4K Monitor

[LunarMist]

There is a computer I built about 6 years ago with a SKylake 6700K. The board is a Z270M which supported the 6th and 7th generation but the user wanted Win 7 at the time. Now there is an option to get a Dell 4K 27" display as a corporate prize. My guess is it is worth about $300-400 based on the other (useless to the user) options like jewelry or outdoor stuff, etc. The problem is that the 4K monitor is stated to have two HDMI inputs only.
From what I read on the CPU Intel HD530 and motherboard, the HDMI output may not support the 3840x2160 @ 60Hz. I have a few old video cards, but I think they all have the same issue with low-quality on the HDMI (or no HDMI like the P1000 or P2000). Is there any way to convert HDMI to DP for 4K or if not, then some really cheap video card that runs 4K from the HDMI? Obviously I don't want the user to waste the prize on a monitor that will look bad. That person already has a better system for general use, but the 4K would be a nice upgrade over the 23" 1080 display for the old 6700K system in a different part of the house. Thanks.

 

[sdbardwick]

HDMI 2.0 came out in 2013 and can support 3840x2160 @60Hz. If computer and monitor both support 2.0 or better they'll probably work fine (with decent non-generic recent HDMI cable). I've run i7-3770S at 4K 60 Hz (Intel HD Graphics 4000), and it was fine for office work.

EDIT: Crap. ark.intel.com shows 6700K as 4K@24Hz over HDMI, but 60Hz over DP. Might try a $20 DP to HDMI ACTIVE converter (passive converters only support 30Hz) for 4K @ 60Hz if the computer supports DP. Example, not endorsement: DP => HDMI Active

 

[LunarMist]

The reviews of most of them are iffy, but it would be the simplest solution. If that doesn't work, what cheap video card with HDMI 2.0 could be used that doesn't draw any power? I don't think all the cables are present.

 

[Mercutio]

In nVidia-land, xx50 and xx50TI cards don't need additional power. A GTX 1050 can definitely do 4k60 and probably costs $100 or less as a refurb card. I know you're allergic to system pulls, but this is a case where using one absolutely makes sense, and no one sane was using cards that crappy to do crypto mining.

 

[LunarMist]

Are there any reliable sources for used parts online? Reviews for the Amazon used suppliers are typically horrible.

 

[Mercutio]

I've had very few negative experiences with second hand video cards. I know for a fact that all of the GTX1080s I passed to people during the pandemic that were definitely used as crypto mining cards are still fine to this day. It's not all horror stories.
You might look on ebay for cards listed with a warranty. There are resellers offering cards that way.

 

[LunarMist]

It's just that I have terrible experiences with the e**y. I doubt that my account works anymore or I have any way to reactivate it. For now we will await the monitor.

 

[Mercutio]

Anything that sells refurb / secondhand cards carries a little bit of risk, but it beats wasting $100 extra to get a new in box item that isn't worth $150 in the first place.

 

[LunarMist]

Fortunately the description of the monitor was bogus or maybe just trunucated. There is a DP input.

 

[sdbardwick]

Fortunately the description of the monitor was bogus or maybe just trunucated. There is a DP input.

 

[LunarMist]

I just had a DP cable sent. The 6700K achieves the 3840x2160 @ 59.7MHz.
However the cheap monitors don't have any reasonable control of the color.
An EX3 (Eizo version of Spiders MK 5) was a failure on a laptop with DisplayCAl, perhaps due to the Argyll.
I have an old i1DisplayPro somewhere, maybe on storage. I have no easy way to determine if it is any good now.

 

[LunarMist]

I tried to calibrate the display itself, but that is not allowed - rather like a laptop.
"Standard" has some naturally putrid color balance. "Custom" is just a manual control of the RGB%s but they are not really independent and poorly coordinated. I gave up on the X-rite software and used the DisplayCal. The gamut is totally wacky. sRGB coverage is 99% and volume is 125%, but in a weird direction. The aRGB is only 86% and the P3 whatever is also poor. It's unsurprising that the center vs corners are not the same, but all four corners are slightly different colors.

How do people watch these displays and not be disgusting? It's beyond me.

 

[sedrosken]

Most people don't even notice color problems. I'm actually one of them -- "good enough" is good enough. As long as it's running in full RGB mode instead of limited, it's fine for me -- heck, I can still get along mostly fine in 16-bit color mode, it's just that banding and dithering is very noticeable to me now.

 

[LunarMist]

But if one processes still images or color grades videos, then what are they doing to ensure the output will suffice?
I'm not against the sRGB gambit either, but its should cover that space and not be out of control with 25% overage in an ugly way.
My early 2000s 21' Eizo did not have the aRGB+ coverage of todays monitors but it looked really good and was able to replace the S*ny Artisan for practical purposes. Even back then the largest CRTs were too much for my organs to relocate as an individual.
I feel that having a cheap display with high resolution is not really making any progress in monitors.

 

[sedrosken]

Lunar, most people don't edit content like that at all. That's how they watch these displays and think they're perfectly acceptable -- they don't need accuracy and frankly some don't want it either.