IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
Which one?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think he is talking about the X1
yes I'd guess two or more but who knows. We just got to the point where a single top end gpu (1080ti) can do 100fps+, average, at 2560x1440 on games of it's generation - even so, with some over the top settings still turned off on a few of the most demanding games. If high hz 4k screens become more prevalent perhaps it would drive gpu manufacturers to achieve more sooner though.
I think he is talking about the X1
Then I have no idea what he's talking about. The new Sony OLED doesn't hit 1,000 nits according to this review, and that's the problem.
First North American listing. It's in Canadian Melty Fun Bux.
http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_1195_700_1104&item_id=122062
View attachment 73023
I'm honestly more interested in the 35" Ultrawides. But they probably won't be out until Q3 or Q4. TFTCentral reported panel production is supposed to start in July. And I'm still skeptical about panel quality for both of these things. Will need a real review before I even consider spending that much money on an Asus/Acer "gaming" product with historically terrible quality control.
1440PeeMe too. That 35" 1440p @200Hz model is the one I want to see reviews of. If it ever releases.
Its 2018
2160 is fantastic..finally don't need blurry AA!
I don't see why we should accept anything less,especially given the direction of TVs and consoles.
Much of the time, the 240hz screen will provide significantly better visual quality, especially if you introduce strobing.
.
VRR tech, have you heard of it?4K is useless with these high fps screens, unless you're playing old games that are easy to push.
I have a 1080ti and still struggle to push everything at "gasp" 1440p @ 165fps. Not sure 4k 144 will be a reality any time soon
That's a heck of a lot of FALD haloing (unavoidable). I'm sure the monitor will be fine for bright games like PUBG, but it's going to be terrible for dark games.
That's a heck of a lot of FALD haloing (unavoidable). I'm sure the monitor will be fine for bright games like PUBG, but it's going to be terrible for dark games.
That's a heck of a lot of FALD haloing (unavoidable). I'm sure the monitor will be fine for bright games like PUBG, but it's going to be terrible for dark games.
Yeah but you would need a crazy amount of zones...for a 4K panel, you would probably need ~500,000-~2,000,000 zones for it not to noticeable in a desktop environment/mouse cursor IMO.Is it possible to not have haloing with a fald?
I don't think it needs to be that crazy. You could probably approach a good usage scenario with around 5,000 zones, but it really depends on the panel size. 384 zones on a 27" means each backlight is about 0.8 in². 5,184 zones would reduce that to 0.06 in². On a 65" panel 384 zones would make each backlight a 4.6 in², while 5,184 zones reduces that to 0.34 in². A 64x64 mouse cursor on a 27" 4K screen is 0.154 in² and 0.891 in² on a 65".Yeah but you would need a crazy amount of zones...for a 4K panel, you would probably need ~500,000-~2,000,000 zones for it not to noticeable in a desktop environment/mouse cursor IMO.
You’re probably right but I think of dark sky scenes with stars in the sky and fald lcds always look like trash compared to OLED. That said, 5,000 zones seems like a crazy number too on a 27” so who knows if we’ll ever see that... it might make more sense looking into ‘fixing’ OLED issues or finding a better technology altogether.I don't think it needs to be that crazy. You could probably approach a good usage scenario with around 5,000 zones, but it really depends on the panel size. 384 zones on a 27" means each backlight is about 0.8 in². 5,184 zones would reduce that to 0.06 in². On a 65" panel 384 zones would make each backlight a 4.6 in², while 5,184 zones reduces that to 0.34 in². A 64x64 mouse cursor on a 27" 4K screen is 0.154 in² and 0.891 in² on a 65".
I don't think it needs to be that crazy. You could probably approach a good usage scenario with around 5,000 zones, but it really depends on the panel size. 384 zones on a 27" means each backlight is about 0.8 in². 5,184 zones would reduce that to 0.06 in². On a 65" panel 384 zones would make each backlight a 4.6 in², while 5,184 zones reduces that to 0.34 in². A 64x64 mouse cursor on a 27" 4K screen is 0.154 in² and 0.891 in² on a 65".
You’re probably right but I think of dark sky scenes with stars in the sky and fald lcds always look like trash compared to OLED. That said, 5,000 zones seems like a crazy number too on a 27” so who knows if we’ll ever see that... it might make more sense looking into ‘fixing’ OLED issues or finding a better technology altogether.