Hacker News Reader

Comment by howinteresting | Hacker News Reader

Most people buying high-end monitors prioritize high refresh rates over pixel densities.

High refresh rates seem to have gotten quite cheap. In addition to refresh rates, the high end is concerned with HDR, resolution, color reproduction, curve, and width, depending on the professional segment being targeted.

The products exist but they're not as numerous as I'd expect (certainly not outside of the Apple ecosystem), and it's an eye-watering leap as far as prices go, hundreds of dollars at one end and multiple thousands at the other with very little in between.

My experience is that HDR is rarely worth it on a computer monitor because OLED is so rare. FALD or other non-OLED HDR displays don't get near a decent OLED TV's HDR performance.

Gamers do. For coding I prefer high contrast and clarity. I’m disappointed there haven’t been any huge genuine OLED screens. MicroLED could be nice too.

Right, and most people buying high-end monitors are gamers.

Interesting, I’d assume it’s professionals in the video/photography/production space spending the serious money on high end displays. Where are you getting your data?

Well there's "high end" consumer and then there's "high end" professional which is a few times higher in price

Yeah the extra frames do nothing in my text editor. The only part of your typical gaming display I want in a work/daily driver monitor is adaptive sync to reduce video judder and to allow the GPU to idle even more deeply when nothing is being redrawn (which is part of why M-series 14/16” MBPs get great battery life: their screens can go down as far as 1hz).

I won’t turn down a higher peak framerate if it comes without cost to the rest of the monitor’s functionality of course, but it’s not worth trading anything away for.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com