They do flicker, but it depends on the brightness.
PS: With CRTs, you also have factor in the black period between frames
Last edited:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
3D / 120hz / LED IPS possible?
- Thread starter Cyane
- Start date
They do flicker, but it depends on the brightness.
PS: With CRTs, you also have factor in the black period between frames
The required pixel clock would be extremely high, so a new type of interface would have to be developed/selected - QSFP+ cables wouldn't cut it.
A resolution of 1920x1080 @ 1000 Hz requires approx 2.7 GHz pixel clock (including horiz. and vert. blanking). That would be about 81 Gbps. A single link DVI is spec'ed to 165 MHz and ~5 Gbps - while there's apparently no upper limit for dual-link cables, it's not matched for crazy high frequencies as those - the cables would likely all have too high an inductance for that.
Dividing the screen area into smaller areas and let multiple DVI connections handle a part each would make it possible, but you'd need a source with tons of outputs to feed it - what source could ever supply data at 2.7 GHz?
Sure everything is "possible", but completely unreasonable and doesn't make any sense. 120 Hz is more than possible.
This discussion is like fitting a ship engine into a car. You can start with a normal sized car, but realise it won't work, then DIY your own car chassis to fit the engine... It'll be one crazy expensive and ridicously looking car that no-one will buy - the same for this monitor and video card(s).
Last edited:
Godmachine
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2003
- Messages
- 10,472
Thank you for quantifying it for that wrong/confused poster.
I know this is somewhat irreverent to the thread but some may find it interesting/useful. Refreshing the panel at higher frequencies do provide two major advantages (even if the source is capped to 60Hz)
1. Improved Pixel Response
2. Improved Picture Uniformity
@60Hz, there's 17ms lag between the first and the last line. So moving picture isn't perfectly uniformed and it's more visible when viewing (horizontally moving) vertical lines. If you wish to witness the tilting, box the current window and drag it left and right and you should notice the bottom part drags behind the top.
1. Improved Pixel Response
2. Improved Picture Uniformity
@60Hz, there's 17ms lag between the first and the last line. So moving picture isn't perfectly uniformed and it's more visible when viewing (horizontally moving) vertical lines. If you wish to witness the tilting, box the current window and drag it left and right and you should notice the bottom part drags behind the top.
Last edited:
Higher fresh rates do nothing if the pixels can't respond fast enough to display the information. That's the limitation to overcome for now.
A holy grail would be <1ms response time to complete all possible transitions, then we'd more or less be limited by graphics card horsepower.
A holy grail would be <1ms response time to complete all possible transitions, then we'd more or less be limited by graphics card horsepower.
ATM, pixel response of VA and certain TN and IPS panels do not fall within the 16.7ms category (let alone 8ms needed for 3D). There's even talk of reducing color depth to 6bit to boost pixel response.
While I was at the 09FPTV Technology Review by Samsung, one of the lead engineers explained to me (in detail) why the pixel response improves when driving at higher frequencies. But I have forgotten most it. I suppose I can ask him again in April/May (and remember to take notes).
PS: But I do remember the length they had to go for enabling 3D on the slowest panel on the market (S-PVA). If you'd like, I can send you the report I've written on 2010 FPTV Technology Review in PDF format.
Last edited:
Check out the E70v from LG. Suppose to be a gaming ISP panel.
The poster that was talking about the race to the bottom is correct but it is a race to profitability, not to please a "special interest group" unless that market share can be proven to be profitable. (Much like the most profitable segment for video card is NOT the high end ones.) This is especially critical now when the world economy is in a slump; fewer markets with fewer people willing to spend a premium on products they can not discern the difference between/among. A company is in it to make a profit for its shareholders not just flex technical expertise without sales. No corporate president want to say that they sold less, spent more and made less than the competition, BUT, we had a great year in technical advancement. HE IS FIRED QUICKLY!!! Technical advancement will be slow and incremental under these conditions.
Computer 3D has been around for how long? We are just now seeing 27" 3D monitors being announced by more than one company. ASUS announced early last year but failed to follow through. This year it will reach critical mass and enough people will want 3D and a larger monitor that it warrants companies investing in the technology for the production of larger 3D monitors.
The poster that was talking about the race to the bottom is correct but it is a race to profitability, not to please a "special interest group" unless that market share can be proven to be profitable. (Much like the most profitable segment for video card is NOT the high end ones.) This is especially critical now when the world economy is in a slump; fewer markets with fewer people willing to spend a premium on products they can not discern the difference between/among. A company is in it to make a profit for its shareholders not just flex technical expertise without sales. No corporate president want to say that they sold less, spent more and made less than the competition, BUT, we had a great year in technical advancement. HE IS FIRED QUICKLY!!! Technical advancement will be slow and incremental under these conditions.
Computer 3D has been around for how long? We are just now seeing 27" 3D monitors being announced by more than one company. ASUS announced early last year but failed to follow through. This year it will reach critical mass and enough people will want 3D and a larger monitor that it warrants companies investing in the technology for the production of larger 3D monitors.
dowant120hz
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 632
what i said can be built with current technology
that's what display port (17 gbps) and ati cards with 6 display port jacks are for
no just kidding
obviously 1000hz was just an example and not practical with the human eye not recognizing more than 500fps
just used 1000 to make people realize even "slow" panels can do the highest refresh rates
its not a technical limitation
its just manufacturers using the cheapest electronics possible
the pixels already respond pretty much instantaneously
even on some old 50ms tft higher refresh rates make everything much smoother
they also decrease pixel response blur (not much unfortunately)
that's because with higher hz/fps the pixels can change earlier and the required change each frame is halved (best case scenario)
Last edited:
dowant120hz
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 632
its 60hz
not interesting for serious gamers
Thanks for the offer, I wouldn't understand it. I just saw a transitions time graph for IPS/TN/VA panels, and to be honest it feels like the limitation of mechanical hard drives. Just as the laser reader needed time to physically move, LCD pixels need time to rotate. We'll need to wait for some variant of OLED that is durable and cheap to manufacture before we'll see CRT quality images at 120hz+.
LG's website claims that all of their LCD panels over 37" are IPS panels.... so the the smallest 3D capable 120+ they make (its actually 240hz) IPS LED is the 47" LG 47LX6500
It should surely meet all your needs and still be 3D capable, plus it has FULL LED not crappy Edge-Lit LED + its got local dimming FTW!
It should surely meet all your needs and still be 3D capable, plus it has FULL LED not crappy Edge-Lit LED + its got local dimming FTW!
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
dowant120hz
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 632
most hdtvs are either ips or pva
tn makes a rather small number there compared to monitors
but they all are 60hz
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
True, most newer HDTV's come in IPS if they are above a certain size usually. I think this is because TV's require more horizontal viewing angles since people sit around a TV. Monitors it doesn't really matter usually since most of its users sit directly in front of it, they don't need wide horizontal viewing angles. IPS is more money though, but with TVs being mass produced in bigger sizes, it drives the prices down to be more affordable compared to a IPS monitor
IPS FTW!
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
The thing that gets me about interpolated Hz on TVs, is that even though they're getting updated by the internal chip from a 60Hz input, surely it means the technology itself has no problem with higher refresh rates.. Since I see people saying "IPS simply cannot do 120Hz yet" so often.
Theres a new article on pcmonitors.org, it is very interesting:
http://www.pcmonitors.org/articles/...-computer-monitors-a-lesson-in-responsiveness
http://www.pcmonitors.org/articles/...-computer-monitors-a-lesson-in-responsiveness
darklight_tr
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2006
- Messages
- 249
Yeah because all "serious gamers" hold the same opinion as you.
While a 120hz display is appealing, I am just fine with gaming on my 60hz U3011.
So the tl;dr of it is: all panels running at 120hz+ rely on overdrive to do it, which produces artifacts. IPS and PVA panels need more aggressive overdrive for 120hz = more artifacts, which is okay for TVs since they are further away and it's harder to notice vs. a monitor up in your face.