Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 6 Jan 2020.
Oh man, burying the lede there! The PG32UQX is a check-all-the-boxes monitor for me: UHD or above, larger panel area than a 32" ultrawide, variable refresh rate, proper HDR (if it's not OLED or FALD, it's nor HDR), and with a >60Hz refresh rate to boot.
Probably costs a kidney plus some sundry organs and limbs though.
I mean, will even the most elite of the elite competitive e-sports gamers notice a difference between 240hz and 360hz?
From the Asus press release for the 360Hz monitor; "Why push refresh rates all the way to 360Hz? It shouldn’t be news to anybody, but eSports competitions have well and truly become elite athletic events."
Elite athletic? Who the hell do they think they're kidding here, moving a mouse and bashing a keyboard athletic? 360Hz is beyond silly and, beyond any human's ability to perceive the benefit compared to previous "gaming" monitors.
For me too. When a slightly more reasonably priced one comes out, I'll have to take a long look.
I guess latency? Maybe. But I really rather doubt it... at least that it would have any measurable impact.
Marketing. It's just marketing. Or perhaps esports events will make competitors run on a treadmill to power their systems? Environmentally conscious, and all that.
It's not only a latency thing but faster does have a measurable impact, at least on this testing Linus did.
Smells suspiciously like the ProArt Mini led in ROG drag and that one is over £2500:
Come on folks.
Don't diss it too much, my Wife may read this!
How am i ever going to get her to believe that her likkle snugglebunny really needs (wants) one of these?
I have been using an ROG swift 27" for a few years now, and i can only sing its praises, 144hz at 1440p is a wonderful place to game.
They play darts.
Citation needed. The human visual system has all sorts of weird quirks, and one of them is the odd things that can occur during smooth tracking tasks or simulated smooth tracking tasks (e.g. tracking a 'stationary' object against a moving background where you have direct control of the background motion as a proxy for viewport motion, AKA mosuelook).
Inb4 somebody mistakenly cites the flicker-fusion threshold as some arbitrary upper limit for sequential visual perception, and doubly inb4 they use a much lower value than experimentally measured like 24Hz (which itself is based on a misunderstanding of how movie projector illumination works).
The extreme high hz was SUPER exciting when we went from 60 to 100, then the excitement continued up to 144, and then 240. I just can’t get excited beyond that though.
can I ask if anyone thinks this monitor will be hot or not: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/lg-3...een-led-backlit-curved-monitor-mo-15g-lg.html
I’ve got my heart set on it going from the 100hz ASUS Rog 34” widescreen. I want the increase in height plus extra hz.
The HDR on it is absolute garbage.
The 175hz oc is a load of excrement as well, DP 1.4 doesn't have the bandwidth for 3840x1600 @175hz (at least not without compression), so it is a 144hz monitor for all intents and purposes.
But if you ignore the marketing wan*ery in regards to the above two points... then it will still be one of the best monitors money can buy.
I’m not bothered about HDR. My eyes are screwed from staring at screens for over 3 decades, so not having glowing areas is fine by me.
But what you say about the DP not being able to feed the 175hz is worrying.
Unfortunately a common problem in ultra high end monitors, there is an explanation here (from a 3440x1440 200hz monitor, but that is very similar in bandwidth required compared to 3840x1600 175hz):
Thank you. You’ve saved me a lot of cash! (Although the reviews when it finally goes mainstream will be interesting).
Well it should be able to do 144hz without resorting to nonsense like compression, so still orders of magnitude better than the "regular" 3840x1600 60hz ones
Freesync works over HDMI.
On the G-Sync front it is a bit more complicated:
However, none of that really matters, because there are no GPUs with HDMI 2.1 out, so instead of the limitations of DP 1.4 you'd just be fighting the limitations of HDMI 2.0.
(or just buy a cheap monitor that won't run into those limits)
The first strikes above 60 Hz were only exciting because LCD was FINALLY starting to support what CRTs were doing single every day since 1987(IBM's original VGA specification was 70Hz in most modes). 144 was where LCD started to strike at the ground the best CRTs had planted their flags upon. 240 was better than most any CRT ever reached.
This? This isn't exciting, because it isn't comparable to CRT.
Which is the most exciting thing of all. Monitors better than we had in the 90s, better than we could MAKE in the 90s. Monitors that can't be footnoted with "we did this twenty years ago but forgot how."
It cuts it fine, but 3840x1600 @ 175Hz with 8bpp/c is within HBR 3 bandwidth.
3840x1600*3*8*175 = 25,804,800,000 b/s, x 10/8 (due to 8:10 encoding for DP) = 32,256,000,000 b/s (32.3Gb/s). HBR3 bandwidth is 32.4Gb/s.
Same formula for 3440x1440 @200hz is only 29,721,600,000 b/s yet they still run into problems, so either there is some other overhead or the HBR3 bandwidth limit is rather theoretical.
Separate names with a comma.