![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Samsung G8 G80HS 6k @ 165Hz dual mode 3K @ 330Hz priced at $1499 anyone interested I am considering it and comparing it to my samsung neo g9 57''
- Thread starter jdizzy
- Start date
lol Im like whatever gets me to 8k @ 120hz first as long as its ips or better and not tn for comparisons I'm trying to see how 6k would stack up to like 7680x2160 or even 8k 7680x4320.
I'd only be interested this for use with MacOS, and MacOS is an absolute turd when it comes to HiDPI scaling options. Even on Apple's own displays the 6K model supports only an integer scaled HiDPI resolution. Which is fine for this size, but leaves very little options if you feel it's too large.
I fully expect it won't run above 60 Hz on Macs either.
I fully expect it won't run above 60 Hz on Macs either.
That monitor is actually quite interesting if it uses integer scaling in dual mode and has very low input lag. Running 4k is a little bit overkill for a 32" panel, but running QHD is too low resolution. Running 4K gaming is really hard for the GPU and the current dual modes run at 1080p, which is way too low for a 32" panel. Running at 3K is 44% higher resolution than QHD, so it should be similar to running QHD on a 27" panel, which is high enough resolution. At the same time it pushes 64% of the pixels of a 4K display so it should be much kinder on GPUs for gaming and lets you get overkill 6k for desktop use. Personally I would most likely prefer a plain 3K panel with 330hz, but such dual panel might be the best things we will get.
Difference in pixel ratio
Difference in pixel ratio
- 4K - 3840x2160: 8 294 400 pixels (100%)
- 3K - 3072x1728: 5 308 416 pixels (64%)
- QHD - 2560x1440: 3 686 400 pixels (44,4%)
- 1080P - 1920x1080: 2 073 600 pixels (25%)
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,778
Sure but IMO there is more to what makes a display look good today besides "How many pixels does it have?". Contrast is a big factor and not being OLED or mini LED means it will have terrible contrast. Color volume is another big one and again this display completely lacks in that area. It's going to be great for productivity sure, but for gaming I don't care about how sharp the image looks if it's going to be completely dull and lifeless as well.
update its sasmung 6k is $1,199 if you have a government account but I decided to go back to 8k found a good deal on a QN990f for like $2499 for 8k @ 120hz 4k @ 240hz and you can just use the mini hdmi to hdmi 2.1 to get good input response if you don't want the input delay the wireless one connect box brings. I will be using it as a monitor anyway. Maybe to replace my neo g9 57'' we will see once it gets here I will start testing both modes one connect box and hardwired for pc and console gaming.
There is a difference between theoretical contrast and real life contrast. On paper an OLED will have a much higher number, but in real world usage, the difference in contrast between a good LCD and OLED isn't night and day. I have a LCD monitor that came out around around 5 years ago and a fairly new OLED and when both are calibrated very close to 6500k, the OLED looks slightly better, but I wouldn't call it a massive jump. The major advantage of OLED is in pixel response time as it is near instant, which is the main reason I am willing to put up with all the drawbacks of OLED (pixel refresh/penel protection, putting the monitor to sleep after very short idle time etc.).
I just bought one of these and it was delivered the next day. I currently have a 3x 32" 4K monitor setup with 2x G3223Qs and 1 XG32UCG. This monitor definitely has better colors than either of those other models; very clean white, less yellowish than the G3223Q's and less overly saturated (I could never get the white balance right no matter what I adjusted on those). Text is definitely crisper at 6K, although I wouldn't say it's night and day, but I'm a stickler for text quality (I'm one of those people that can see, and can't stand, OLED text fringing on 4K 32" monitors, which is why I'm still on IPS, as I do coding + gaming).
I don't think I'll be playing Warhammer 40K: Darktide at 6K, even with my 5090, and to be honest I can't notice the difference in game between 4K and 6K anyway except for the UI menus. So probably I'll continue with 4K gaming for modern 'real time' games, and 6K for productivity and turn based games.
For most people this monitor probably won't be worth it or even upgrading from an existing 32" 4K. But if you have the money to burn (e.g. you are the type to buy a 5090), you love super sharp text for productivity, and have to have the best/latest thing, but don't want to go OLED yet (because no comparable OLED RGB stripe monitors to this are out yet, or burn in concerns, etc.) this hits the spot. I'm very happy with it so far.
DisplayPort isn't showing 165 Hz at 6K resolution, so I had to use HDMI. I suspect this is likely because I need a better DisplayPort cable so I ordered a new one.
I don't think I'll be playing Warhammer 40K: Darktide at 6K, even with my 5090, and to be honest I can't notice the difference in game between 4K and 6K anyway except for the UI menus. So probably I'll continue with 4K gaming for modern 'real time' games, and 6K for productivity and turn based games.
For most people this monitor probably won't be worth it or even upgrading from an existing 32" 4K. But if you have the money to burn (e.g. you are the type to buy a 5090), you love super sharp text for productivity, and have to have the best/latest thing, but don't want to go OLED yet (because no comparable OLED RGB stripe monitors to this are out yet, or burn in concerns, etc.) this hits the spot. I'm very happy with it so far.
DisplayPort isn't showing 165 Hz at 6K resolution, so I had to use HDMI. I suspect this is likely because I need a better DisplayPort cable so I ordered a new one.
DP cables that can handle UHBR 20 at more than 1.3m are rare. I run 2m UHBR 20 cables from Silkland as they are VESA certified for 2m. Works like a charm for 240hz 4K without DSC. It was a PITA to find 2m cables though, as only a few were certified by VESA for 2m, most where just certified for a little over 1m. The 5000 series from Nvidia are the only Nvidia GPUs with DP 2.1 UHBR 20, but your 5090 should have you covered.
You will have massive compression over HDMI if you try to run it at 165hz at 6k as HDMI 2.1 has just a little over half the bandwith of UHBR 20 (48gbps vs 80gbps). Probably 4:2:0 when you want 4:4:4 for a PC display.
Got this monitor in. Text is glorious. Definitely an amazing desktop display. No FALD so it will be crap for HDR gaming and also has noticeable IPS glow.
My sample literally came with like a grade D panel. One bright pixel in central viewing area and ~11 dust specks under the AR film. The factory these are made in must be pretty dirty. Trying to decide on replacement or return and go with a 27" 5K of some sort.
My sample literally came with like a grade D panel. One bright pixel in central viewing area and ~11 dust specks under the AR film. The factory these are made in must be pretty dirty. Trying to decide on replacement or return and go with a 27" 5K of some sort.
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2021
- Messages
- 3,708
The thing is 360 HZ 4K monitors are coming in quarter one of 2027 so this monitor is completely pointless in my opinion
Not sure what going from 240hz to 360hz at 4K has to do with 6K. 6K is almost 3x the resolution of 4k and the clarity is insane. Going above 240Hz is good for a few competitive games but IMO competitive gaming is dying.
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2021
- Messages
- 3,708
At 32" 6k imo is probably imperceivable. Makes more sense at 40". I notice a huge difference in latency of frames going from 360 to 240. Also multiplayer shooters are MASSIVE dominating gaming not sure why you would think it's dying.
I think that's just projecting your needs for displays. I would be more interested in 6K on desktop and don't give a damn about 360 Hz because I sure as hell can't run anything I play at those framerates even on a 4090.
That said, I do agree 6K on a larger panel like a 40" would be better. Still very high PPI, but you could use less scaling for more desktop space.
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2021
- Messages
- 3,708
How are you interested in 6k for desktop if you already can't run the 4090 high frame with your current monitor? The 6k will make most games undesirable to play and probably drop below 60fps miserably as 4k is already rough enough on a 5090.
32" 6K on the desktop is like looking at a high quality magazine, it's amazing. 4K at 32" looks pretty weak if you have 20/20 vision or better. But yes it matters less in games; but also why the 3K 330Hz dual mode on the 6K works well too. The difference in frames between 360 Hz and 240Hz is 1.38 milliseconds, I certainly wouldn't use the word "huge" lol. And I've tried 540Hz monitors. Almost all triple AAA online FPS's are cross-play couch dad controller auto-aim slop. Only games you could really say are "competitive" anymore are ancient counterstrike, S6 and kiddy looking Valorant since that doesn't have cross-play and PC controllers don't get auto aim.
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2021
- Messages
- 3,708
I'm telling ya even without looking at specs or speed I noticed a big difference. Yea I'm talking about shooters all I've played my whole life 240 feels like you have shackles on your ankles in comparison to 360. That 1.38 millisecond like you mentioned translates into a very big meaningful difference when it comes to snap aiming or tracking also motion clarity or the updating to the newest frame faster all adds up to a very noticeable difference. To me it feels like going from 120 to 60 just less exaggerated when going from 360 to 240. Also not just for shooters but for all games are capable of hitting 360 look so much better faster and not just look but it feel better lower latency just feels so luxurious it's addictive the smoothness. At 6k the latency is going to be extremely bad that's for sure.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,778
If dropping from 360hz down to 240hz feels like shackles then you should try gaming on those new 1000hz monitors
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,778
How do you feel about those tandem WOLED panels? Supposedly there are TrueBlack 1000 models coming in the future which sounds awesome, but the green tinting, grey banding, and chrominance overshoot of tandem WOLED are quite off putting for me.
I keep waffling back and forth with OLED. I don't play as many games as I used to so some of the benefits aren't weighed as heavily for me. 6K clarity on the desktop is amazing. And not having to babysit OLED is always a relief. I guess I have OCD or something. Really the only monitor that has me somewhat interested for 2027 is the 32" 5K glossy Pulsar.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,778
Pulsar is impressive but in the end I just can't live with an edge lit LCD panel anymore, especially IPS. The glow just completely ruins any dark game. The camera exaggerates it a little bit, but the glow is absolutely noticeable even with some ambient light in the room. Yuck.
Bigmonitorguy
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2020
- Messages
- 372
The difference in font rendering between 4K and 6K is noticeable, but not of much significance in my experience. Basically, 4K is already very good (on 32"), and 6K is a bit better.
A big part of my computer use is on the desktop, with MacOS which tends to work better the higher PPI you have. So that's my 6K for desktop interest. I use the Samsung 8Kx2K display atm and could go sharper.
All the games I play are titles where reaching even 120 fps is a challenge on my 4090 if you keep graphics high. I have zero interest in multiplayer shooters anymore.