If anyone is trading off one of the newer 28" 4K monitors (i.e. asus pb287q), is the desktop and text size workable at native resolution without scaling? My inclination is to go to 1440p instead until the 30"+ monitors come down in price.
GTX980 which is overkill unless you're gaming at 4K, but I don't upgrade often so I like to future proof. I've seen both the PB287Q and Samsung 590D, they definitely get great reviews for the price, my concern though is reading text and mouse clicking at native resolution. You'll notice if they are demoed in a store the Windows scaling is usually at 200% or more in which case you just wind up with a 1440 or 1080p desktop anyway.
I haven't used a 4K, but do sometimes use a laptop with a 15.6" 1920x1080 display, using native resolution. My colleagues have commented on the small size of things on the screen, but I haven't found it to be a problem. A 4K 28" would be ~10% higher density than my laptop, so for me it would be borderline and would need to test it out before committing to buying. I would certainly be comfortable with a 32" 4K.
I am going to wait for the Broadwell processor from intel as it does 4k at 60hz on the chip no graphics card needed.
Yeah that's a good idea, there are hundreds of complaints about GTX970/980 owners having problems with displayport and 4K monitors too at the moment (DP required to run at 60hz).
As I also mentioned in another thread, I had a lot of problems when I tried 4K a couple of years ago -- I got it to work, but only at 15hz and it just didn't look good, so I went back to 2560x1440's. I would like to try 4K again -- eventually -- but I will wait for better connectivity (DisplayPort 1.3, or preferably USB type C) and to see what other people do with it; I also want flawless portrait mode, which supposedly was an issue with the latest 4K's even a few months ago (and I'm guessing probably still is).
I'd stick to a 1440 with 28", wouldn't bother with 4K below 38" personally. 38" being tad higher DPi than 28" 1440