CES 2020: Best of Monitors

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2020
Much of the CES 2020 showroom floor is dedicated to displays packing new technologies that could easily be connected to a Mac or MacBook. AppleInsider collects some of the announcements worth investigating.

Best of monitors

Lenovo

Lenovo ThinkVision Creator Extreme
Lenovo ThinkVision Creator Extreme


Lenovo ThinkVision Creator Extreme was unveiled at CES 2020, with the goal of bringing a more affordable mini-LED to the market. The 27-inch DisplayHDR boasts a 1,152-zone mini-LED array with dynamic local dimming, full coverage of the P3 color gamut, and a 4K resolution. It also offers 100% sRBG and 100% BT709 color gamut coverage.

The screen brightness is 1,000 nits, a bit lower than Apple's Pro Display HDR, but the ThinkVision Creator Extreme is a fraction of the cost.

Additionally, the ThinkVision Creator Extreme features a USB-C port with 90W power delivery, ethernet passthrough, audio, video, and data. The stand is lift and tilt adjustable.

Those interested in picking up a ThinkVision Creative Extreme will be able to do so in April 2020, with the starting price set to come in at $2499.

Dell

UltraSharp 27 4K USB-C Monitor
UltraSharp 27 4K USB-C Monitor


Dell has brought several monitors to CES 2020, seemingly with the goal to reach out to creative professionals such as designers, artists, photographers, and video editors.

The UltraSharp 27 4K USB-C monitor is a 27-inch monitor that boasts a 4K UHD resolution, 95% P3 color gamut coverage, and VESA Display HDR 400.

It also features a compact base, making it perfect for smaller workspaces, and a borderless InfinityEdge to make it perfect for multi-screen setups. The Dell UltraSharp 27 4K USB-C monitor will be available worldwide starting January 30, and will retail for $709.99.

The UltraSharp will also be available in a 25-inch QHD resolution model that costs $479.99.

UltraSharp 43 4K USB-C Monitor
UltraSharp 43 4K USB-C Monitor


For those who need more screen space, Dell is also releasing the UltraSharp 43 4K USB-C Monitor. It features the ability to connect up to 4 computers to one monitor and will be able to view the content from each computer simultaneously.

The 42.5-inch, 4K monitor boasts USB-C connectivity that delivers 90W passthrough power delivery. This monitor is designed for professionals who need the use of multi-display setups but may not have the space for multiple monitors.

Dell's UltraSharp 43 4K USB-C Monitor will be available on January 30 and will start at $1,049.00.

Samsung

Samsung Odyssey G9 curved gaming monitor
Samsung Odyssey G9 curved gaming monitor


The new line of Odyssey G7 and G9 monitors from Samsung are large gaming screens that are curved and wide, giving the sensation of the display filling up the user's vision. The curved screens are the first to gain certification from TUV Rheinland for a high performance 1000R curve, with the regulator also awarding certification for eye comfort to the displays.

The G9 measures 49 inches diagonally, and is the first dual quad high definition (DQHD) display with a resolution of 5,120 by 1,440 and an aspect ratio of 32:9. Offering 1/000 cd/m2 peak brightness, the display has a 240Hz refresh rate, a 1ms response time, and uses quantum dots for vivid and lifelike color representation.

Encased in white, the G9 also features a lighting system for the rear, spanning across 52 colors and with five lighting effect options.

The G7 is offered in 32-inch and 27-inch variants, complete with the same curvature as the G9. They are somewhat less extreme, with QHD resolutions of 2,560 by 1,440 and a 16:9 aspect ratio, but they use the same QLED Quantum dot technology for color reproesentation and offer 600cd/m2 peak brightness.

Both models support Nvidia G-Sync, as well as Adaptive Sync when used on DisplayPort 1.4.

Samsung will start shipping the G9 and G7 models globally in the second quarter.

Acer

Predator CG552K Gaming Monitor
Predator CG552K Gaming Monitor


Whether you're into gaming gaming or just want an ultra-immersive monitor, Acer's Predator CG552K Gaming Monitor might be what you're looking for. The 55-inch behemoth offers plenty of room for console-like immersion, alongside a 4K OLED display that boasts 98.5% coverage of the P3 color gamut. The brightness is a bit low for creative professionals at 400 nits, but should be more than enough for most gamers and average users.

The Predator CG552K Gaming Monitor also supports a variable refresh rate via HDMI, Adaptive Sync, and Nvidia G-Sync, with a 0.5ms response time and a 120Hz refresh rate.

It boasts three HDMI 2.0 ports, two Display Port v1.4 ports, a USB-C port, and two USB 2 and USB 3 ports, making it easy to hook up to all your devices. While we'd still recommend snagging a sound bar, it does feature built-in 10W speakers as well.

The Acer Predator CG552K Gaming Monitor is set to release in the third quarter of 2020, with pricing starting at $2,999.

Update
Added Acer's Predator CG552K Gaming Monitor at 6:30AM, January 9, 2020

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 624member
    So still no 5K except LG. The PC world is pretty sad without retina level display support. 
    thtwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 20
    gustavgustav Posts: 826member
    I'm a bit disappointed in the state of external displays for Macs. macOS no longer supports sub-pixel antialiasing, so any display that is not of a "retina-level" resolution results in blurry text (or if you set it to HiDPI mode, very large UI elements)

    A 4K display should be 21-24 inches.
    A 5K display should be ~27 inches.

    Ultrawide displays should be shooting for much higher resolutions not larger sizes. I'd pay a lot for a 34" Ultrawide 6880x2880 display that I could run in HiDPI mode.
    neilmwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 20
    thttht Posts: 4,507member
    gustav said:
    I'm a bit disappointed in the state of external displays for Macs. macOS no longer supports sub-pixel antialiasing, so any display that is not of a "retina-level" resolution results in blurry text (or if you set it to HiDPI mode, very large UI elements)

    A 4K display should be 21-24 inches.
    A 5K display should be ~27 inches.

    Ultrawide displays should be shooting for much higher resolutions not larger sizes. I'd pay a lot for a 34" Ultrawide 6880x2880 display that I could run in HiDPI mode.
    Yeah. Disappointed that Apple is not selling the iMac monitors as standalone monitors+docks. The LG UF 27” 5K is fine I suppose, but just not as fun to own as an Apple one would be, especially one with glass and aluminum ID.

    Apple does offer a 32” monitor at 6016x3384 monitor, but too much. I’m looking for a 35” 21:9 220 DPI monitor for home too and the wait continues. Would have to settle for the LG 34WK95U-W (5120x2160) if I replace my 2013 iMac 27 today. At 2560x1080 PPI, it doesn’t sound that great. Would have to settle for a scaling mode.
    watto_cobrajeffharris
  • Reply 4 of 20
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,022member
    1440 vertical is absolutely pitiful on any monitor in 2020.
    netroxwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 20
    boboliciousbobolicious Posts: 1,007member
    ...and I would remind that even the iMac 5K at last check did not offer 4K scaling OEM, and that the cinema, thunderbolt & default iMac display resolutions historically were 110dpi native, so 4K @ 110dpi translates to roughly 40", or smaller than the 43" Dell. Even so I have found in use 40" @ 110dpi to benefit from a slightly deeper than standard desk, if offering remarkably usable & immersive desktop and / or the benefits of multiple computer connections (eg. desktop/server) for professional use...

    Also are there any portable Apple options offering full 4K resolution for AirPlay2 mirroring for presentations on the now seemingly ubiquitous 4K 'smart' TVs?

    edited January 2020
  • Reply 6 of 20
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,070member
    Is anyone offering something on the ballpark of Apple's Pro Display XDR?

    I'd love to see more action in the higher-end. That space has been kind of deserted, aside from Eizo & NEC.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 20
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,258member
    cpsro said:
    1440 vertical is absolutely pitiful on any monitor in 2020.
    Well then most people on the planet are pathetic.

    1920x1080 is still the #1 used resolution.
    baconstangcgWerks
  • Reply 8 of 20
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,717member
    DuhSesame said:
    cpsro said:
    1440 vertical is absolutely pitiful on any monitor in 2020.
    Well then most people on the planet are pathetic.

    For many reasons.
    baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 20
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,717member
    tht said:
    gustav said:
    I'm a bit disappointed in the state of external displays for Macs. macOS no longer supports sub-pixel antialiasing, so any display that is not of a "retina-level" resolution results in blurry text (or if you set it to HiDPI mode, very large UI elements)

    A 4K display should be 21-24 inches.
    A 5K display should be ~27 inches.

    Ultrawide displays should be shooting for much higher resolutions not larger sizes. I'd pay a lot for a 34" Ultrawide 6880x2880 display that I could run in HiDPI mode.
    Yeah. Disappointed that Apple is not selling the iMac monitors as standalone monitors+docks. The LG UF 27” 5K is fine I suppose, but just not as fun to own as an Apple one would be, especially one with glass and aluminum ID.

    Apple does offer a 32” monitor at 6016x3384 monitor, but too much. I’m looking for a 35” 21:9 220 DPI monitor for home too and the wait continues. Would have to settle for the LG 34WK95U-W (5120x2160) if I replace my 2013 iMac 27 today. At 2560x1080 PPI, it doesn’t sound that great. Would have to settle for a scaling mode.
    I find trying to compare specs on monitors very confusing and difficult. One of attractive features of the iMac is this all goes away. It looks great, functions as expected. But...WYSIWYG. You can't later drive it with a new CPU or laptop. Peripheral connections are sort of etched in stone. There are lots of variables to weigh against the value when springing $1000+ (minimum) on a monitor. Given one must assess specifically the need for a desktop display, it gets horribly complicated from there. 

    From my own perspective, my current iMac is over 10 years old. It does everything I ask of it; but I know there are better displays now. And at the end of a day, what's the most used function of a desktop? You *look at it*. 

    I think my pain point is when I see a 27" monitor that a macmini can drive at its max resolution via thunderbolt, under $500, I'm having Jeff deliver one via prime. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 20
    HapHap Posts: 13member
    "The G9 measures 49 inches diagonally, and is the first dual quad high definition (DQHD) display with a resolution of 5,120 by 1,440 and an aspect ratio of 32:9."

    While it seems a bit better spec'd. It's the same size/resolution as the LG I got in Sept, so it's not the first.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 20
    gustav said:
    I'm a bit disappointed in the state of external displays for Macs. macOS no longer supports sub-pixel antialiasing, so any display that is not of a "retina-level" resolution results in blurry text (or if you set it to HiDPI mode, very large UI elements)

    A 4K display should be 21-24 inches.
    A 5K display should be ~27 inches.
    It sure would be great if there was more action in the 27-inch 5K space! I also have been pretty pleased with the results of using a 4K 27-inch display in HiDPI 2560x1440 mode. I've been using such a display since Apple unceremoniously dropped sub-pixel antialiasing in macOS, making text display on my old QHD (2560x1440) display look like garbage. It is noticeably less sharp than the 5K display in an iMac, but text is way better rendered than on the QHD monitor. All in all, I'd say 4K 27-inch on macOS is very good while 5K 27-inch is great. Of course, ymmv.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 20
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,258member
    eightzero said:
    DuhSesame said:
    cpsro said:
    1440 vertical is absolutely pitiful on any monitor in 2020.
    Well then most people on the planet are pathetic.

    For many reasons.
    For many reasons.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 20
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,063member
    Someone should create a website which organizes all the pertinent features of these products (resolution, connectors, size, mount options, etc.) into a spreadsheet, so I don't have to compile my own spreadsheet every time I read an article like this. I want to purchase a monitor for my Mac Mini but only once I feel fully informed and this sort of article doesn't make me feel informed because I have so much work to do now to make sense of it all. That's my two cents.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 20
    GG1GG1 Posts: 483member
    Someone should create a website which organizes all the pertinent features of these products (resolution, connectors, size, mount options, etc.) into a spreadsheet, so I don't have to compile my own spreadsheet every time I read an article like this. I want to purchase a monitor for my Mac Mini but only once I feel fully informed and this sort of article doesn't make me feel informed because I have so much work to do now to make sense of it all. That's my two cents.

    Yes, very good idea. Please do it! ;)

    For the monitors mentioned above with USB-C, does that imply TB3? My understanding was that USB-C is just the physical connector, while TB3 is the transport protocol. If I'm correct, it looks like there are now more options for a TB3 monitor than just the LG 4K and 5K monitors. I'm also looking at the Mac Mini + TB3 monitor route.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 20
    AppleishAppleish Posts: 466member
    LG is still the winner with their Apple approved 4K and 5k monitors in this space.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 20
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,196member
    I'll settle for a 4K 32" 16:9. Asus has a nice one. Maybe there's a Dell UltraSharp that fits the bill, That 43" is nice. I wonder what it's look like with a TV tuner connected.
  • Reply 17 of 20
    That 43" 4K Dell looks great, until you're like "The 4K UHD resolution and a high pixel density of 103ppi shows your work in striking clarity." — LOL 103ppi is "high pixel density" maybe if you get into a time machine and go back 20 years? Their 32" 4K 140ppi which is way more palatable.
    edited January 2020 GG1watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 20
    The frames around these high end monitors are remarkably ugly. Don’t these companies have designers? It’s not hard. Just take the easy route and build an iMac looking knockoff with aluminum shell. Better yet, Apple should build their own. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 20
    eightzero said:
    .
    I find trying to compare specs on monitors very confusing and difficult. One of attractive features of the iMac is this all goes away. It looks great, functions as expected. But...WYSIWYG. You can't later drive it with a new CPU or laptop. 
    Funny, but I use an iMac as a second display in a client’s office using my 2019 i9 MacBook Pro.
    I use an Apple Thunderbolt 2 cable with Apple Thunderbolt to USB-C adaptor and run a free little utility called Virtual KVM. 
    It works well. Bluetooth just has to be active on both machines. Previously I used my 2012 MBP Retina the same way.
  • Reply 20 of 20
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,424member
    I have a 32" 4K Viewsonic Pro spare from work that I intended to turn into a desk display at home for photo-processing, but TBH it's just a tad too large to be comfortable there. Sitting less than 2 feet from it entails a bit too much need for eye-darting. Instead I'll stick to 27"(Also Viewsonic Pro-4K) as it's less straining IMO

    Not convinced that 4K is even needed on smallish display intended for photo editing but whatever.  A 27" Dell QHD serves perfectly well on one of our large-format work-stations where color is far more important. That's why our higher res Viewsonics are not used for print work. 100% sRGB but only 80% AdobeRGB. Great for display and web stuff with almost perfect calibration out of the box, consistent across the entire screen with no ghosting or vignetting, but not so much for use with the printers where aRGB is a necessity. The Dell covers 100% of both. 
    edited January 2020
Sign In or Register to comment.