Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
LG 31MU97 4k Display
- Thread starter Zorn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
50Hz should be OK for most things. At least it's not the HDMI 30Hz which would be pretty bad I should think. As 60Hz is possible on Windoze at 4096x2160, hopefully this can be fixed for the Mac.
+1 that. As LG don't seem to know when it's going to be fixed and whether or not it's them who are going to fix it, this is our only hope!
I'm going to wait for this one to be sorted out before I place an order. I realise there are hacks to get it to work, however 4096 x 2160 is promised on the LG web site (although it doesn't state at what refresh rate), so personally I want to know that it can be done - out of the box - before I part company with any of my cash.
I looked at this monitor, but it appears to me that 4096x2160 isn't a final delivery resolution for any current application. The confusion (of end users AND manufacturers), or marketing tactic of it being a "true 4K" monitor, stems from DCI 4K standards being a "Hollywood" acquisition resolution, so that a final cut can be delivered scoped at 4096x1716 (2.39:1 aspect) or 3996x2160 (1.85:1 aspect). Note that either the full horizontal or vertical resolution is used, depending upon the desired aspect ratio to be displayed when shown. Therefore, there are cameras that generate 4096x2160 video, which is intended to be CROPPED when projected, but I have not yet found another use for 4096 rez (as opposed to 3840) except for the TINY amount of real estate you gain on either side of the monitor.
Last edited:
Firstly, a big thank you to those who have contributed to this forum. It has been a great resource and very informative in allowing me to make my decision.
I pulled the trigger on the LG 31MU97 after switching back and forth for several weeks trying to decide between this one and the BenQ.
Anyway, I figured I'd give it a try and return it if I was disappointed. I have a nMP (late-2013) with dual D500s and mainly use it for event photography editing. I was therefore keen to find a good high-res screen to use as the main screen for my Photoshop & Lightroom workflow. Games are not a factor for me personally. Like many, I spent most of 2014 waiting for an updated TB2 display from Apple and was pretty frustrated when the iMac display effectively leapfrogged the capabilities of a machine I had dropped a lot of cash on. I wish Apple had made it clear at the Mac Pro release that they would not be developing a high res screen. Although disappointed, I feel like it would have avoided a lot of frustration for many of us and allowed us to choose appropriate third party alternatives.
The LG arrived last night. After attaching the stand and connecting via the Displayport->Thunderbolt cable provided, I have to say, the screen is a thing of beauty. Color is stunningly rich and I agree with those who have said above that seeing 4k will make it very hard to go back to lower res screens. I'm genuinely excited about working with this screen.
I didn't have very long to play around with it, but my initial observations are as follows:
- after enabling display port 1.2, I seem to be getting full 4096x2160 res @ 50Hz according to OS X system report. There are no black vertical bars. This is without using third party software. I had updated my Yosemite software, so that may have contributed to this result. The image does not appear to be stretched, although I was just starting to play around with the "wide/original/1:1" settings in the monitor menu, so I'll verify that this weekend.
- at full 4096 resolution, there is acres of screen real estate, but text and buttons are a little too small for me. Therefore I'm using a scaled res of 3008x1586 for now. I'll keep playing around with the options available (pressing Alt- when you click on the resolution preferences gives you additional options, as one helpful poster noted above).
- I am noticing some flickering artifacts, blackouts and screen-jitters. This is a little concerning, but as I say, I have still to play around with the settings so I'll see if this persists. Powering off the monitor and re-inserting the display port cable did not seem to cure this for me.
So first impressions are pretty good in that it seemed to work at full, screen-filling 17:9 resolution without any additional hacks. However, the screen jitters suggests to me that the drivers still need an update. I hit "buy" on this one after reading the update on the LG website about this being the subject of a future OS X update. I won't hold my breath, but I suspect there will be a fix of some sort (probably 3rd party) fairly soon. The guy at SwitchRes seems to be all over this, which is encouraging.
I'll provide further observations as I spend some more time with this beauty! Thanks again to those who took time to share their observations and experiences.
I pulled the trigger on the LG 31MU97 after switching back and forth for several weeks trying to decide between this one and the BenQ.
Anyway, I figured I'd give it a try and return it if I was disappointed. I have a nMP (late-2013) with dual D500s and mainly use it for event photography editing. I was therefore keen to find a good high-res screen to use as the main screen for my Photoshop & Lightroom workflow. Games are not a factor for me personally. Like many, I spent most of 2014 waiting for an updated TB2 display from Apple and was pretty frustrated when the iMac display effectively leapfrogged the capabilities of a machine I had dropped a lot of cash on. I wish Apple had made it clear at the Mac Pro release that they would not be developing a high res screen. Although disappointed, I feel like it would have avoided a lot of frustration for many of us and allowed us to choose appropriate third party alternatives.
The LG arrived last night. After attaching the stand and connecting via the Displayport->Thunderbolt cable provided, I have to say, the screen is a thing of beauty. Color is stunningly rich and I agree with those who have said above that seeing 4k will make it very hard to go back to lower res screens. I'm genuinely excited about working with this screen.
I didn't have very long to play around with it, but my initial observations are as follows:
- after enabling display port 1.2, I seem to be getting full 4096x2160 res @ 50Hz according to OS X system report. There are no black vertical bars. This is without using third party software. I had updated my Yosemite software, so that may have contributed to this result. The image does not appear to be stretched, although I was just starting to play around with the "wide/original/1:1" settings in the monitor menu, so I'll verify that this weekend.
- at full 4096 resolution, there is acres of screen real estate, but text and buttons are a little too small for me. Therefore I'm using a scaled res of 3008x1586 for now. I'll keep playing around with the options available (pressing Alt- when you click on the resolution preferences gives you additional options, as one helpful poster noted above).
- I am noticing some flickering artifacts, blackouts and screen-jitters. This is a little concerning, but as I say, I have still to play around with the settings so I'll see if this persists. Powering off the monitor and re-inserting the display port cable did not seem to cure this for me.
So first impressions are pretty good in that it seemed to work at full, screen-filling 17:9 resolution without any additional hacks. However, the screen jitters suggests to me that the drivers still need an update. I hit "buy" on this one after reading the update on the LG website about this being the subject of a future OS X update. I won't hold my breath, but I suspect there will be a fix of some sort (probably 3rd party) fairly soon. The guy at SwitchRes seems to be all over this, which is encouraging.
I'll provide further observations as I spend some more time with this beauty! Thanks again to those who took time to share their observations and experiences.
It is a beautiful monitor. I'm glad to hear the display override is getting the full resolution, I returned the monitor just before that was available. Keep an eye on the screen glitches and blackouts. I was having quite a bit of those and thought it was just monitor compatibility issues and then took it into the Genius Bar and they replaced the graphics cards.
Great review, thanks. Far more informative than most of the ones posted on the pro sites. Let's hope all of the monitor/driver problems are resolved with Yosemite/.02 - and soon.
Apple Support Page
I have been following this thread for awhile now and appreciate all the info! I was browsing apple support and noticed an update to the list of supported 4k displays.
With OS X Yosemite:
-LG 31MU97 4k display (at 30Hz or 50Hz)
http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT6008
I found it a little funny that they actually included the 50Hz
I have been following this thread for awhile now and appreciate all the info! I was browsing apple support and noticed an update to the list of supported 4k displays.
With OS X Yosemite:
-LG 31MU97 4k display (at 30Hz or 50Hz)
http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT6008
I found it a little funny that they actually included the 50Hz
In 10.10.2 beta, Apple now includes a file similar than the one I made for overriding the EDID. Proof that Apple uses the same kind of "hacks" that we did here...
From what I've seen, their new EDID doesn't set the 4096 resolution as native like mine did, they only exchanged the definition of 4096 at 50 and 60Hz (a solution that we tested with "drecc", and that didn't work to get 60Hz on 10.10.1 on his Mac).
That can mean two things:
- Apple is aware of a problem with this monitor and they're working on it
- they probably have improved the way OS X tries to guess the native resolution within the EDID, to comply with this monitor (and maybe others)
If this is the case, the monitor will work much better natively on 10.10.2 than on 10.10.1. (Probably no need of my file any more)
I however cannot say anything about 60Hz support in 10.10.2, as I don't own this display
From what I've seen, their new EDID doesn't set the 4096 resolution as native like mine did, they only exchanged the definition of 4096 at 50 and 60Hz (a solution that we tested with "drecc", and that didn't work to get 60Hz on 10.10.1 on his Mac).
That can mean two things:
- Apple is aware of a problem with this monitor and they're working on it
- they probably have improved the way OS X tries to guess the native resolution within the EDID, to comply with this monitor (and maybe others)
If this is the case, the monitor will work much better natively on 10.10.2 than on 10.10.1. (Probably no need of my file any more)
I however cannot say anything about 60Hz support in 10.10.2, as I don't own this display
Thanks for the update Stéphane!
Do you recommend deleting the custom SRX DisplayProductID-76e7.txt before we upgrade to 10.10.2?
I'm unable to install the beta unfortunately because I can't risk any beta hiccups, but I'll post here if 10.10.2 works when it's released.
Most certainly the upgrade to 10.10.2 will erase any custom file with its own. No need to delete, it will be overwritten automatically.
Thanks to everyone for the recent updates. This thread is turning into the best place on the intertubes for information about the LG 31MU97 with OS X, there's nothing else out there that comes close - or if there is, I can't find it.
Some problems look like they could be resolved, or on the way to being resolved with Yosemite updates, however the main point of concern is the flickering artifacts/blackouts/glitches/screen-jitters which is very likely driver related as has been pointed out.
Will be very interested to hear how PeteNYC gets on over the next few days. Keep us posted!
Ok, some updates from this morning.
Firstly, the flickering seems to be completely cured by switching to a different thunderbolt port on my nMP. I thought I had chosen a free bus originally, but maybe it was sharing with my external hd. In any event, it seems to be completely gone now. No stuttering, blackouts or artifacts for the past hour or two. I'll keep an eye on that but it looks promising.
Secondly, I have played around a bit with SwitchResX, which is a really neat little program. It's just nice to have all the options laid out there and to be able to customize your display options so comprehensively. It's much easier to see what you're getting than through Apple display prefs so a good way to compare resolution options.
Right now I'm switching between (i) full 4096x2160@50Hz (too small for detailed work, but stunning), (ii) 3008x1596@50Hz (feels very familiar in terms of screen real estate/element size coming from my prior monitor) and then 3840x2160@60Hz to enjoy the slightly smoother scrolling. I have to say, I do notice the increased smoothness at 60Hz, but don't remotely find 50Hz a problem for the things I use it for.
I'm going to play around with the color settings a little. I like the color straight out of the box, but I'm curious to try some tweaks.
Will keep y'all posted.
Loving it so far though, especially now the flickering stopped!
Firstly, the flickering seems to be completely cured by switching to a different thunderbolt port on my nMP. I thought I had chosen a free bus originally, but maybe it was sharing with my external hd. In any event, it seems to be completely gone now. No stuttering, blackouts or artifacts for the past hour or two. I'll keep an eye on that but it looks promising.
Secondly, I have played around a bit with SwitchResX, which is a really neat little program. It's just nice to have all the options laid out there and to be able to customize your display options so comprehensively. It's much easier to see what you're getting than through Apple display prefs so a good way to compare resolution options.
Right now I'm switching between (i) full 4096x2160@50Hz (too small for detailed work, but stunning), (ii) 3008x1596@50Hz (feels very familiar in terms of screen real estate/element size coming from my prior monitor) and then 3840x2160@60Hz to enjoy the slightly smoother scrolling. I have to say, I do notice the increased smoothness at 60Hz, but don't remotely find 50Hz a problem for the things I use it for.
I'm going to play around with the color settings a little. I like the color straight out of the box, but I'm curious to try some tweaks.
Will keep y'all posted.
Loving it so far though, especially now the flickering stopped!
Thanks, PeteNYC. That does sound promising. Fingers crossed that it continues like that. It makes sense what you say. For anyone wondering about the bus arrangement on the nMP, see the image below. Most people probably know about that already but I thought I'd update the thread on the off chance that there's anyone who doesn't. Sorry if I'm stating the obvious!
With the updated Apple Support page cast128 mentioned it does appear that 50Hz is what they're expecting us to get, however I'm encouraged by your experience so far. It seems odd that 3840x2160 works at 60Hz but 3008x1596 doesn't (and that's the kind of size I could see many people using - me included).
I'm sure I'm not the only one watching your experiments with the monitor with considerable interest!
Attachments
I wonder if 50Hz is the maximum the nMP can support for this monitor. Given that Bootcamp wouldn't go to 60Hz either, it seems a possibility although it's also possible going to 60Hz required a GPU driver update that wasn't ready and they instead decided that shipping a display override was a better than delaying. In any case, it's nice to see Apple adding monitors to the officially supported list.
Hoping
I am hoping that Apple and/or LG eventually get it working at 60Hz, but I am beginning to think that it may be a Mac Pro hardware limitation and/or bandwidth issue.
One the reviewers on Amazon stated that his machine (a PC) was having difficulty displaying 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz with the picture frequently going black, flashing back on after a few seconds, in addition to a number of artifacts when the screen was on. He turned his refresh rate down to 50Hz and the problems seemed to go away. He was able to get his machine to finally display 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz by using a heavier 24 AWG DisplayPort cable (and more expensive) instead of the one included with the monitor. He mentions others having the same issues with the included cable.
Im not sure about the cause, but I will keep hoping someone eventually gets it to work. For now, I guess I will keep playing the waiting game until I make my final purchase decision.
I am hoping that Apple and/or LG eventually get it working at 60Hz, but I am beginning to think that it may be a Mac Pro hardware limitation and/or bandwidth issue.
One the reviewers on Amazon stated that his machine (a PC) was having difficulty displaying 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz with the picture frequently going black, flashing back on after a few seconds, in addition to a number of artifacts when the screen was on. He turned his refresh rate down to 50Hz and the problems seemed to go away. He was able to get his machine to finally display 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz by using a heavier 24 AWG DisplayPort cable (and more expensive) instead of the one included with the monitor. He mentions others having the same issues with the included cable.
Im not sure about the cause, but I will keep hoping someone eventually gets it to work. For now, I guess I will keep playing the waiting game until I make my final purchase decision.
HiRez DisplayPort Cables - Required?
There seems to be a consensus that the cables used to drive the LG-31MU97 make a difference, especially since C4K (4096x2160 @60Hz) is bumping up against max signal data rates. High Rez (fat-copper) cables cost significantly more. But if true, then it does seem daft for LG to have packaged this monitor without them.
For example.
http://www.dvigear.com/cables-dp-hr.html
Partial Quote:
“The transport of high resolution DisplayPort signals over copper cables must overcome several challenges, such as insertion loss, differential skew and jitter. Insertion loss is caused by cable capacitance, which acts as a low-pass filter, blocking higher frequency signal components from passing. Skew occurs when the differential DisplayPort signals get delayed and become out of phase as they pass over a long cable. Both factors contribute to increased digital jitter, which degrades the performance of the cable. This jitter becomes more severe with higher resolutions, higher bit rates and longer cable distances. Conventional cables that support lower resolutions at short distances are often unable to support the data rates required by higher resolutions at longer distances. The resulting video can be disrupted by visual artifacts.”
Who knew
There seems to be a consensus that the cables used to drive the LG-31MU97 make a difference, especially since C4K (4096x2160 @60Hz) is bumping up against max signal data rates. High Rez (fat-copper) cables cost significantly more. But if true, then it does seem daft for LG to have packaged this monitor without them.
For example.
http://www.dvigear.com/cables-dp-hr.html
Partial Quote:
“The transport of high resolution DisplayPort signals over copper cables must overcome several challenges, such as insertion loss, differential skew and jitter. Insertion loss is caused by cable capacitance, which acts as a low-pass filter, blocking higher frequency signal components from passing. Skew occurs when the differential DisplayPort signals get delayed and become out of phase as they pass over a long cable. Both factors contribute to increased digital jitter, which degrades the performance of the cable. This jitter becomes more severe with higher resolutions, higher bit rates and longer cable distances. Conventional cables that support lower resolutions at short distances are often unable to support the data rates required by higher resolutions at longer distances. The resulting video can be disrupted by visual artifacts.”
Who knew
Since the LG is a 10-bit monitor, 4096x2160@60Hz at 10-bit color comes right up against the limits of DisplayPort 1.2. Since the Mac only supports 8-bit color, it should have plenty of headroom, unless the Mac is padding the 8 bits up to 10 bits because the monitor needs it or something.
D300
So this got me thinking.
As I'm sure many of you know, the D700 isn't a direct comparison to the AMD FirePro W9000. The major difference, according to arstechnica, is that the D700 is very underclocked to meet the TDP/thermal requirements of the Mac Pro. The D300 on the other hand is quite similar to the FirePro V7900.
AMD has a white paper on DisplayPort 1.2 and the FirePro V7900 and V5900 online. In that, it states that "Although DisplayPort 1.2 can accommodate resolutions up to 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz, the AMD V7900 and V5900 are designed to support up to 4096x2160 @50Hz."
So based on my fairly big assumption that a D300 = V7900. If Apple is planning to have all of the Late 2013 Mac Pro's support certain displays, are they going to cripple the better D500 and D700 machines due to possible limitations of the D300? Again, I don't know a ton about this, but thought some of you might think it was interesting.
So this got me thinking.
As I'm sure many of you know, the D700 isn't a direct comparison to the AMD FirePro W9000. The major difference, according to arstechnica, is that the D700 is very underclocked to meet the TDP/thermal requirements of the Mac Pro. The D300 on the other hand is quite similar to the FirePro V7900.
AMD has a white paper on DisplayPort 1.2 and the FirePro V7900 and V5900 online. In that, it states that "Although DisplayPort 1.2 can accommodate resolutions up to 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz, the AMD V7900 and V5900 are designed to support up to 4096x2160 @50Hz."
So based on my fairly big assumption that a D300 = V7900. If Apple is planning to have all of the Late 2013 Mac Pro's support certain displays, are they going to cripple the better D500 and D700 machines due to possible limitations of the D300? Again, I don't know a ton about this, but thought some of you might think it was interesting.
Some really interesting points raised on this thread over the last few days. It's got me thinking. I've got a D300 card (wish I'd gone for a D500, but it's all water under the bridge and I'm still delighted with my nMP) so even if 60Hz at 4096 became possible, it's seems unlikely I'd be able to run that myself. I certainly think that if the D500 or D700 can handle it, Apple shouldn't throttle the capabilities of those cards. I hope that's not happening, although we're talking about Apple here so who knows?
I did quite a bit of research myself over the weekend and there are similarly priced (to the LG) IPS based UHD monitors on the way - finally! Personally, I'd like to be running at 60Hz so if that means going UHD at something like 32" then so be it (would prefer 30" like my ACD, but these new screens all seem to be jumping in size from 28" to 32").
Going to keep watching the situation as it develops but feeling more positive about the situation than I was a day or two ago. The jury's still out, but it's starting to feel like the LG won't be the monitor for me after all.
I did quite a bit of research myself over the weekend and there are similarly priced (to the LG) IPS based UHD monitors on the way - finally! Personally, I'd like to be running at 60Hz so if that means going UHD at something like 32" then so be it (would prefer 30" like my ACD, but these new screens all seem to be jumping in size from 28" to 32").
Going to keep watching the situation as it develops but feeling more positive about the situation than I was a day or two ago. The jury's still out, but it's starting to feel like the LG won't be the monitor for me after all.
Some really interesting points raised on this thread over the last few days. It's got me thinking. I've got a D300 card (wish I'd gone for a D500, but it's all water under the bridge and I'm still delighted with my nMP) so even if 60Hz at 4096 became possible, it's seems unlikely I'd be able to run that myself. I certainly think that if the D500 or D700 can handle it, Apple shouldn't throttle the capabilities of those cards. I hope that's not happening, although we're talking about Apple here so who knows?
I did quite a bit of research myself over the weekend and there are similarly priced (to the LG) IPS based UHD monitors on the way - finally! Personally, I'd like to be running at 60Hz so if that means going UHD at something like 32" then so be it (would prefer 30" like my ACD, but these new screens all seem to be jumping in size from 28" to 32").
Going to keep watching the situation as it develops but feeling more positive about the situation than I was a day or two ago. The jury's still out, but it's starting to feel like the LG won't be the monitor for me after all.
What are the UHD monitors that are on the way ?
Perhaps the nMP(6,1) is simply not yet ready for c4K(4096x2160)@60Hz over three screens. Also, with the fat bandwidth requirements, it does not leave much room for any other peripheral devices, such as an external TimeMachine hard-drive etc.
Yes, ArsTechnica relate the D700 specs to the AMD FirePro W9000. And they suggest that the under-clocking was set so that it can run with greater reliability over longer time-frames. (Optimized for rendering rather than games).
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/01/two-steps-forward-a-review-of-the-2013-mac-pro/3/
Have never seen anything official from Apple to suggest that the lower-spec nMP/D300 & nMP/D500 versions can not also run three c4K monitors. Even if the small print states that the third one must use the lower-bus/Hdmi port, and will only be enabled @30Hz (even for the D700). Still, not bad for just two video cards.
http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202801
Yosemite supports: "LG 31MU97 4K display (at 30Hz or 50Hz)".
The AMD FirePro W9100 (update to the W9000) was launched back in April 2014. Surely enough time for Apple to bang it into shape for the nMP. And it seems to offer a whole lot more juice (& 16Gb Vram) in the same form-factor.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7901/amd-announces-firepro-w9100
So it seems likely that a V-card bump will be included in the next nMP(7,1) machine, - Whenever that may be..
https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//#Mac_Pro
Yes, ArsTechnica relate the D700 specs to the AMD FirePro W9000. And they suggest that the under-clocking was set so that it can run with greater reliability over longer time-frames. (Optimized for rendering rather than games).
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/01/two-steps-forward-a-review-of-the-2013-mac-pro/3/
Have never seen anything official from Apple to suggest that the lower-spec nMP/D300 & nMP/D500 versions can not also run three c4K monitors. Even if the small print states that the third one must use the lower-bus/Hdmi port, and will only be enabled @30Hz (even for the D700). Still, not bad for just two video cards.
http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202801
Yosemite supports: "LG 31MU97 4K display (at 30Hz or 50Hz)".
The AMD FirePro W9100 (update to the W9000) was launched back in April 2014. Surely enough time for Apple to bang it into shape for the nMP. And it seems to offer a whole lot more juice (& 16Gb Vram) in the same form-factor.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7901/amd-announces-firepro-w9100
So it seems likely that a V-card bump will be included in the next nMP(7,1) machine, - Whenever that may be..
https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//#Mac_Pro
Last edited:
I am still rocking this monitor in OS X with a MacPro 2012 GTX 980 and 4096x2160@60hz. I do still get the occasional black screen and windows 8.1 bugs out and I get tearing in the middle of the screen , but a resolution change and back fixes it.
These are the pick of the IPS based 32" UHD monitors that I found while researching at the weekend. They're either out now or soon will be:
Acer B326HK
Asus PQ321QE
BenQ BL3201PT
Samsung UD970
The Samsung and Asus are a little higher in price, but it seems to be changing all the time so definitely worth keeping an eye on, especially if you don't mind waiting a few weeks for your new display while prices settle. If anyone wants to add to that list for the benefit of this thread then please do.
32" might be a big too big and I still like the look of the LG, but that 50Hz/60Hz thing and the blacking out/tearing is a showstopper for me.
EDIT: I've listed 32" monitors above, but if you don't mind 27" then there are several at that size (including the almost frameless Acer S277HK). They're all at good price points too. Sharp are updating their IGZO displays at the moment so look out for frameless and high contrast options around 31.5" next year, but if we kept waiting for the "next thing" we'd all still have Commodore 64's
Last edited:
Anybody know of how to get some scaled resolutions that aren't perfect 2x (2048x1080 in Retina mode)
...but rather get something with a bit more screen real estate (something closer to 1440 vertically maybe)?
Never mind - File worked
Last edited:
These are the pick of the IPS based 32" UHD monitors that I found while researching at the weekend. They're either out now or soon will be:
Acer B326HK
Asus PQ321QE
BenQ BL3201PT
Samsung UD970
The Samsung and Asus are a little higher in price, but it seems to be changing all the time so definitely worth keeping an eye on, especially if you don't mind waiting a few weeks for your new display while prices settle. If anyone wants to add to that list for the benefit of this thread then please do.
32" might be a big too big and I still like the look of the LG, but that 50Hz/60Hz thing and the blacking out/tearing is a showstopper for me.
EDIT: I've listed 32" monitors above, but if you don't mind 27" then there are several at that size (including the almost frameless Acer S277HK). They're all at good price points too. Sharp are updating their IGZO displays at the moment so look out for frameless and high contrast options around 31.5" next year, but if we kept waiting for the "next thing" we'd all still have Commodore 64's
Thanks. I think after seeing a lot of 4k content on my current (2560x1440) monitor, that I would definitely want 32" for the lower ppi..
As far as future monitors ,the Asus has been around for a while and seems to have just as many issues as the LG as far as OSX goes.
I know I can send back any monitor that doesn't work out, but that's a pain.
I just have to say, regardless of who is at fault, I find it strange that it has been one year after the nMP release and we still have to experiment to find an acceptable 4K monitor !