feels nice to be a mac user. there's like four or five suitable 5k screens and that's it. no port problems, no difficult choices (they all are good, even the cheapest chinese one calibrates to <1 EVERY color), no oled crap, no nikob spewing his s*** fantasies about 80k@12000Hz and ten million ppi required for normal work.
Gotta love hdmi. Oh yes it's 2.1, really. That doesn't mean the same thing on different displays, you should've checked the uhbr thing.
Like stupid usb standards where the number tells you hardly anything about the capabilities of a port except bandwidth if you're lucky. Power delivery? Display-port? You can't tell just by the version number.
And this despite the fact that the DP2.0(2.1) standard itself with UHBR20 is morally outdated - for a good response of 8k monitors, you need at least 120 Gbit/s of useful data (30-bit color in lossless mode), to support 8k@120Hz.
Let me remind you that TB5 promises just 120Gbits/s, but only with service traffic, i.e. even it will not be able to support 8k@120Hz/30bit 4:4:4 resolution without lossy compression (DSC).
And all this for the sake of an elementary, banal thing that we have all been waiting for for decades - a perfectly clear picture on 27-32" monitors with a ppi above 250...
In general, as I have written many times, it's time for the IT industry to abandon copper cores and switch to optical cables, where it is easy to provide even 500 Gbit/s over long distances of tens of meters without signal amplifiers.
Well, the second problem why manufacturers have been pushing DP2.0/UHBR20 in their gadgets on the x86 market for 5 years is trivial - to work effectively even in 2D with 8k@60fps you need a RAM bandwidth of at least 150-200GB/s. And most laptops and PCs are not capable of delivering even 80GB/s. What is there to talk about then?
Until memory becomes 4-channel everywhere in x86 or the bus bit rate for 2 channels increases to 256-512 bits, there will be no normal 8k even in 2D.
especially 2-4 monitors at the same time, and this is now generally the norm for 2-4 monitors both at home and at work. Here you probably need memory bandwidth a confident 200GB/s+.
And as tests have shown to Apple's disgrace, even with declarations of 300-400GB/s for their 512-bit memory controllers, the actual bandwidth of their soldered memory does not exceed 120-130GB/s.
Those, everything is bad in both the x86 and Arm markets. They are not ready even 5 years after the release of the DP2.0/UHBR20 standard for its launch into mass hardware. This is probably a record for long-term construction in IT... but it's clear why.
The author should correct the note in such a way as to highlight the disadvantages of such solutions with declarations of support for 4k@240Hz. DSC compression comes with information losses, and the more complex the picture, the higher the losses.
In the case of the most primitive mode 4k(16:9)@240@24bit, to avoid loss, you need to achieve compression of at least 13%, but rather 15%.
In the case of 4k(16:9)@240@30bit(HDR 4:4:4) to avoid loss, you need to achieve compression of at least 85%, but rather 90%
Thus, monitors with support for DP1.4b and declared 4k@240Hz distort complex images as much as possible. But it little significance for games and this target audience.
But if someone tries to use them in 240Hz mode for normal work with complex content, this is a clear problem.
So we are waiting for 8k@60Hz monitors with DP2.1/UHBR20 and a response time as short as possible.
For games, 4k@120Hz is still sufficient for 99.9% of the population. Especially if you remember the general input lag, which closes the control loop to a much longer reaction time.
HP has revealed new details about the Omen Transcend 32, its 32-inch QD-OLED gaming monitor with a 4K resolution and a 240 Hz refresh rate. While HP advertises the monitor as being DisplayPort 2.1 compatible, it lacks the high-bandwidth support of its main rival, the Gigabyte AORUS FO32U2P.
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
Magyar