Monday, April 28th 2014

BenQ Readies the BL3200PT 32-Inch AMVA Monitor

BenQ is currently preparing the release of the BL3200PT, a 32-inch monitor equipped with a WQHD (2560 x 1440) AMVA panel. This model makes use of Flicker-free technology to eliminate flickering at all brightness levels and also features four blue light reduction modes (Multimedia - 30% reduction, Web-surfing - 50% reduction, Office - 60% reduction, Reading - 70% reduction), an ambient light sensor (to automatically adjust brightness), and a stand enabling tilt, pivot, swivel and height adjustment.

The BL3200PT has a 3,000:1 contrast ratio (20,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio), a 4 ms GTG response time, 300 cd/m2 brightness, dual 5 W speakers, D-Sub, DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort 1.2 inputs, plus a USB hub with two USB 2.0 and two USB 3.0 ports. BenQ's monitor is expected to ship next month but it's already listed with prices starting at just under 600 Euro.

Source: TFT Central
Add your own comment

19 Comments on BenQ Readies the BL3200PT 32-Inch AMVA Monitor

#2
Chaitanya
Atleast Benq used a 1440p panel instead of 1080p panel.
Posted on Reply
#3
RCoon
Gaming Moderator
by: Cristian_25H
(20,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio)
Why do companies even bother with DCR specs? They literally mean nothing. They could write 20 gorillion dynamic contrast ratio and it would make no difference.
Posted on Reply
#5
Fairlady-z
2560x1440 with 8X AA would look really sharp on that 32" hmmm tempted. However, its priced at 1 grand in the US.
Posted on Reply
#6
Red_Machine
Nice to see the correct exchange rate applied to prices for a change.
Posted on Reply
#7
RCoon
Gaming Moderator
by: Fairlady-z
2560x1440 with 8X AA would look really sharp on that 32" hmmm tempted. However, its priced at 1 grand in the US.
Not really.

24" 1080p:
Display size: 27.89" × 15.69" = 437.55in² (70.84cm × 39.85cm = 2822.93cm²) at 91.79 PPI, 0.2767mm dot pitch, 8425 PPI²

32" 1440p:
Display size: 20.92" × 11.77" = 246.12in² (53.13cm × 29.89cm = 1587.9cm²) at 91.79 PPI, 0.2767mm dot pitch, 8425 PPI²

Sharpness of this monitor vs a standard HD monitor is identical.
Posted on Reply
#8
Jizzler
I think that was the point? 2560x1440 is going to look pretty nice on a 32" vs all those 27-32" 1920x1080 screens.
Posted on Reply
#9
ZetZet
by: RCoon
Not really.

24" 1080p:
Display size: 27.89" × 15.69" = 437.55in² (70.84cm × 39.85cm = 2822.93cm²) at 91.79 PPI, 0.2767mm dot pitch, 8425 PPI²

32" 1440p:
Display size: 20.92" × 11.77" = 246.12in² (53.13cm × 29.89cm = 1587.9cm²) at 91.79 PPI, 0.2767mm dot pitch, 8425 PPI²

Sharpness of this monitor vs a standard HD monitor is identical.
But the fact that it's so big should definitely make it look pretty impressive, atleast I think it will.
Posted on Reply
#10
RCoon
Gaming Moderator
by: ZetZet
But the fact that it's so big should definitely make it look pretty impressive, atleast I think it will.
I suppose it would give more workspace real estate, but if somebody wanted a sharper image than their standard 24" HD monitor, they'd need to go 1600p @ 32" or 1440p @ 27".
Posted on Reply
#11
Octavean
Interesting,.....

Even at ~$1000 USD its interesting IMO,...and possibly worth buying.

I'm not sure its an improvement in my use case though. So I would much rather have a 4K monitor at 32" then the current crop of cheaper 4K monitors at 28". So I'll put it this way, I would probably be willing to spend ~$1000 USD on 4K 32" but not necessarily this BenQ 2560x1440.

Something like this really should be seen up close and personal before making such a decision though.
Posted on Reply
#12
techy1
1000$ for 1440p 60hz, when there is UHD's out for the same price... yea - I do not think that this is hard decision :D
Posted on Reply
#14
radrok
by: techy1
1000$ for 1440p 60hz, when there is UHD's out for the same price... yea - I do not think that this is hard decision :D
There's no decent UHD offering in that price range, atleast not on the level of this panel quality and size.
Posted on Reply
#15
Scrizz
I love VA panels!!!!!!
The blacks mmmmm....
Posted on Reply
#16
Octavean
by: radrok
There's no decent UHD offering in that price range, atleast not on the level of this panel quality and size.
That's basically true given the 32" size.

However, that's not to say that there aren't or won't be some compelling non-4K delays like the LG 34UM95 34" Ultra Widescreen 21:9 Monitor at 3440x1440

Youtube: KnrxNfxRK_4

I'd personally prefer a 34" 21:9 3440x1440 monitor to this 32" BenQ 2560x1440 but its hard to say if I would prefer the former over a 28" 4K monitor.
Posted on Reply
#17
radrok
I'm on the fence about ordering that very specific LG monitor, would love to see how gaming is on 21:9.
Posted on Reply
#18
hellrazor
So it's a 20/40 vision simulator?
Posted on Reply
#19
Fairlady-z
by: radrok
I'm on the fence about ordering that very specific LG monitor, would love to see how gaming is on 21:9.
Not sure how the experience will feel, but having had owned a 2560x1080 monitor I really could not stand the black bars when the games didn't not work with it. Also, the UI in most games had major issues fitting. Again, my experience with the 2560x1440 Dell your millage on the LG one might vary. I just ordered the 32" BenQ, as the Samsung 28" 4k was one of the worst modern monitors used. Fit and finish was fisher price like, and the fuzzy won't drove me insane.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment