|
Is there a connection yet that can do 144hz 3840x1600 yet? I don't think there's any monitors that do that either, but I feel like there should be by now. Whenever the tech comes along to push that I think I'll be about ready for that level of upgrade from the 1440p era.
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:Isn't DVI still the only way to use those overclockable Korean monitors? You can use them via HDMI or DisplayPort (with an adapter), but they hit their highest overclocks via DVI. The new generation of Korean monitors have FreeSync though and that's a worthy tradeoff for gambling on overclocking IMO. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:Is there a connection yet that can do 144hz 3840x1600 yet? I don't think there's any monitors that do that either, but I feel like there should be by now. Whenever the tech comes along to push that I think I'll be about ready for that level of upgrade from the 1440p era.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:Is there a connection yet that can do 144hz 3840x1600 yet? I don't think there's any monitors that do that either, but I feel like there should be by now. Whenever the tech comes along to push that I think I'll be about ready for that level of upgrade from the 1440p era. That would also take a GPU somewhere around twice as powerful as a Titan X Pascal to even think about getting over 100fps in 4K at high graphical details.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
blowfish posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
I've got a shameful story: I'm using VGA when I work from home to hook up my work Dell Latitude to a 27" 2560x1440 monitor because VGA supports a higher resolution than the HDMI 1.2 on my monitor, and the laptop doesn't have a displayport or DVI output.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
What's the upper limit for VGA resolutions? I mean you have 15 pins to work with you should be able to get some nice throughput.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:What's the upper limit for VGA resolutions? I mean you have 15 pins to work with you should be able to get some nice throughput. The Matrox dual head boxes would do at least 3840x1200 over VGA with no issues!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
You can, in third party software, try to drive resolutions up to 4096x3072 through VGA. Though if you're reaching the upper limit of what your GPU can actually put out through VGA, the quality of the VGA cable you're using, and the quality of the VGA adapter on the monitor, you will get horizontal blurs and in extreme cases individual pixels won't be recognizable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:What's the upper limit for VGA resolutions? I mean you have 15 pins to work with you should be able to get some nice throughput. Well, I thought theoretically there was no hard limit if your DAC was clocked high enough and your monitor could support it, but 2048×1536 was always a number stuck in my head as being the highest normal resolution, but it seems that notion is outdated. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Yeah very high quality and short cables and connectors could potentially push VGA to 8K, but you'd be unlikely to achieve that. Standard quality cable and connectors at normal lengths starts having noticeable degradation of signal quality above 1920x1200 or so, and who really wants to spend a bunch of money on cables just to still use VGA these days?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
As one with one of those Korean monitors and a 1080P (120hz) 2nd monitor (both 27" as well) how hard is it to go from 2 screens like this to a single 1440P Ultrawide? I have no way of having an Ultrawide and another screen on my current desk, but the thought of going back to a single monitor again also scares the crap out of me. (My Multitasking  ) I might be able to get one of those movable monitor arms off of a massdrop and mount one of these screens on it. I guess at that point I wouldn't have the current issue of 2 screens that need DVI, but still. Its going to be a big change. One thing thats annoying is everything is Freesync, but as AMD hasn't got anything to compete with Nvidia this round in the high end, I am waiting for a Massdrop for a Gsync ultrawide which will still be an expensive endeavor. Either way I feel if I would go for such a screen ever, might as well make sure it supports Gsync. I am pretty much married to the Nvidia tech at this point, with Shield + Splashtop, and VR stuff. (Not so much the 3D Vision 2 screen which is still neato, but pretty much obsolete now).
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
SuperDucky posted:Doesn't work that way in the military and embedded market, bub.  There are customers still buying ancient Pentium 3 era processors to put in stuff like a gerzillion dollar scanning electron microscope, ultraspecialized custom equipment or fleets of slot machines because it's still way cheaper to buy the obsolete junk at a premium than to upgrade. It's funny to hear about what still gets made and sold.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:
We'll still build Williamette P4 boards for someone that wants to order a min. quantity. Everything else we had to EOL because we just can't get some of the IC's necessary to build 'em.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:
A lot of scientific instruments are shipped with a PC with a very specific configuration, which if you tinker with it or clone the hard drive or really look at it funny will refuse to work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:A lot of scientific instruments are shipped with a PC with a very specific configuration, which if you tinker with it or clone the hard drive or really look at it funny will refuse to work. And bust any warranty or hope of getting factory-based support, too!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
They're coming but slowly. Andandtech had an article today (how topical!) on a sharp demo unit that went up at some asian product faire: 27 inches, 7680x4320 pixels by 10x3 bit depth by 120hz framerate.  Yes that is 8 DP cables in parallel lol. I have to imagine this thing will be $50,000 if it's ever released.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
SwissCM posted:I have a DP->VGA adaptor that cost 5 bucks and seems to work fine, I don't see much point in keeping them around on the actual hardware.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Yes that is 8 DP cables in parallel lol. I have to imagine this thing will be $50,000 if it's ever released. Well, given that it'll probably be highly prized for medical imagery, where in most first-world countries ~money is no object~, they'll damned well get it, too. ...doesn't mean the staff won't try to watch the Super Bowl/UEFA/World Cups upscaled on it, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
By the time some medical supply reseller that the hospital actually has the sourcing contract through is done with it, it'll be a $165k monitor because a $200 piece of crap TN monitor is already sold at $800+ prices because of "enterprise reasons."
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 03:13
|
|
|
Guys I just want to ask if going from a 1080p 60hz monitor to a 1440p 144hz g-sync one feels like having sex with Candice Swanepoel k thanks bye.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:Strangely, the existence of an active component doesn't obviate all the software work that would go into fully removing VGA from x86 systems. I assume by VGA you mean "a frame buffer compatible with the ancient SVGA standard"? Because you can get rid of VGA-the-analog-15-pin-port (which I think is the idea in the earlier posts) while retaining hardware and BIOS capable of faking being the old junk for stupid software reasons. Sort of like how SATA was designed to mimic ATA instead of making a clean sheet break away from the 1980s, for stupid software reasons. PC industry: it's engineering atrocities all the way down
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
Otakufag posted:Guys I just want to ask if going from a 1080p 60hz monitor to a 1440p 144hz g-sync one feels like having sex with Candice Swanepoel k thanks bye. You might have some trouble finding the g-sync
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Otakufag posted:Guys I just want to ask if going from a 1080p 60hz monitor to a 1440p 144hz g-sync one feels like having sex with Candice Swanepoel k thanks bye. Before you spend a small fortune, go to a store that sells televisions and ask to see one that works at 60Hz, one at 120Hz, and then one of those 'simulated 240Hz' ones. Make sure your eyes *like* high-refresh before you drop ~$500-700 minimum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:I assume by VGA you mean "a frame buffer compatible with the ancient SVGA standard"? Because you can get rid of VGA-the-analog-15-pin-port (which I think is the idea in the earlier posts) while retaining hardware and BIOS capable of faking being the old junk for stupid software reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:By the time some medical supply reseller that the hospital actually has the sourcing contract through is done with it, it'll be a $165k monitor because a $200 piece of crap TN monitor is already sold at $800+ prices because of "enterprise reasons." The enterprise reason is usually things like never being turned off and lasting as long as the machinery is medically relevant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Before you spend a small fortune, go to a store that sells televisions and ask to see one that works at 60Hz, one at 120Hz, and then one of those 'simulated 240Hz' ones. Make sure your eyes *like* high-refresh before you drop ~$500-700 minimum. Everything that you see in stores will look like poo poo, they never have anything calibrated right and it's always viewed under harsh commercial lighting. Running games at high refresh rates will always look better, comparing it to how we perceive film is silly. Not to mention that 120 is dividable by 24 so even film sources will look better than they would on a 60hz screen due to the lack of stutter caused by duplicated frames.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
Comparing games and film is even sillier when you consider the high amounts of motion blur in each frame in film. Playing a game with the same frame rate and motion blur is sure to make you ill.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 10:27
|
|
|
Fair enough - I was suggesting the TV thing simply so he could see if his eyes were hypersensitive to 120Hz. People got ill during the HFR showings of The Hobbit, and others couldn't stand the 'soap opera effect.' I know I always notice the higher frame rate the most during commercials, specifically pill commercials.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
The Hobbit looked weird because of the way the video was captured. The 360-degree shutter used caused any movement in the frame to have a substantial amount of motion blur. I think Peter Jackson said it made it look "silky" but in retrospect it's kind of a bad choice and likely responsible for all of those complaints of sickness. This isn't a problem for games. Motion blur post-processing looks like poo poo regardless of the refresh rate, though more recent implementations can look okay. In any case games generally let you turn it off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Fair enough - I was suggesting the TV thing simply so he could see if his eyes were hypersensitive to 120Hz. People got ill during the HFR showings of The Hobbit, and others couldn't stand the 'soap opera effect.' I know I always notice the higher frame rate the most during commercials, specifically pill commercials. The Hobbit's "high" frame rate was just 48 fps, rather than something above 60. Not really relevant to 120 hz panels. Also it's a different thing when the TV is setup to generate its own fake intervening frames like you're seeing in commercials, versus native high framerate content. Edit: it's worth remembering that in general our video frame rate standards are accidental rather than being carefully planned. The only reason movies are shot 24 fps is that it happened to be a decent compromise between capturing motion and conserving physical film back in the 20s and 30s (if we'd standardized at 30 fps for instance, every second of footage would need an extra 25% more physical frames, and consequently the amount of time that could be continuously shot on the same length of film is shorter, etc). It could have been just about anything though, as rates from 15 to 35 had been common before standardization. When shot correctly, any high enough framerate looks fine. But there's nearly a century of experience in getting say 24 fps content to be well lit and everything related, not so much with others. You combine that high expertise in 24 and to a lesser extent 25 and 30 (for television in different parts of the world), and if you've been watching that stuff for a long time you get used to it being "correct" even though there's no inherent advantage. fishmech fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Oct 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
Otakufag posted:Guys I just want to ask if going from a 1080p 60hz monitor to a 1440p 144hz g-sync one feels like having sex with Candice Swanepoel k thanks bye. Basically. Having to use my 60Hz 1080p panel at work sucks. I feel like I'm dragging my mouse through mud.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Fair enough - I was suggesting the TV thing simply so he could see if his eyes were hypersensitive to 120Hz. People got ill during the HFR showings of The Hobbit, and others couldn't stand the 'soap opera effect.' I know I always notice the higher frame rate the most during commercials, specifically pill commercials. As already mentioned, there's basically nothing in common with "high" framerate movies/tv (48hz) and 120hz games. When TVs are doing things like 120hz, they are interpolating existing frames, essentially upscaling 24/30/48hz to 120hz. a 120hz monitor will display up to 120 different pictures a second based on how much the computer is managing to feed it. You can think of it as the difference between a 820x420 picture upscaled up 4K, and a picture rendered at 4K. You're unlikely to hear complaints about proper 4K content on a 4K display being "too sharp", but an upscale will probably look like rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
I think I inadvertently found the new "airplane on a treadmill" topic. I *get it*, guys. Thanks. I've been a 60Hz'er for my whole life and don't intend on going HFR 1440p until my next build about a year from now...or if my 2500K gives up its "blue smoke" beforehand. That being said, nVidia should really - at some Best Buy's, Fry's, and Microcenter's, put up a "push this button to see what our tech can do" displays like the Playstation demo kiosks that bad parents used to use as babysitters in the mall. Just no controllers. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Oct 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:You might have some trouble finding the g-sync With a high enough frequency it might not matter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
eggyolk posted:With a high enough frequency it might not matter. Or an long enough waveform.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
SuperDucky posted:We'll still build Williamette P4 boards for someone that wants to order a min. quantity. Everything else we had to EOL because we just can't get some of the IC's necessary to build 'em. I have a story which tops yours. I have been told that point-contact diodes (these are the oldest semi-conductor devices which date back to the 19th century and consist of a wire pressed against a semiconductor) are still produced in small quantities for use in ancient government electronic systems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I think I inadvertently found the new "airplane on a treadmill" topic. Don't the monitors with GSync have a sort of Demo Mode you can turn on that shows Gsync on 1/2 and no sync on the other 1/2? Or maybe that was in the Nvidia Driver panel? Hmm Also the visual difference you get from going 60hz to True 120hz+ is a completely different thing then what you get looking at any TV that is supposedly 120hz. True Framerate looks soo much better and different then fake injected frames and such.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
First thing you'll be doing on a high refresh rate monitor is just moving windows on your desktop around for a couple of minutes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:First thing you'll be doing on a high refresh rate monitor is just moving windows on your desktop around for a couple of minutes. The Smoothness.  And watching as you can see the mouse move smoothly around on the screen alone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 20:54
|
|