On the topic of calibration, definitely agree that on a cheap (TN type) screen calibration is important if you want to view your images even roughly close to what many other's see them.
For me it's not so much about seeing what others see(that is I don't really care if others use cheap screens) .. just that I want to set an image in a particular way and see it that (correct) way.

My current cheapie when not calibrated has a huge error margin in terms of colour .. measured in Delta E(ΔE).
Anything at about 1 or less is very good.
0.5 or less is excellent.

My screen uncalibrated shows 4-6 on the review software.
When calibrated it shows an average of 1.(something tiny) .. mostly 0.5ish except on one colour plane. That colour plane depends on which way I set it.
So either blue is out to about 2 or 3 or 4 or black is out by about the same margin or whatever.
I can get those specific colours back into the less than 1ΔE range, but at the expense of another colour somewhere else .. that's why the average is higher than the real average.
So I'll get 9 out of 10 colours all under 1ΔE and then one colour spikes to something like 4(which ruins the average colour accuracy rating).

Like Tony said .. usually a calibration point that is good enough(ΔE between 1 and 2) is good enough for all of us to use.

I remember reading about some specific screens(maybe Dell and or Samsung) that required the use of a specific X-Rite calibrator .. but only for use with the manufacturers software if the need was to calibrate the internal LUT of the screen.
That is, you could use whatever calibrator you liked/had and calibrate the screen to the graphics card, but if you did want hardware calibration on the screen, then it needed to be used with the manufacturer's software using their specified calibrator model.

I checked the Samsung and the use of their specific calibration software(Natural Colour Expert) and they list a few calibrators for use. Problem is they list the Spyder 5(specifically .. and not Spyder's!) and I have a Spyder3.
So I can only hope that NCE recognises the Spyder 3 too.
If not I'll end up getting a i1 Pro myself too one day. No rush tho, I can still calibrate it or check calibration of it using my Spyder 3 and Basicolor software anyhow.

And the graphics card problem annoyed the hell out of me too.
Could have got a cheaper card too .. but been there done it before.
Before you know it you have the wrong device and it can't do what you had planned.
My plan is to run two screens, the 4K Samsung and the current cheapie(1080).
Whilst many cards say they can do 4K .. and I have no doubt they can do that, they don't always specify at what refresh rate they do so .. and if they can also drive another screen at a decent resolution, or if you have to lower the one screen to compensate for another screen.
Also can it drive two 4K screens at the same time .. AND at a proper refresh rate!
60Hz is the minimum refresh rate I want to see. Anything less is not going to cut it.
I prefer to use a lower resolution at a higher refresh rate rather than the higher res at a lower refresh rate.

I'm the first to admit that spending money on stuff I don't fully use is something I hate.
So much so that the onboard graphics card is plenty enough to run my current cheapie HD screen at HD resolution and 60Hz refresh rate.
But! .. I had to use a HDMI cable to do so. I have a ton of DVI cables all over the house. No idea why, but I have about 7 of them.
MY current screen wouldn't do HD res at 60Hz ... only 30. I've never needed a HDMI cable, so didn't have one.
When I finally cottoned on as to why the screen wouldn't use 60Hz(grey out), I had to find a HDMI cable, fitted and bingo!. 60Hz brilliance!
Also unlocked a few extra settings on the OSD menu for the screen too.

My original graphics card(had to use it on another system) wouldn't run the two screens I had back then.
That was this current screen and another old crappy 1280x1024 screen as well. It had all the required ports, just could run them concurrently.
I wanted both to run off the same graphics card, but had to eventually settle on the new(current) screen on the graphics card and the old crappy HP screen (I salvaged) on the graphics chip on the M/board.
This was all back on '09 after I built the PC. I eventually stopped using two screens, simply because my sisters PC graphics card died and I 'loaned' her my graphics card for her to get by(she's runs a small business). That was some 6 years ago! .. so the second screen was ditched(necessity) and I've been running a crappy screen via an onboard graphics chip since then with the view to update/upgrade ever since.
So I don't necessarily need an uber high end graphics card as such< and in fact I don't want one. I want a lower end fanless card that makes no noise and uses as little power as possible.

The need for a high end graphics card makes sense for specific situations tho.
eg. 5K screens .. they use a lot of graphics bandwidth.
I really can't understand tho, why a card that can run 2 separate 4K screens at 60Hz .. can't run a single 5K screen(which is less bandwidth) tho.
That pissed me off.

.. and it seems I ranted a bit there too .. so </rant off>


I'm thinking my next big purchase will be a good quality printer too. I don't particularly get excited about prints/printing personally, so it's a waaayyyy off possibility. Something Epson R4900-ish maybe.
So if I do print on such an expensive machine to print with, at least I can set myself up so that if I do print something, I haven't printed it massively out of whack. (ie. wasted all that expensive ink on a rubbish print) .. etc.