27" IPS 2560 x 1440 for new iMac, standalone display coming?

This panels specs look very interesting. I hope LG or some other put it out in their own monitor. I would consider replacing my 30" dell for these updated specs, even at the loss of a couple of inches. It should be far less expensive outside of Apple's domain.
 
GoldenTiger said:
For anyone saying "but the text will be too small" that's what the DPI setting in Windows is for :).
Click to expand...

I'm all for this new panel and I have no problem with high pixel density. But tweaking the Windows DPI setting just fucks things up. Windows still isn't scalable.
 
Can the 27" one pivot? 3x27" in portrait Eyefinity would be UBER awesome!
 
vjcsmoke said:
Can the 27" one pivot? 3x27" in portrait Eyefinity would be UBER awesome!
Click to expand...
I think so
27-inch model can be attached to a wall mount, articulating arm, or other VESA-compliant mounting solution using the optional VESA Mount Adapter Kit
Click to expand...

but you're gonna have a huge bezel on the one side
 
Last edited:
evilsofa said:
A 27" 2560x1440 16:9 IPS LED-backlight glossy finish monitor for $1500? It's not the price that's crazy.

There's two IPS LED-backlight monitors that I can think of. The HP LP2480ZX goes for $2000, is 24", is 1920x1200 16:10, and has a matte finish. The NEC 2180WG-LED is 21", came out in 2005, and still sells for $2800.

Until (if!) LG comes out with a separate monitor with this panel, Apple won't be able to keep a single 27" iMac on the shelf.
Click to expand...

!! 2480zx ($1000 value at most) is available for $1800 due to useless features, old 2180WG is available for $900.
LED backlight itself is nothing. There is no info of the image quality of this combination (iMac screen + PC). It may happen that it has lower resolution, or wide gamut, or poor black/contrast, or poor color accuracy and it's a bare panel....
If it has standard gamut - wow, it's something to think about. Some people will appreciate glossy screen as well.
If not - just get the Dell 3008 - the real monitor for about the same price (1700).
 
Apple will likely release a new Cinema Display based on this new panel after a few months of iMac sales, but will also likely charge a price similar to the full iMac for it.

Think $1599 or so. No way they'll float a bad boy like that for a measly $1000.
 
This is one 16:9 monitor I can tolerate. :)
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. At the higher res than 1080, I can stand 16:9.
Would sure like to see both Samsung and LG 27" models coming in this res AND with white LED lighting.
 
anyone gonna buy a new imac and use it just as a monitor?
I guess that's a new feature of them with the displayport, use the computer as a monitor for another computer.
 
darkhorse said:
anyone gonna buy a new imac and use it just as a monitor?
I guess that's a new feature of them with the displayport, use the computer as a monitor for another computer.
Click to expand...

Anything to move overpriced macs out the door. Best plan yet, disguise it as a monitor! Sell em like hotcakes. Then claim increased marketshare because 'technically' more people now own macs! :D
 
grdh20 said:
OK then LG, bring it on to your otherwise stale product line.
Click to expand...

I wish, it seems though that they prefer letting apple sell their higher end glossy panels than do it under their brand name.


But for some reason, the apple clientèle seem to be more eager to pay large sums of money on hardware with an apple logo on it. Though at least on that particular part it is worth it.
 
tybert7 said:
But for some reason, the apple clientèle seem to be more eager to pay large sums of money on hardware with an apple logo on it. Though at least on that particular part it is worth it.
Click to expand...

I believe its called (like it or not) effective marketing.
 
elleana said:
I believe its called (like it or not) effective marketing.
Click to expand...

It's also called living in the past. Apples Pricing isn't so out of line anymore.

Their 24" ACD S-IPS screen with LED backlighting, is cheaper than my NEC 2490.

The 27" imac starts at $1699. A Dell 30" 3008 LCD is currently $1699. I have seen some people say it is almost worth buying the the 27" imac just to use it as a monitor so how can it be overpriced?

Seriously the illogical apple hatred on [H] is quite ridiculous.

It isn't some kind of conspiracy keeping these as apple exclusives. LG is a business, you want the panels they will sell them to you. Apple is likely the only manufacturer with enough balls to pay the money and guarantee the will by 80 000 units or whatever it takes to get custom panels.
 
Something actually useful from Apple, oh my. What if I bought the iMac and threw the "iMac" part out the window, would it work as a normal display?

And snowdog, You could potentially use a 30" display for ten years, but enthusiast who's paying 1700$ for a monitor wouldn't be very happy if it degraded as fast as an iMac. It makes absolutely no sense to mate a display of that price and a computer, especially if it can't be upgraded. Obviously apple got the panel for cheap and it would sell like bread as a stand alone display, but now no one will buy it for the display alone. Most of the time one can only wonder what the heck Apple is thinking.
 
novemberrain said:
What if I bought the iMac and threw the "iMac" part out the window, would it work as a normal display?
Click to expand...
No, according to the Teardown http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMac-Intel-27-Inch/1236/1 (see step 8) the system has to be powered up for the display to work.

I think Apple really missed a trick with this, if they had an ultra low power computer option that could be switched on independently of the display I imagine people would buy it just for the display, but I don't see much appeal in the configuration(s) as is. Not powerful enough for games enthusiasts, too much idle power for a 2nd system web browser/file server/whatever else.
 
novemberrain said:
And snowdog, You could potentially use a 30" display for ten years, but enthusiast who's paying 1700$ for a monitor wouldn't be very happy if it degraded as fast as an iMac. It makes absolutely no sense to mate a display of that price and a computer, especially if it can't be upgraded.
Click to expand...

That is a seperate issue from the constant whining about how Apple sells crazy over priced equipment. The price is very good. The prices have been fair for quite some time.

But I agree, I don't like All in one units either. I would likely buy a mac if they built a half decent mid tower like I always buy for my PCs.

But clearly Apple knows what it is doing. In the midst of the recession and they made the most money they ever did and they increased the market share of Macs as well. They are probably ahead of the curve, the internals of computers are becomming more and more irrelevant, the slowest piece of junk on the market these days is overkill for your average user. Your average user could be happy with a Mac until the screen fails.
 
Snowdog said:
It's also called living in the past. Apples Pricing isn't so out of line anymore.

Their 24" ACD S-IPS screen with LED backlighting, is cheaper than my NEC 2490.

The 27" imac starts at $1699. A Dell 30" 3008 LCD is currently $1699. I have seen some people say it is almost worth buying the the 27" imac just to use it as a monitor so how can it be overpriced?

Seriously the illogical apple hatred on [H] is quite ridiculous.

It isn't some kind of conspiracy keeping these as apple exclusives. LG is a business, you want the panels they will sell them to you. Apple is likely the only manufacturer with enough balls to pay the money and guarantee the will by 80 000 units or whatever it takes to get custom panels.
Click to expand...

You can do what everyone else does. Ignore them.

That's what I do.
 
i would absolutely love a 27" LED backlit screen with a resolution of 2560x1440.

it would be perfect for eyefinity IMHO if couple with a pair of flanking 17" monitors using the 1440x900 resolution in portrait mode.

just enough to give you extra peripheral vision when gaming, and perfect for document/IM windows when not gaming.

how soon can i buy one...........................
 
R3MF said:
it would be perfect for eyefinity IMHO if couple with a pair of flanking 17" monitors using the 1440x900 resolution in portrait mode.
Click to expand...
I don't think they would quite match up, the 17" would be approx 1cm wider than than the 27" height. This display size calculator is excellent to check any combination:
http://www.silisoftware.com/tools/screen.php

A couple more things to consider for Eyefinity:
  1. Input lag will be different on each monitor, this is critical as the screens are right next to each other and in peripheral vision. You will easily see any variation in the timing of the frame updates.
  2. Using those cheap TN panels in portrait mode at the sides will really suck as you will be viewing at the worst angles possible for TN.
 
R3MF said:
i would absolutely love a 27" LED backlit screen with a resolution of 2560x1440.

it would be perfect for eyefinity IMHO if couple with a pair of flanking 17" monitors using the 1440x900 resolution in portrait mode.
......
Click to expand...


1: Eyefinity doesn't work with monitors in different orientations.
2: TN monitors (as these would be) are wretched in portrait mode.
 
I have been reading here for a couple of years and have to say that I love this forum because of how much I have learned about displays. I also have gone through a lot of monitors in search of the holly grail. I was one of the first people to get the 2209wa and I am pretty happy I guess. I have been waiting a long time to get a 16 X 9 wide screen monitor with a higher resolution then 1080p and this new panel in the imac sounds amazing!

This panel in 120hz would be the ultimate gaming monitor (until OLED gets here).
Click to expand...

Only thing that could better would be 24hz support and local dimming ( I will keep dreaming )

Just saw this post about a new dell that might have this panel : http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?p=2134070

Is there any truth to this or is this guy dreaming like me ?

when searching google I pulled up the dell model # U2711 in a list of supported monitors for one of there sound bars http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Video_Conferencing/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=313-8742
 
newuser101 said:
I have been waiting a long time to get a 16 X 9 wide screen monitor with a higher resolution then 1080p and this new panel in the imac sounds amazing!
Click to expand...
Well there are the 2048x1152 panels and they hardly cost any more than 1080p. 2560x1440 sounds a lot sweeter though...
 
The problems with 2048x1152 monitors are that they are 23", meaning smaller than what many of us already have, and (unless I'm mistaken) they're all TN panels too.

I have to say, I've been waffling on the idea of getting an iMac as I have been, for the most part, pleased with my Apple BBQ grill better known as a 2006 MacBook Pro. Upon seeing the specs for this 27-incher I immediately was intrigued. A choice of Core i5 or i7, a (more reasonable than in the past) cost for upping to 8GB of RAM, and being able to use that sexy beast as a monitor as well? It's beyond tempting to me. Don't get me wrong, I love my 2407, but in the interest of more and more screen real estate I had always lusted after those 30" monsters even if they are frankly too large. This is like the perfect solution. It's smaller than a 30" but nearly the resolution with the image quality to boot. Upgrade to a 5870 and that and I have a feeling it would be like a completely new experience.

Still, as someone who wishes for having my cake and eating it as well, I can't help but wish for a standalone monitor as well. That would be the ultimate solution to be able to have both. Still, I think Apple made a rather ingenious move there to allow it to be used as a monitor. I have to give them kudos to the whole system. Now if only it had a 5850 instead of the 4850...
 
There's a 27" 2048x1152 also. Maybe more than one. Just for the record.
 
Snowdog said:
1: Eyefinity doesn't work with monitors in different orientations.
2: TN monitors (as these would be) are wretched in portrait mode.
Click to expand...

that's a shame on both counts, AMD really ought to sort out the former however.
 
R3MF said:
are you sure?

http://www.hardforums.com/showpost.php?p=1034813411&postcount=19
Click to expand...

Yes sure. That is his old setup using SoftTH or Matrox TH. He doesn't have an ATI 5000 series card yet.

Right now it only supports same orientation/resolution. Though you can get away with setting resolution to the lowest common denominator on all monitors. Say you have a 1920x1200 and two 1920x1080, you can set them all to 1920x1080 and run Eyefinity.
 
hornkiku23 said:
I have noticed booting up dragon age, shift and a few others that there is not support for anything about 1920 1080 in the 16:9 format in the menus but 2460x1600 in the 16:10 section.

Would gaming on this be a problem or would simple edits to config files do it most of the time?

(this is provided the displayport starts working on the 5870pc with the imac but that's another thread)
Click to expand...
..?
 
I've been trying to figure out what LCD to buy, after being an FD Trinitron CRT user for 11 years. My GDM-FW900 went kaput and my GDM-F500 has strange color anomaly.

The seemingly crazy option of buying a 27" iMac just to use it as a monitor seems to be my only current option, given that I want a glossy, high-gamut monitor that's 2560 pixels across, with no more than 1 frame of input lag. Am I missing something?

The speckle / sparkle / glitter / shimmer / micro-luster / powder / fine rainbow dust / crystalline effect on a matte IPS LCD absolutely disgusts me. I ordered a Dell 3007WFP-HC without knowing about this effect, and while it's wonderful in other ways, I'm going to have to return it because of this.

I'm spoiled on Trinitron CRTs and never had a problem with their being glossy. I can darken my room if necessary (but it's often not even necessary). They have good anti-reflective coatings, and I see no reason that a glossy LCD shouldn't have a coating just as good — they do, don't they?

It seems the Atlona DVI to Mini DisplayPort Converter would be just as expensive as buying a new video card that already has DisplayPort output, and it's questionable whether the converter would even work at 2560x1440 and keep a reliable, stable image.

The fact that the iMac would have to be turned on to accept DisplayPort input to the LCD module is a bit disappointing, but with LED backlighting, wouldn't it still use far less power than a 30" CCFL LCD, even adding the power used by the iMac?

And given that 30" 2560x1600 LED-backlit LCDs are over $3000, what allows Apple's 27" to be so cheap?! Is it because it uses white LED instead of RGB LED?
 
Last edited:
I have another question regarding the 27" iMac: can it be mounted on a stand that pivots between landscape and portrait orientation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top