Try the custom AI to help you find products that Reddit loves.
I love my benq monitor, I have the 32 inch version, UHD, that displays 100% SRGB.
The amazon link shows cheaper monitors, I'm assuming since the most expensive one $800. is great you can get a cheaper one and it will still be great. It's nice to edit on a screen displaying the colors as closes as possible.
I have this BenQ display. It's UHD, so it's near-retina-quality dot pitch. I like it a lot, but there's one huge caveat: You need a helluva graphics card to drive all those pixels in 3d. Watch a video of a gaming tournament: You'll see that they're not using huge displays. That's because you need much more horsepower to drive 'em, and when ms are of the essence, pixels aren't that important.
I recently built a PC for 3d apps, and my GTX 1080 Ti can drive the BenQ pretty well, but my older Mac Pro really struggles.
I dunno what the size limits for "ultrawide" is, but I recently got a BenQ display that's 32" wide, and it looks pretty good. My biggest complaint is that the included KVM does not work very well at all.
I did the same thing as the OP (except I built after I started making money), and I bought a $900 monitor. Yes, the base PC was only about $600. What does $900 get you in a monitor? 32", 4k, low input lag. This one : https://www.amazon.com/BenQ-32-Inch-Definition-BL3201PH-3840x2160/dp/B00O1B5M9I
Ahh, so it's just a matter of PC Part Picker not having review data for everything? I just realized there were many without stars on them. Better not filter those out.
I see, all the bigger ones (EDIT: besides an out-of-stock BenQ) are all above $1K. Out of my budget, but good to know anyway. Doubt any prices will be halved for Black Friday. Thanks for the info.
Thank you for the build. Couple questions:
1) To make a 4K gaming build, all I need is a 4K Monitor like this? Or do I need any other changes?
2) I think the case is too expensive. Can you recommend a cheaper case like in the $100-150 range?
3) is just one case fan enough? Sorry if this is a dumb question
Yeah sorry, amazon.com forwarded me to amazon.de because I'm from switzerland... Here's the english page:
is this the same model as yours?
Well what's your price range? If you're looking into professional 4k, 700$ is a good starting price point.
If your budget is lower than this I'd suggest sticking to 1440p. There are plenty of really nice 1440p IPS monitors in the 400-600$ range.
You need to consider what it is you REALLY need and make your decision based off of that. If all you do is game, I'd strongly suggest just getting a good TN panel instead of a bad IPS panel.
we just bought 4 of these and they arrived today: I will let you know how it turns out. https://www.amazon.com/BenQ-32-Inch-Definition-BL3201PH-3840x2160/dp/B00O1B5M9I
If you're going to use an LCD and really want to do it right, you need a FreeSync or G-Sync capable monitor. It just sucks to run games at the wrong speed or with stuttering, and a variable refresh monitor is the only way around that with an LCD.
This is the best 32" LCD in the world for arcade games currently:
It has 10.1ms of input lag, which is pretty low for a monitor of that size, and it supports FreeSync, meaning that Mortal Kombat (54hz), Moon Patrol (55hz), and every game that runs at a weird refresh rate (basically all of them) will update glass-smooth. You'll need a modern AMD card to drive FreeSync, though. That's expensive. $900 for the monitor and $300 for the video card right there. CRTs are still cheaper than LCDs for this reason. You basically have to spend $1,200 just to get an LCD setup that's going to be "okay" for arcade games.
The other thing that people are finally starting to wake up to is that the end game for playing 4:3 games on LCDs is getting a large monitor (42" or so), mounting it vertically in a normal, slim cabinet, and then rotating MAME 90 degrees so that it looks like a normal display. This is basically the only way to fit a 27" CRT worth of 4:3 screen into a relatively narrow, normal arcade cabinet. The problem with mounting widescreen monitors in traditional cabinet designs is that you always end up with a wide, squat-ass looking cabinet. Cabinet proportions should be tall and narrow; short and wide doesn't look good.
A note about HLSL: it looks like dog shit unless you're running at 4k resolution. You can NOT get evenly-sized scanlines in HLSL without running at that resolution. The Lottes shader with GLSL looks a lot better at resolutions less than 4k (I'd argue it looks better at 4k, too). The point I'm making is that if you're running at 1080p, then HLSL doesn't even look that good. Resolution requirements for good CRT simulation are insane. You need a TON of resolution. It gets even worse if you go with a setup described in the previous paragraph (large LCD mounted vertically with rotated emulators). Say you've got a 3840x2160 screen. If you mount your monitor vertically and tell MAME to rotate the image so you can fit a 42" LCD in a normal sized standup cabinet, and you keep the aspect ratio correct, you now only have 2160x1620 of that resolution dedicated to the actual game image. It's not ideal. If a 4k LCD isn't rotated, you get a lot more resolution (2880x2160), which you really need for the best shaders. The best looking one overall is probably CRT Royale in Retroarch. It looks fine at 2880x2160, but you really don't want to go much lower than that.
In a couple of years, there will be a 42" OLED monitor with low input lag and FreeSync, and that'll be the ticket for an amazing, CRT-rivaling looking setup. In the far future, the true end game is going to be an 8k (7680x4320) 42" OLED monitor with variable refresh (G-Sync or FreeSync) that runs at 120hz+ with some kind of strobing mounted in a cabinet vertically with emulators rotating the screen to get you back at 4:3. That will be finally be the satisfactory combination of features for "better than CRT" arcade gaming: perfect geometry, perfect size (visible game area equivalent of a 27" 4:3 CRT), no motion blur, perfect blacks, and enough resolution for flawless CRT simulation (4320x3240).
I mean...I'd really like to know what qualifies as "good" in your book
Yeah me too... the BenQ one looks droolworthy. But no matter how hard I try I can't justify spending $1k on a single monitor.
Get a TV that supports FreeSync. Arcade games run at different refresh rates. You won't be able to run games at their real speed without tearing or stuttering unless you have a variable refresh setup.
It isn't just about response time. It's about input lag. Most 40" TVs have unacceptable levels of input lag.
You need 4k resolution for the most advanced CRT shaders to look good.
Basically, there isn't a 40" TV that has all of these features. What you want:
Freesync or G-Sync
4ms response time or less
Less than a frame of input lag
In an OLED panel. It just doesn't exist yet. Maybe next year.
Getting a 40" TV and mounting it vertically is a good idea, though. A 40" TV mounted vertically and running MAME rotated would be the equivalent of a 25" 4:3 screen roughly.
As of November 13, 2015, the best flat screen monitor in the world for arcade games is probably this one:
It has virtually no input lag, is 4k, supports FreeSync, and has about as good response time as you're going to get at that size. It's only 32", but like I said, display technology fucking sucks. Maybe next year.™
I use this one:
Works great although it's a UHD-monitor, fast reaction time and great image quality... But I also use it for work so it might be a bit expensive just for gaming.