What is the Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC?
We’ve previously described 32-inch 4K monitors as “huge”, but they look Lilliputian when up against the Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC. This 4K panel has a 40-inch diagonal, and that doesn’t just mean it dominates desks – it dominates rooms, too.
This screen is vast, but it’s more expensive than the competition, too. Its £690 price means it’ll set you back far more than the Samsung U28D590D and the Asus PB287Q – 4K screens that have 28-inch diagonals and cost less than £500 and £600 respectively.
SEE ALSO: Best Monitors Round-up
Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC – Design
The Philips has practical elements that go beyond its sheer size. The 40-inch screen and 3840 x 2160 resolution means this screen has a ppi of 110 – a more manageable level than the 163ppi and 138ppi densities found on 4K screens with 27-inch and 32-inch diagonals.
In fact, the Panasonic’s ppi is more akin to the density levels found on 27-inch and 32-inch screens with resolutions of 2560 x 1440.
The Panasonic’s ppi level means this screen doesn’t have the pure sharpness of smaller 4K panels, but it is more practical. Icons and text are sharp and rendered at manageable sizes, so there’s less need to squint at impossibly tiny features or use Windows 8.1’s scaling options make the panel usable.
The panel is a VA unit with a W-LED backlight. The former technology should ensure that this screen has inky black levels, decent viewing angles and good brightness – all attributes we crave on versatile monitors. The VA technology does mean that response times might not be great, though, and we’re intrigued to see how the W-LED backlight performs, as it’s one of the cheaper backlight technologies around.
It’s a good-looking unit. The screen is surrounded by a slim, glossy bezel that bulges at the bottom to house a touch-sensitive Philips logo that acts as the power button. The stand is slim, metallic and looks more like the sort of kit you’d find on a high-end TV. It’s not too huge, either – its 9.7kg weight and 213mm depth are high, but not unreasonably so.