ASRock PG558KF - 8K (7680 x 4320) 55" gaming monitor (HDR1000)

Either AUO, TCL or CSOT's panel. Could be a 55" FALD VA that Samsung used in its QN700A/B/C.
 
1685582316697.png

1685582336777.png


https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9166...ch-8k-ips-display-at-computex-2023/index.html

Giant meh on the 60hz.
 
55" is too large for a 16:9 monitor. I tried to use that size, and could never get used to it. The width is ok, but the height is way too much.
 
Displayport 1.4a can only handle 8k at 60hz. 4090s have displayport 1.4a.. so....I'd say we're not ready for 8k on the desktop yet

Which makes it kind of ironic that the 7900XTX is more forward looking with its HDMI 2.1a connection. Is there any reason Nvidia AIB's couldn't release a 4090 refresh with HDMI 2.1a?
 
Which makes it kind of ironic that the 7900XTX is more forward looking with its HDMI 2.1a connection. Is there any reason Nvidia AIB's couldn't release a 4090 refresh with HDMI 2.1a?
Graphics chips likely have Displayport/HDMI integrated on the chip unlike the old days. Nvidia would need to release/refab an update. Thing is, you're not going to get great framerates with any of the high end gpus at 8k at the moment, it's significantly more pixels than 4k.
 
Graphics chips likely have Displayport/HDMI integrated on the chip unlike the old days. Nvidia would need to release/refab an update. Thing is, you're not going to get great framerates with any of the high end gpus at 8k at the moment, it's significantly more pixels than 4k.

Don't disagree about current high end GPUs struggling to push 8K, but at the rate that monitor tech seems to be advancing (240hz 4K monitors are already in the pipeline, which seemed unfathomable only a few years ago) only someone wanting the pay top dollar for the bleeding edge would be happy to buy this monitor rather than waiting for the inevitable high Hz versions which probably aren't that far away.
 
I could see it being useful as a work display set 1+ meter away. Tons of sharp desktop space at 160 PPI. Would also work for the people who use a computer for work and then play using a PS5 or Xbox where most games are 30-60 fps still.

8K displays really need to get on that "more refresh rate at lower resolution" train that was mentioned in some TFT Central panel roadmap posts or something. 8K 60 Hz, 4K 120+ Hz would be great.

For people saying "nothing can run 8K for gaming", the answer is "it doesn't matter". You get integer scaled 4K, 1440p and 1080p support so you have plenty of options. Pair that with DLSS and no problem.
 
Don't disagree about current high end GPUs struggling to push 8K, but at the rate that monitor tech seems to be advancing (240hz 4K monitors are already in the pipeline, which seemed unfathomable only a few years ago) only someone wanting the pay top dollar for the bleeding edge would be happy to buy this monitor rather than waiting for the inevitable high Hz versions which probably aren't that far away.
https://www.samsung.com/au/monitors/gaming/odyssey-neo-g8-g85nb-32-inch-ls32bg852nexxy/ 250hz 4k already exists ...

The issue is not so much the monitor tech, it's the graphics card compatibility to drive it. Nvidia cards still run DP1.4a - that will only drive up to 8k/60hz or 4k/144hz unless overdriven (and it cant go much further than that).
 
Last edited:
https://www.samsung.com/au/monitors/gaming/odyssey-neo-g8-g85nb-32-inch-ls32bg852nexxy/ 250hz 4k already exists ...

The issue is not so much the monitor tech, it's the graphics card compatibility to drive it. Nvidia cards still run DP1.4a - that will only drive up to 8k/60hz or 4k/144hz unless overdriven (and it cant go much further than that).
The scanline issues on that monitor though. DSC shouldn't be abused more than x2/ imho, no matter how "lossless" it is.
 
Back
Top