• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Philips Demos 328P8K 8K UHD Monitor

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Philips will be releasing an 8K display with a built-in webcam and docking feature in 2018: the significance is that there is only one other 7680x4320 monitor on the market right now (Dell’s UltraSharp UP3218K). The monitor utilizes a 31.5” IPS panel featuring 400 nits brightness and (presumably) 60Hz refresh rate. At least one USB-C port will allow for docking and simultaneous notebook charging.

Philips does not disclose whose panel it uses for the monitor, but given that the specs of the Philips 328P8K are similar to those of the UP3218K, it is highly likely that both models use the same panel from LG Display (with whom TPV has a joint venture in China). Meanwhile, Dell’s UP3218K ended up supporting 98% of the DCI-P3 color gamut (in addition to 100% of the AdobeRGB and 100% of the sRGB color spaces), hence, if the panels are the same, the Philips 328P8K may well support DCI-P3 as well. In fact, the company has published a marketing rendering of the 328P8K that displays the Adobe Photoshop CC working under macOS.
 
Good for content creators and not much else, I suspect, but this is where the new display tech typically lands first. I look forward to these becoming mainstream in a few years
 
"There's only one other 8k monitor on the market right now"

Wait, show me where I can buy either of them. "announced" does not equal "on the market". If that we're true, we would have several different 4k 144hz monitors "on the market"
 
There was once a day when I said 4K was a silly gimick. Of course, I ended up checking them out.

Now I have two 4K displays on my machine.

I'm not going to shoot my mouth off about a new, higher resolution again.
 
Living Weapon said:
I keep hoping head mounted displays will get good enough, light enough,and wireless enough that I can stop buying silly giant sheets of glass </sigh>

Anyway, check out the soon to be ratified HDMI2.1 spec for glorious variable refresh rate - it is neither vsync nor gsync, but presumably the industry will converge on it?
http://www.pcgamer.com/hdmi-21-is-coming-soon-with-support-for-8k-120hz/
Click to expand...

HDMI VRR, to my understanding, is essentially a copy of DisplayPort variable refresh.

The latest versions of HDMI are DisplayPort style packet streaming links, departing from the straight DVI signal that HDMI debuted with. Thus, implementing FreeSync-style variable refresh is fairly straightforward.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
HDMI VRR, to my understanding, is essentially a copy of DisplayPort variable refresh.

The latest versions of HDMI are DisplayPort style packet streaming links, departing from the straight DVI signal that HDMI debuted with. Thus, implementing FreeSync-style variable refresh is fairly straightforward.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in theory, given the bandwidth to do 8k @ 60Hz, should be no problem pushing variable 4k up to 240Hz on the same interface by shoving more packets. Not that a TV would know what to do with that. But it at least suggests 4k VRR will become the new normal, as well as movies at "real 24Hz" on whatever pixel count (and there will still be a lack of hi-res content, but at least it won't judder)
 
8K.... for f*cks sake we haven't even gotten 4K into the mainstream yet. I'm still eyeballing a $600 ($600 on sale! $700 msrp) 43" 4k monitor and I probably won't go that high.
 
Meh.

I love lots of screen real estate, but going much above ~110dpi or so on the desktop is pointless, even when it comes to content creation.

I love my 48" 4k screen, and actually consider the dpi a little low (the sweet spot would probably be 42" to 44" somewhere for 4k, IMHO.

All these insane resolutions make no sense to me. 4k makes sense at 40+ inches. 8k never makes sense.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
There was once a day when I said 4K was a silly gimick. Of course, I ended up checking them out.

Now I have two 4K displays on my machine.

I'm not going to shoot my mouth off about a new, higher resolution again.
Click to expand...
There was once a day when I said 4K was a silly gimmick then I ended up buying a 4K monitor, then a 4K TV.

Now I'm using a 1440p monitor.

I'm all for higher resolution. I say we won't need more resolution when AA will make absolutely no difference in games visually. But currently lack of proper scaling in desktop prevents me from using 4K daily.
 
For content creators using a couple of P6000's I suppose something like this could work. I think someone here on [H}ard actually posted a link a month or so ago of Linus using a Quadro for playing some games on 4x4k tv's. It did o.k. but definitely struggled under the highest settings. The 24GB Vram got some use though.

I'm usually for new, increased resolutions but it's pretty obvious that, even for the wealthy, most tech can't support it yet. I really think they should slow down and focus on various quality issues for current 2k/4k stuff before even trying to jump further. I honestly think this step is a wasted direction for content creators as there's still so much work left to do for various 4k streams and compression techniques.
 
when gaming versions come out I hope Nvidia and AMD start developing for Xfire/SLI support again. Or it might be a while before 8K monitors are useful.
 
Linus was getting very acceptable frame rates at 8k IIRC on SLI Pascal Titans but games kept crashing. For content creation, he was using multiple Quadros and a Red Rocket accelerator card.
 
Twisted Kidney said:
There was once a day when I said 4K was a silly gimick. Of course, I ended up checking them out.

Now I have two 4K displays on my machine.

I'm not going to shoot my mouth off about a new, higher resolution again.
Click to expand...

More resolution/dpi is never a gimmick. It's just a question of it being practical/sensible. In the world of medical imaging, they have been sensible for a while. They are also pretty practical in financial applications and graphic design. Things that benefit from more readable stuff in X amount of space. 4k isn't just starting to become practical in entertainment. We have 4k media sources, and have for a while, but we are only just starting to get a 4k delivery pipeline. We are also jsut starting to get graphics cards that can drive 4k displays reasonably.

Zarathustra[H] said:
Meh.

I love lots of screen real estate, but going much above ~110dpi or so on the desktop is pointless, even when it comes to content creation.

I love my 48" 4k screen, and actually consider the dpi a little low (the sweet spot would probably be 42" to 44" somewhere for 4k, IMHO.

All these insane resolutions make no sense to me. 4k makes sense at 40+ inches. 8k never makes sense.
Click to expand...


How much dpi makes sense comes down to how close to your face you are going to stick the thing. 48" 4k displays work well in finance for folks who need to see lots of charts heads up and readable. 4k a bit smaller makes sense for content creators NOW. However, the home market is going 4k, so that means theaters, etc. To differentiate themselves have to look at 8k. That means smaller 8k displays need to be available for the content creators in that pipeline. Then you have head mounted displays for VR and AR. They may not need 8k pixel counts, but they need the pixel density of 8k resolutions coming to that market.

Yes, at some point there will be a practical plateau where more resolution and dpi won't be needed. We aren't there yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top