hopefully it will be better, but 4k at 240hz (and higher) can’t come soon enough.
  • Beaver M. - Thursday, March 5, 2020 - link

    Then you should learn how to read properly on monitors. Scroll first, then read. Like everyone does.
    But why easy when it can be complicated...
  • Beaver M. - Thursday, March 5, 2020 - link

    I mean, people didnt even do that on CRTs.
  • p1esk - Thursday, March 5, 2020 - link

    Get back to me after you try to skim through a six page PDF in 30 seconds.
  • lilkwarrior - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Uh, modern MacBooks can drive 6K@60hz; don’t conflate gaming performance with the capabilities of consuming everyday content with a GPU or simply proper I/O

    With HDMI 2.1, it’s easy.

    In 2020, 4K+ and 120hz is ideal. 60hz is merely passable
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    I am not talking about the resolution alone. I am talking about 4K in combination with 120 Hz. Its useless.
    There is no question that even 8K is useful in office use, but 120 Hz is not. And in gaming much less, because rarely will you be able to reach even much above 60 FPS in modern games with even an 2080 Ti.
  • Freeb!rd - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Not all of us can live in the holographic world... some of us still must live in the real world. (They ran out of the blue pills.)
  • inighthawki - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    I'm personally not a huge fan of 4K. I consider it a waste of processing power for something that I personally can't really see a difference until you start getting to like 40+ inch screens. Granted that's just my opinion based on my own eyesight and preferences.

    Gaming at 4K@120hz is also insanely difficult even on bleeding edge hardware. I personally find 1440p to be a sweetspot, but others would still gladly take 1080p along with even higher refresh rates like 240+hz.
  • damianrobertjones - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    If I put a 4k screen onto an office desk, I would be asked to reduce the res (make things bigger) within ten minutes. Even my own 4k office scree (AOC U2879VF) is at 1080p as I don't want to go blind. It was bought for cad... they didn't want it.
  • PeachNCream - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Fabric textured backside...that I will look at maybe once. Great, where do I sign up for this "aggressive" monitor?

    Also, the eye fatigue zone is sort of BS. It assumes my head and/or body is incapable of moving.
  • 5080 - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Absolutely agree on the eye fatigue zone. If anything it makes it much worse if you're working a lot in Excel spreadsheets. I had a curved monitor and it was a complete PITA to work with large spreadsheets. It always looked like the cells to the left and right were a different width. Now I went back to a flat monitor and my eyes are much less tiered after working for several hours in a spreadsheet.
  • Atari2600 - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    I have to admit, I have the opposite experience and much prefer the curved screen.

    32" 4k curved beats 40" 4k flat IMO.

    But each has their personal preference of course.
  • Atari2600 - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    (that is using excel and CAE tools)
  • Questor - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    1440p, 27", 1000R and take my money. Seriously, we are this far along and still stuck at 1080? This is just silly.
  • Sharma_Ji - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    And here me working on a 720p 18.5" HP display, TN pabel.
  • Sharma_Ji - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    Panel*, oof no edit button.
  • Vitor - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    LOL @ 1080 32". It's like they have all those displayed piled in some warehouse 8 years ago.
  • HowDoesAnyOfThisWork - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    > Samsung is promoting the new curved displays as provoking less eye strain than flat monitors, as they bring the whole picture closer to the human eye.

    Yep. That's why i put the comic books right up my nose when reading them as my child. Not only less eye strain, but it also gave me eagle vision (although, i didn't know this as a child; i just did it because keeping the comic book half an arms length away from my face strained my eyes too much)
  • HowDoesAnyOfThisWork - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    ...*as a child*. Sigh....
  • Atari2600 - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    I have 2 of the 32" 4k 1500R curved U32R59C in work. Great job - not perfect, but getting close to it.

    I had (and still do, its at home now) a 40" 4k and did find viewing the two edges of the screen uncomfortable.

    The 32" monitor here definitely needs a 4k screen before its relevant.

    Ideally, Samsung would up the screen size to 34" and make the panel 4k with 1000R curve - I think that would be as perfect as a 4k productivity monitor could get.
  • ananandandtech - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Why doesn't anyone talk about the visual distortion caused by curving a display horizontally, but not vertically? If they're going to claim it is all about distance from the eyes, then in the context of curved displays the flatness of the vertical plane is now bending away from the viewer, right? A visually accurate display would need to bend along the vertical plane to some degree too it seems.
  • boeush - Wednesday, March 4, 2020 - link

    Firstly, manufacturing a cylindrical panel is much easier (and cheaper, and more scalable to high volumes) than making a spherical one. All you have to do is build it flat, then bend it (without breaking) around one direction. But you can't turn a flat sheet into a spherical surface without seriously stretching parts of it in a nonuniform manner: that sort of deformation would tend to destroy any crystalline layers, and would pose a challenge for any embedded circuitry, in the panel.

    Secondly, with widescreen formats the horizontal dimension matters much more than the vertical as far as spanning the visual field. Thus, the curve is always applied along the monitor's width, rather than its height.
  • Valantar - Thursday, March 5, 2020 - link

    I am consistently fascinated by these nonsense claims that "X curvature better matches the human field of vision", as if this is somehow not dependent on the distance you're viewing from? If we simplify the human field of vision to be circular when "viewed" from above, it's rather common to think that a circle's circumference increases as the radius increases, right? So, say, an 1800r monitor will "match" the human field of vision just as well as a 1000r monitor when placed at a similar distance? Of course 1000r would allow you to place the monitor closer with this still being true, which I guess is what managers looking to shrink desks to save on office space might be looking for. "We got you this new 1' deep desk for ergonomic reasons! (Never mind that we can now squeeze you into an even smaller cubicle.)"
  • teamlouish - Thursday, July 23, 2020 - link

    Sometime in the article, you say TD5 and other times you say T55. I think its T55, as TD5 doesn't really show any results online. So the title of the article in the address bar and the H1 tag are wrong and need to be updated.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now