32" 6K ProArt Display From ASUS Launching in Late August

[theorist9]

Because they probably all come from the same factory.

The Dell 32" 6k has IPS Black panel tech, which means the panel is made by LG.

If the ASUS 32" 6k were also made by LG, it would most likely have that as well, but it doesn't (none of the ASUS monitors do). Given its low projected price, my guess is that its panel is made by someone less expensive than LG—maybe BOE (Beijing Oriental Electronics Group).

 

[artifex]

No thanks. It probably doesn't matter to most, but aesthetics are important to me. Those little buttons across the lower THICK bezel are ugly as. To each their own.

I didn't used to think so, as long as I was getting the tech specs I wanted and a good deal, but my last couple of displays have lasted over a decade each. My current one is probably about 15 years old, actually. And that's a long time to look at something that annoys you at all. Definitely get something else even if it costs more, if you aren't happy with this.

...which is why I'm glad to see this release, ironically. The display actually looks fine to me, but I'm not in the market for 6K at all yet (nothing to drive it, no content to put on it). I'm just hoping this means the prices of nicer looking mid-tier 4K displays will come down to where the budget ones are now

 

[artifex]

Not to worry, Mac games capped at 60fps with 1440p upscales. What a peak of gaming machine LOL 😁

RAM usage is crazy tho.. Windows machine requires no more than 16GB. Well, it's a Mac 😉

but are you also counting what the GPU would need on the Windows side, or just the CPU?
At 1080p, with system RAM at 16GB, my RTX 1070 (8GB) does okay, but my RTX 3060 (12GB) looks better. So these numbers don't look very off for even higher resolution.

unrelated, but: if you do buy this for your Mac, don't buy it from the App Store. Steam or GOG are the best. Total footprint in storage will be about the same if you download all the voiceovers and extras, but at least you'll have a choice about it. And Steam and GOG have great sales. I do wonder how hard it is to get mods from NexusMods working, regardless.

 

[iSayuSay]

but are you also counting what the GPU would need on the Windows side, or just the CPU?
At 1080p, with system RAM at 16GB, my RTX 1070 (8GB) does okay, but my RTX 3060 (12GB) looks better. So these numbers don't look very off for even higher resolution.
...

Even when you sum up VRAM + RAM on Windows system, it'd still be less than what CDPR states for Mac. Even more so when Mac version has Ray/Path Tracing disabled by default.

CDPR makes Mac version of Cyberpunk a resource hog for some weird reasons. We do know how premium storage costs on Mac, and CDPR eats 160GB just like that, like daanggg.

 

[Moonjumper]

I disagree. The best image size for 5K for me would be closer to 29". Apple used to agree with me, but then switched things up later by reducing the screen size for 2560x1440 / 5120x2880.

30" Cinema HD Display - 2560x1600 = 100.6 ppi.
Hypothetical 30" Retina display - 5120x3200 = 201.3 ppi

If we were to use this pixel density standard, a 5K display would be 29.2", and would be Retina at ~17" or further.
The 27" Apple Studio Display at 218 ppi is Retina at ~16" or further.

I have a 27" iMac and I find the default text sizing a bit small at normal 2X scaling, at my 22"+ seating distance.
Using the same OS, I find the default text sizing nicer on my 30" Cinema HD Display, at the same seating distance.

The 30" Cinema display was 16:10 ratio. 27" 2560x1440 is a similar density, it is the missing 160 vertical pixels that accounts for the size difference.

The 30" Cinema display was amazing. 16:10 is a much better ratio for a lot of things, as it offers more space vertically so needs less scrolling with vertical content such as code, documents, and websites (I never have to scroll Mac Rumors horizontally, but I do need to vertically a lot). Plus 16:10 is very close to the Golden Ratio (1.618). I wish there was more variety in aspect ratios available.

 

[Dr McKay]

So, what is wrong with 60Hz? No gamer is going to spend $1,200 for a studio monitor on a Mac.

Simply navigating the UI is nicer to look at, they didn't give iPad pro, pro iPhone models, or MacBook Pros pro motion displays for the games.

 

[deevey]

I don't know if that's true, but it's certainly an interesting idea!

To the extent one hears about uniformity issues, though (including on the LG Ultrafine, which is glossy), they're mostly larger-scale problems, such as color banding or non-uniform backlighting. What kind of small-scale uniformity issues did you have in mind?

Nit picky details - not small scale. Backlight bleed / uniformity / blooming / muted colors. Things that would be b**thed and moan about with an Apple product, but with a cheaper product it can be let slide because...well, it's cheaper.

I don't think most manufacturers have the same QC standards as Apple does, a Matte screen finish masks alot of issues the typical consumer would notice much easier than with a glossy one.

Just a theory

 

[tenthousandthings]

but are you also counting what the GPU would need on the Windows side, or just the CPU?
At 1080p, with system RAM at 16GB, my RTX 1070 (8GB) does okay, but my RTX 3060 (12GB) looks better. So these numbers don't look very off for even higher resolution.

Also, those recommended and high-fidelity Mac memory numbers are just the minimums available for the M3 Pro and M2/M3 Max — Apple doesn’t sell configurations with less memory. So that claim is a straw man. It’s about GPU performance, just like the PC requirements.

 

[iPhone2019]

Would a 120 Hz display have made the picture quality worse in any way?

 

[escargot3]

Plus this is a 6k display. I’m not aware of any display at 6k with higher than 60hz at any price.

Nobody even makes a proper 5K above 60Hz, let alone 6K

 

[escargot3]

Actually no. TB4 technically can drive one 5K display at 120Hz with video stream compression (but we do not see such displays for some reason). TB5 has 3 times higher bandwidth than TB4's 40Gbps (and probably supports more effective video compression) which it already higher than 88Gbps needed for a lossless 6k 120Hz 10bit video stream.

He said lossless. Video stream compression is not lossless.

 

[escargot3]

I've been looking forward to this 6K monitor and am not bothered by 60Hz refresh rate. For my Windows gaming system, I have a monitor that can do 240Hz, but I run it at 120Hz because that is what my good, but not top-end, computer can cope with for the games I play. That faster monitor is 45" at 3440 x 1440 to be able to run at 120Hz. Anyone wanting more than 60Hz at 6K has a very high end computer to run it smoothly, or they are not running anything too taxing.

Resolution and refresh rate are a trade off for most people. The monitor that can do both really well will be very expensive and need an expensive computer to run it. And when montiors are expensive, they get very expensive as they have a limited market, and therefore few units to pay back the development costs.

Nobody is running 6K above 60Hz as no such monitor exists

 

[Jensend]

Nit picky details - not small scale. Backlight bleed / uniformity / blooming / muted colors. Things that would be b**thed and moan about with an Apple product, but with a cheaper product it can be let slide because...well, it's cheaper.

I don't think most manufacturers have the same QC standards as Apple does, a Matte screen finish masks alot of issues the typical consumer would notice much easier than with a glossy one.

Just a theory

A matte screen isn't going to hide Backlight bleed / uniformity / blooming issues. That's their point.
I have no idea what "muted colors" means.

 

[EugW]

The 30" Cinema display was 16:10 ratio. 27" 2560x1440 is a similar density, it is the missing 160 vertical pixels that accounts for the size difference.

No, the pixel density is noticeably different.

My 30” ACD is 101 ppi.
My 2010 27” iMac is 109 ppi.
And my 2017 27” iMac is 218 ppi.

Text is noticeably larger on the ACD, and that larger text size is more comfortable to look at IMO.

As mentioned, to achieve the same equivalent pixel density as the 30” ACD, the non-Retina 2560x1440 iMac would need to be 29.2”. Similarly, a Retina 5120x2880 screen would need to be 29.2” to achieve the same text size. A Retina 5120x3200 screen with that text sizing would be 30” of course.

Conversely, a 5120x3200 screen at the same 218 ppi pixel density as the 27” 5K iMac would be 27.75” (not 30”).

I own that 2010 27” iMac, 2017 27” 5K iMac, and 30” ACD and thus have been able to compare them directly side by side with the same versions of macOS.*

*I can use the 2010 iMac in Target Display Mode so I know what recent versions of macOS look like on that 15 year old iMac. I even know what iPadOS 26 looks like on that 2010 27” iMac.

 

[Dark-Signature]

No, the pixel density is noticeably different.

My 30” ACD is 101 ppi.
My 2010 27” iMac is 109 ppi.
And my 2017 27” iMac is 218 ppi.

Text is noticeably larger on the ACD, and that larger text size is more comfortable to look at IMO.

As mentioned, to achieve the same equivalent pixel density as the 30” ACD, the non-Retina 2560x1440 iMac would need to be 29.2”. Similarly, a Retina 5120x2880 screen would need to be 29.2” to achieve the same text size. A Retina 5120x3200 screen with that text sizing would be 30” of course.

Conversely, a 5120x3200 screen at the same 218 ppi pixel density as the 27” 5K iMac would be 27.75” (not 30”).

I own that 2010 27” iMac, 2017 27” 5K iMac, and 30” ACD and thus have been able to compare them directly side by side with the same versions of macOS.*

*I can use the 2010 iMac in Target Display Mode so I know what recent versions of macOS look like on that 15 year old iMac. I even know what iPadOS 26 looks like on that 2010 27” iMac.

View attachment 2530238

View attachment 2530239

What I want to give you credit for is that you can substantiate your view of pixel density very well. But you are one of the very few people I read that would find a pixel density of 190-200PPI better than a pixel density of ~220PPI.

I, for example, have no problem at all with the text size on my 5K displays (Dell & Apple) on 27" with the 220PPI and find this size ideal. The market penetration shows that most people think this is as great as I do.

Maybe you just need to adjust your working behavior (keyword: sitting distance to the display) to be just as satisfied as the rest of humanity?

 

[EugW]

What I want to give you credit for is that you can substantiate your view of pixel density very well. But you are one of the very few people I read that would find a pixel density of 190-200PPI better than a pixel density of ~220PPI.

I, for example, have no problem at all with the text size on my 5K displays (Dell & Apple) on 27" with the 220PPI and find this size ideal. The market penetration shows that most people think this is as great as I do.

Maybe you just need to adjust your working behavior (keyword: sitting distance to the display) to be just as satisfied as the rest of humanity?

Apple’s 218 ppi pixel density is considered Retina at about 16” or more.

A pixel density of 201 ppi would be considered Retina at about 17” or more.

However, US occupational health ergonomics guidelines recommend a minimum seating distance of at least 20” for a desktop screen. I sit at approximately 22”-ish, a normal desktop seating distance.

 

[springsup]

Nobody is running 6K above 60Hz as no such monitor exists

BOE shows 31.5” 8K 120Hz LCD panel on SID Display Week, mass production later this year​

So coming soon. If those kinds of specs become available, it’s possible we could see more retina-quality, high-refresh screens in general (whether 6K, 8K, etc).

 

[dannys1]

I don’t think you understand the tech here. First, XDR is not mini led. Second, IPS is a type of panel and Mini Led is type of lighting. You can put them in the same comparison as it would be like comparing WiFi with Bluetooth. Different aspects

Yes you're right sorry - I'd never really looked into mini-LED properly as it wasn't a technology I was that interested in- i've pretty much gone to OLED for every panel I could. For some reason I assume mini-LED was a cheaper version of micro-LED - but it's effectively just local zone dimming scalled up to a lot more zones - with a confusing name to make it sound better.

So yes, mini-Led could be on IPS or VA and the Pro XDR is nothing more than a nice IPS panel with a lot of dimming zones. I do now remember the comparisons to OLED when it came out and the haloing you got even with the extra dimming zones.

Micro-LED on the other hand is more like OLED.

 

[dannys1]

View attachment 2530037


Here it is 8K, but what works in 8K also works in 6K.

But what do high Hz values necessarily have to do with gaming? I can understand anyone who would like to work at 120/240Hz. I would like that too, but I'm realistic and a good monitor that offers these features (6K/8K & 120/240Hz & glossy coating & on 32/40") will certainly want to be paid for handsomely. If I were a manufacturer of such monitors, I wouldn't release them for less than $3,500.

Well 120hz+ is pretty much useless for anything other than pro gaming - at 240hz you've hit the point of diminishing returns for even the most eagle eyes pro gramer.

Its nice to have smoother scrolling and a richer mouse pointer at 120hz+ but it' doesn't really improve much for day to day computer work. Really we'd be better off with Apple's Pro Motion tech so that a desktop screen could sit at 1hz when stable to save power and scale up when scrolling.

 

[deevey]

A matte screen isn't going to hide Backlight bleed / uniformity / blooming issues. That's their point.
I have no idea what "muted colors" means.

Aim a torch at a piece of frosted glass.

 

[ignatius345]

This list would welcome the Kuycon G32P for 1799 USD.

Anybody here used any of the Kuycon dispays? The specs LOOK amazing, but I'm curious to hear about the actual quality. https://kuycon.us/monitors/

 

[EugW]

Anybody here used any of the Kuycon dispays? The specs LOOK amazing, but I'm curious to hear about the actual quality. https://kuycon.us/monitors/

The 5K has been reviewed. The screen is ok, but not great. However, the all aluminum enclosure is excellent.

 

[weckart]

6 years later you would expect it to be at least on par with the Pro Display XDR.

They are about $4000 (minus stand) below par on the asking price. Is that what you meant?

 

[Admiral]

Do tell...I bought a Studio Display six months ago and would entertain replacing it with such a display.

I'll give you $450 for your old piece of crap.

 

[iPhone2019]

Perhaps we’ll have to wait a year for the 120Hz variants. They probably want to start with 60 Hz screens this year so that there’s a good reason to upgrade next year.