Intel generally has the highest quality drivers and the best GPUs for high-end ultrabooks where gaming isn’t a priority but fast desktop performance and low battery usage are key. If your goal is 3D gaming or other 3D intensive workloads, then yeah, you probably want a discrete graphics chip. If you’re a software developer like me and just want a quality desktop experience with crisp fonts and ample workspace with solid desktop performance and reliability (and battery life), then Intel’s on-chip graphics are generally great and getting better at 3D stuff all the time.
I don’t know why you’re repeating what I said about how MST works, but okay. As I said that’s an implementation detail with no impact to the user. Just like dual-link DVI with high res monitors before DisplayPort came along.
I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that all MST monitors have the wake problem. It’s well-confirmed as fixed in the later UP2414Q/UP3414Q models (and yes, on the original A00 revision, it happens on all OSes, including Mac OS X, as it’s a monitor bug). See posts here from people who exchanged their A00 for an A01: http://commweb-ps3.us.dell.com/support-forums/peripherals/f/3529/t/19536443?pi23185=33
Where do I get the idea that all MST monitors have the wake problem? Hmm… from experience?
How many 4K or 5K displays you used in the last two years by yourself so you can talk from experience? Because, it would really come as a shock to me that I actually got all broken samples for all the models I had (and I had pretty much all).
I think it is wrong to say that it is without an impact to users. Plethora of issues come from the very core of MST implementation and that directly impacts users. - I’ve never seen a glitch with dual-link DVI. Have you?
And regarding the fix, no it has never been fixed. I’ve used an A02 revision even (my 2x UP3214Q both went for 3 replacements) and it has never been fixed in the end.
The very link you offer up there has a funny comment by a user that got a “fixed” A01 display:
"Well, i received monitor last night, it worked 5-6h(i imidalty swaped to 1.2 dp so i can have 60hz) , than problems started. It started to go to powersaving mode on random … during my work, and during my game , than it shows half screen, etc. I also having problems waking monitor up from sleeping mode ( works only if u restart/shut down pc )… "
Won’t go into operating systems again. I rest my case with a screenshot up there. (Confirmed on AMD cards too.)
Probably fine, my multi GPU setups were quite stable. However, there is always more complexity, more power draw, and according to Tech Report more variability in game frame rate with two GPUs.
Both Nvidia and AMD have worked on the multi GPU frame rate variability problem a fair bit since it was publicized in 2012 / 2013. So it might not be a huge issue today.
In general it is better to get a single fast card rather than two slower cards, though. Might be more expensive if that forces you into the super premium enthusiast high end cards, though, so it is a reasonable trade off to make.
The GPU guys must be super excited about 4K since it is a very legit reason to need even more obscene GPU horsepower than what we have today. If displays were stuck at 1080p you could basically stop buying new GPUs from this day on, forever, and be fine.
Besides gaming I am looking at this for video rendering and most software like Premiere takes advantage of multi GPU as well as thinking can push more pixels for 4K gaming.
I am concerned about heat and noise though as extra load on system and requiring a 750W power supply ups the factor.
Considering my last build was in 2011 with sandy bridge and a minor GPU upgrade about 2 years ago, I think a 6 core with 2 GPU will get me another 4 years.
I assume that the flo mounting system that you went for is the flo modular?
According to the flo website:
Flo Modular can support a triple screen cockpit for 22” screens in landscape or 24” screens in a portrait configuration
Did you just ignore that and hope that it worked with 27"
I am now thinking of going for the same setup as you but as I currently have 2 20 inch 4:3 monitors I am worried about the space requirement for 2 27" monitors. There don’t seem to be many smaller 4k monitors around…
27’’ monitors are simply too big. But I’d love to see curved 27’’ UHD monitor.
I really don’t understand why Samsung & LG try to push curved TVs to living rooms, when the perfect use case for the curved screen is computer monitor.
I am studying BSc Computer Science and often use the computer for more than 6 hours a day programming.
I need a monitor that will not do a lot of harm to my eyes. Any ideas? A good anti-glare monitor perhaps?
I’ve been pretty adament about prefering 16:10 displays, but it seems these are on the way out. Does anyone have experience coming from a 16:10 to a 16:9 4k or 1440p for programming and terminal work? Do you miss the vertical real estate?
Large horizontal viewing angle, 60+hz refresh rate, and no PWM or high PWM rate. Honestly I’m just getting back into understanding monitor specs, but these are what I’d look for.
Still not convinced on 4k compatibility for Linux, but I love it on my MBP.
I’ve owned three ASUS monitors, including the one mentioned in the article. One was HDMI, the other two were DisplayPort and HDMI. On all of them, I experienced random issues, such as the screen going black, or going to sleep and never waking up (unless power was pulled.) This seemed to happen even more so when I used DisplayPort on a Mac. Buyer beware. I simply think ASUS’s DisplayPort implementation is wonky. Contacting their support, they wanted me to pay to ship it back (it was only a few months old) and they would only send me a refurb, and not another model/new display. Unacceptable for something so pricey, and likely to have the same issues.
I have had some intermittent display glitches, which I chalked up to the high bandwidth of 4k at 60hz times three for my three displays. But nothing systemic so far.
Surface Pro 3 can handle a single 50Hz 4k display using the regular mDP, OR a 40Hz 4k and a 30Hz 4k daisy chained. Some Intel driver tweaks are required to manually add those resolutions.
This is without the need of a dock.
The limitation comes from the bandwidth capability of the port, and is less to do with the screen, rather the technology to drive the display.
While 4k displays have gone down in price in the last few years, they are still far from what I would call affordable. Especially I you consider the fact that you need an external gpu to drive them (maybe skylake has fixed this (but that’s another overpriced upgrade for anyone with anyone with a Sandy Bridge i5 2500k or anything newer) and live in the EU since we get shafted hard on hw prices (no matter what the actual usd/eur exchange rate is hw prices use a 1:1 exchange rate + tax (20-25%) + and extra price hike of at least another 20-25% (although this can be much higher)). Which means something that’s borderline affordable in the USA is overpriced here (I’m fine with paying tax, but the other two things are just a large fuck you to customers).
Although I welcome the day when 16 bit per colour 16k 32" ips/va/some other good panel tech displays running at 200Hz and a contrast ratio comparable to that of the human eye (measured on two neighboring pixels on the same frame not on two pixels on two different frames which produces artificially inflated numbers) are actually affordable (aka below 300 eur). Of course by the time that happens I’ll probably be too blind to see the difference anyway (right now at 30 I can see individual pixels on a 21" 1080p display viewed from a normal distance and it is very ugly) At least if display tech continues to progress at the same rate as it has so far (I bought a 21" 1680x1050 ips display for ≈ 300 eur 15 years ago and a 21" 1080p ips display for ≈ 200 eur last autumn which is a pathetic rate of progress).
At least if display tech continues to progress at the same rate as it has so far (I bought a 21" 1680x1050 ips display for ≈ 300 eur 15 years ago and a 21" 1080p ips display for ≈ 200 eur last autumn which is a pathetic rate of progress).