• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Philips Unveils the DisplayHDR 600-rated 326M6VJRMB Ultra HD Monitor

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,283 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
Philips today unveiled the 326M6VJRMB, a 31.5-inch 4K Ultra HD monitor certified by VESA to meet DisplayHDR 600 standards. Backed by an AMVA panel, the monitor puts out 10bpc or 1.07 billion colors, 178°/178° viewing-angles, 4 ms response time, and 3,000:1 static contrast ratio with 600 cd/m² maximum brightness. Two features let you care for your eyes - a blue-light reduction mode that makes the display less irritable to your eyes, and a flicker-free brightness adjustment, which uses a non-PWM method to reduce brightness of the LED backlighting. The monitor features RGB LED-based ambient lighting. You get plenty of inputs, including a DisplayPort 1.4, three HDMI 2.0, an analog audio line-in from your PC, and a USB 3.0 input to drive the 4-port USB 3.0 hub. In-built 5W stereo speakers make for the rest of it.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
958 (0.44/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420
Memory 32Gb G-Skill Trident Z Neo @3806MHz C14
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX2070
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 1TB
Display(s) Samsung G9 49" Curved Ultrawide
Case Cooler Master Cosmos
Audio Device(s) O2 USB Headphone AMP
Power Supply Corsair HX850i
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry MX
Software Windows 11
This looks great, then I found the 60Hz (40Hz-60Hz FreeSync) refresh rate... Damn, this was almost an instant buy for me.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
277 (0.06/day)
Won't even touch a 60Hz screen with teen foot pole. 60Hz on a new screen with these specifications is just ridiculous.

"and people, don't even start with commenting that you don't need more than 60Hz, you do not now what you are talking about pure and simple."

The ABSOLUTE MINIMUM industry standard of today should be 75Hz for low end monitors and 100Hz for medium and 120Hz for high end monitors.

Extreme standard for gaming should have 144Hz and more. 240Hz is max today for consumers but 500Hz is not far off.

When CRT went out of fashion they where pushing 120Hz then when TFT took over we like went back to 60Hz for the next following 15 years. The TFT industry has been rotten to the core and several time reveled price fixing cartels, they have been holding back development to milk their old 60Hz technology and factorys like forever. FINALLY we have more actors pushing development to catch up, soon most gaming screen will be a minimum of 144Hz with most extreme modells going over 200Hz.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Messages
210 (0.09/day)
System Name Lightning
Processor 4790K
Motherboard asrock z87 extreme 3
Cooling hwlabs black ice 20 fpi radiator, cpu mosfet blocks, MCW60 cpu block, full cover on 780Ti's
Memory corsair dominator platinum 2400C10, 32 giga, DDR3
Video Card(s) 2x780Ti
Storage intel S3700 400GB, samsung 850 pro 120 GB, a cheep intel MLC 120GB, an another even cheeper 120GB
Display(s) eizo foris fg2421
Case 700D
Audio Device(s) ESI Juli@
Power Supply seasonic platinum 1000
Mouse mx518
Software Lightning v2.0a
120 I will take :)
60 I will pass :)
200+ ? it the myau :)
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
1,002 (0.19/day)
Won't even touch a 60Hz screen with teen foot pole. 60Hz on a new screen with these specifications is just ridiculous.

"and people, don't even start with commenting that you don't need more than 60Hz, you do not now what you are talking about pure and simple."

The ABSOLUTE MINIMUM industry standard of today should be 75Hz for low end monitors and 100Hz for medium and 120Hz for high end monitors.

Extreme standard for gaming should have 144Hz or more.

When CRT went out of fashion they where pushing 120Hz then when TFT took over we like went back to 60Hz for the next following 15 years. The TFT industry has been rotten to the core and several time reveled price fixing cartels, they have been holding back development to milk their old 60Hz technology and factorys like forever. FINALLY we have more actors pushing development to catch up, soon most gaming screen will be a minimum of 144Hz with most extreme modells going over 200Hz.

HDR will be limiting factor there. Its very hard to make really fast brightness changes which would still hold HDR rating. I think it will take quite a bit of time to have both high refresh speed and high HDR standard.

As for 60 Hz. Let me put it this way..

I have old Eizo (S-PVA) monitor, which obviously is 60 Hz.

Doesnt prevent me from obliterating most ppl in any FPS. Yes, more Hz would obviously allow me to be even better, but to be fair I dont think 60 Hz is that much limiting factor for most ppl. Also taking into account ridiculously low sync rates of most FPS (tick rate), it doesnt actually matter much. Ironically only game where I would want more Hz is LoL. :D
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
958 (0.44/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 9 5950X
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Hero WiFi
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420
Memory 32Gb G-Skill Trident Z Neo @3806MHz C14
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX2070
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 1TB
Display(s) Samsung G9 49" Curved Ultrawide
Case Cooler Master Cosmos
Audio Device(s) O2 USB Headphone AMP
Power Supply Corsair HX850i
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Cherry MX
Software Windows 11
HDR will be limiting factor there. Its very hard to make really fast brightness changes which would still hold HDR rating. I think it will take quite a bit of time to have both high refresh speed and high HDR standard.

As for 60 Hz. Let me put it this way..

I have old Eizo (S-PVA) monitor, which obviously is 60 Hz.

Doesnt prevent me from obliterating most ppl in any FPS. Yes, more Hz would obviously allow me to be even better, but to be fair I dont think 60 Hz is that much limiting factor for most ppl. Also taking into account ridiculously low sync rates of most FPS (tick rate), it doesnt actually matter much. Ironically only game where I would want more Hz is LoL. :D
I don’t buy your HDR is hard to do excuse. Others, including years old HDTVs do it with no issues.

And your second point... Once you have used a 120Hz monitor, you simply cannot go back, not without realising how shit it is. Even the Windows UI, and browsing the Internet is a vastly superior experience, let alone how much better most gameplay is.

Hell, even my iPad Pro has made me realise how crap the 60Hz display on my phone is.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
277 (0.06/day)
HDR will be limiting factor there. Its very hard to make really fast brightness changes which would still hold HDR rating. I think it will take quite a bit of time to have both high refresh speed and high HDR standard.

As for 60 Hz. Let me put it this way..

I have old Eizo (S-PVA) monitor, which obviously is 60 Hz.

Doesnt prevent me from obliterating most ppl in any FPS. Yes, more Hz would obviously allow me to be even better, but to be fair I dont think 60 Hz is that much limiting factor for most ppl. Also taking into account ridiculously low sync rates of most FPS (tick rate), it doesnt actually matter much. Ironically only game where I would want more Hz is LoL. :D

I don't see a back light problem, if you are talking about Displayport 1.4 you should be able to get around 85Hz HDR content and 120Hz non HDR at 4K.

I am a hardcore gamer but also work lots with graphics mostly vector in CorelDraw and i cannot work with 60Hz. Once you have taken the stepp to higher Hz and worked with 100Hz+ smoothness you will not want to go back to twitchy 60Hz.

As for gaming, if i go under 100Hz i feel that something is wrong, get nauseous and uncomfortable while playing FPS games.

Sure, if you are used to 60Hz and know nothing else you can surely play ok with that BUT once you go 144Hz+ you will never ever go back to 60Hz.

Also a BIG PLUS, i do not get headaches anymore at 144Hz when playing longer sessions like i used to get with 60Hz monitors.

I trust ny brain and if it says high Hz monitors is best for me i am going with it.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
1,002 (0.19/day)
I don't see a back light problem, if you are talking about Displayport 1.4 you should be able to get around 85Hz HDR content and 120Hz non HDR at 4K.

I am a hardcore gamer but also work lots with graphics mostly vector in CorelDraw and i cannot work with 60Hz. Once you have taken the stepp to higher Hz and worked with 100Hz+ smoothness you will not want to go back to twitchy 60Hz.

As for gaming, if i go under 100Hz i feel that something is wrong, get nauseous and uncomfortable while playing FPS games.

Sure, if you are used to 60Hz and know nothing else you can surely play ok with that BUT once you go 144Hz+ you will never ever go back to 60Hz.

Also a BIG PLUS, i do not get headaches anymore at 144Hz when playing longer sessions like i used to get with 60Hz monitors.

I trust ny brain and if it says high Hz monitors is best for me i am going with it.

Hm, guess I have special 60 Hz, cause it never felt bad. I really didnt like low frew CRTs before (60 Hz on CRT is really horrible flicker show). But on LCD? They dont flicker.

I don’t buy your HDR is hard to do excuse. Others, including years old HDTVs do it with no issues.

And your second point... Once you have used a 120Hz monitor, you simply cannot go back, not without realising how shit it is. Even the Windows UI, and browsing the Internet is a vastly superior experience, let alone how much better most gameplay is.

Hell, even my iPad Pro has made me realise how crap the 60Hz display on my phone is.

Kinda depends if those HDTVs can actually adhere to HDR 600 standard. Which I really doubt they can, especially if you consider that HDR 600 requires quite a bit bigger color space than sRGB. And most TVs probably dont get even sRGB, let alone larger one.

All that said, there are displays that do 4K and HDR and 144Hz. Just a little bit expensive.. :D

Another thing is, 4k at 144Hz and HDR.. with what graphic card? Tesla V? Cause thats probably only thing that can do that reliably.
 
Last edited:

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,163 (4.07/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
I don’t buy your HDR is hard to do excuse. Others, including years old HDTVs do it with no issues.

OLED TVs may be up to the task, but LCD (the backlight, actually) really isn't.
HDR on most TVs is crap anyway. FALD gives you less then 400 independently controllable brightness zones, everything else gives you 20 or less.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2017
Messages
688 (0.27/day)
Won't even touch a 60Hz screen with teen foot pole. 60Hz on a new screen with these specifications is just ridiculous.

"and people, don't even start with commenting that you don't need more than 60Hz, you do not now what you are talking about pure and simple."

The ABSOLUTE MINIMUM industry standard of today should be 75Hz for low end monitors and 100Hz for medium and 120Hz for high end monitors.

Extreme standard for gaming should have 144Hz and more. 240Hz is max today for consumers but 500Hz is not far off.

When CRT went out of fashion they where pushing 120Hz then when TFT took over we like went back to 60Hz for the next following 15 years. The TFT industry has been rotten to the core and several time reveled price fixing cartels, they have been holding back development to milk their old 60Hz technology and factorys like forever. FINALLY we have more actors pushing development to catch up, soon most gaming screen will be a minimum of 144Hz with most extreme modells going over 200Hz.
Why should it be 75 Hz when consoles usually get 30 fps only? People interested in 4K and HDR are interested in higher details, 75, or especially 144 or even more Hz monitor users are usually competitive gamers interested in higher refresh rates. Moreover 4K and even 75 Hz monitors are mutually exlusive as you can only get 75 fps by lowering detail level. Not to speak of 4K 144Hz monitors.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
335 (0.07/day)
Someone is severely underestimating the difficulty with creating high resolution panels capable of high refresh rates. The Asus PG27UQ (27" UHD 144Hz) was announced back in January 2017 and it took until late 2018 for AUO to be able to produce enough panels to get to retail. The Asus PG35VQ and Acer 35x, both 3440x1440 VA panels at 200Hz refresh rate, were announced around the same time and still aren't available for purchase, likely due to AUO having issues with yields on the screens. And really, how many people at this point in time have the GPU power to push frames that high at those resolutions? Even an RTX 2080 ti isn't going to sustain much over 60Hz at UHD on newer games at High/Ultra settings.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,163 (4.07/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Why should it be 75 Hz when consoles usually get 30 fps only? People interested in 4K and HDR are interested in higher details, 75, or especially 144 or even more Hz monitor users are usually competitive gamers interested in higher refresh rates. Moreover 4K and even 75 Hz monitors are mutually exlusive as you can only get 75 fps by lowering detail level. Not to speak of 4K 144Hz monitors.
I really don't know why people assume competitive FPS is the norm. Cause that's pretty much the only genre where high refresh can make a difference. Sure, we can talk about "smoothness" in many scenarios, but I'm pretty sure nobody plays CivVI better because they have a high refresh rate monitor.
So while high refresh is desirable, there's really no reason for people to act so surprised for each and every monitor release that doesn't include a high refresh panel.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
3,413 (1.07/day)
System Name M3401 notebook
Processor 5600H
Motherboard NA
Memory 16GB
Video Card(s) 3050
Storage 500GB SSD
Display(s) 14" OLED screen of the laptop
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores 3050 scores good 15-20% lower than average, despite ASUS's claims that it has uber cooling.
Someone is severely underestimating the difficulty with creating high resolution panels capable of high refresh rates

Lower resolution then?

And, damn it, why can't we have 1/4's of OLED TV, for 1/4th of OLED TV price? Those are 120Hz and easily beat 600 nit requirement.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,163 (4.07/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
And, damn it, why can't we have 1/4's of OLED TV, for 1/4th of OLED TV price?
Because price doesn't scale linearly with surface maybe?
Those are 120Hz and easily beat 600 nit requirement.
Yeah, they beat that so easily DisplayHDR had to come up with separate certification levels for OLED.

And would so love to see you stare at a 600nit screen for half an hour if you think 600nits is a requirement.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
1,002 (0.19/day)
I will add to competitive gaming just this..

You dont need or even want 4K for that. Or HDR. You actually do want 200Hz and FPS if possible, especially if game in question is CS. :D And probably couple others, provided tick rate is actually high enough, which definitely isnt in for example OW, you can easily play that at 100Hz and its already pretty much double of tick rate.

Long time ago, I was afraid that my low Hz monitor will be an issue for FPS, but behold.. servers became so bottlenecked by tickrate, that it actually didnt matter. Talking mostly about Battlefield series. Which also was host of another set of graphical issues, that it didnt actually matter what LCD you had, mostly it was just toss if your game will crash due memory leak or only get slideshow FPS, cause something again was broken in last patch. :D

HDR and 4K is nice for like Far Cry 5, but that hardly requires more than 60 FPS (or Hz).

Selling those 4K, HDR, 144Hz might be issue cause apart ppl that are literally made out of money, nobody needs that. Its cool, its sorta future proof and its also bloody expensive and kinda pointless.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,163 (4.07/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
@Mescalamba I agree with you, except that nobody needs all that. Sure, at current prices you have to pick and choose, but ideally I wouldn't mind a monitor that can handle both fast action and high resolution/HDR. Even if not in the same title.
 
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
120 (0.03/day)
Location
Germany
System Name MonsterPC
Processor AMD X7950X3D
Motherboard MSI MEG E670X ACE
Cooling Corsair Cappelix H150i
Memory 128GB DDR5 @5600
Video Card(s) AMD RX7900XTX
Storage 120TB HDD + 3x 2TB SSD RAID, External - 390 TB Various HDD drives
Display(s) C49RG90
Case BIG Tower
Audio Device(s) Creative X-FI 4 + SteelSeries Arctis Pro USB
Power Supply Corsair AX1200i
Mouse SteelSeries Rival710
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex Pro
VR HMD Valve Index
Software W10 x64
This looks great, then I found the 60Hz (40Hz-60Hz FreeSync) refresh rate... Damn, this was almost an instant buy for me.
60 Hz? 40-60 FS? No FRC?
http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com

Pity... I have hoped it would be at least 40-75 so the FRC could kick-in.... insta-buy.... but now... it's meh.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
3,413 (1.07/day)
System Name M3401 notebook
Processor 5600H
Motherboard NA
Memory 16GB
Video Card(s) 3050
Storage 500GB SSD
Display(s) 14" OLED screen of the laptop
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores 3050 scores good 15-20% lower than average, despite ASUS's claims that it has uber cooling.
Because price doesn't scale linearly with surface maybe?
Yeah, except It is the other way round, bigger screen cots more than 4 times to make.
 
Top