WorldExclusive
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,548
It's confirmed. AMD sure knows how to mess up.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
New Samsung 4k for everyone.
- Thread starter seanclayton
- Start date
It's confirmed. AMD sure knows how to mess up.
Nitemare3219
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 206
For those of you who have been in this thread for the past 100 pages, you might remember when I did comparison tests of the 7500 firmwares... at the time, version 1003 against 1207 I believe. Anyway, what I proved was that Samsung added lag to the newer firmwares once they increased the chroma on game mode. I sent back my TV which was updated (it was a 40") and kept the 48" which had the factory firmware version 1003.
Since I received my JS9000, I decided to test again... The JS9000 is running version 1215 and the 7500 was running 1003, and then tested again with the latest 1215. Here were the results...
First on the word of color... holy smokes, the JS9000 is like IPS versus TN monitors all over again. Blues are about the same between units, but whites are whiter and brighter, red is very punchy and actually RED... on the JU7500 red is actually orange-ish when comparing them side-by-side. Greens are also a bit better on the JS9000, and pretty much every other color as well. Hands down, the JS9000 is way more than 10% better - I'd say 100% with certain colors. Ghosting and motion blur are also, as stated, a touch better with the JS9000. I wanted to get pictures of the color differences, but I can't quite get my camera to do it... you really have to see it for yourself.
JS9000 1215 v JU7500 1003
-PC mode is about 1 frame slower on the JS9000.
-Game modes are equal, tested with dynamic contrast set to low, dark level set to dark, smart LED set to low. I have not noticed any additional lag from using these processive effects, and like the look of them - so I continue to use them in game mode.
-In TV mode with only Auto Motion Plus, set to custom with blur reduction set to 10, the JS9000 is about 1 frame slower.
JS9000 1215 v JU7500 1215
-PC modes are now equal, meaning the JU7500 got slower.
-Game mode is now about 2 frames slower on the JU7500.
-In TV mode with Auto Motion Plus, both are equal, meaning the JU7500 got slower.
Proof is in the pictures. Some people have discounted my testing methodology. If you don't want to put stock into what I'm saying, don't - I don't care. I have spent hours and hours comparing displays on this forum to provide info to my fellow members. This isn't scientific and 100% accurate, but my test has always proved accurate when I felt a difference when using a new display/firmware.
For those of you who haven't seen my test, I am extended the desktop since I can only connect one display to one GPU. I use BlurBuster's frameskip motion test. What we are looking for is a discrepancy in the speed that blocks go white and fade to black. It should be 100% fluid and "equal." The areas I focus on, and show pictures of, are when the blocks split between the displays, and when the blocks light/fade on opposite displays.
For instance, if on display one, blocks 1, 2, and 3 are lit, but on display two, blocks 5 and 6 are lit... that means display 1 is lagging behind as it hasn't lit block 4, and blocks 1 and 2 should have gone dark by now. The number of blocks shown as lit will depend on camera settings. My camera will almost always shows 3 blocks when I set it to specific settings. Any more or less between the two displays means a display is lagging (split block counts as 1/2 for each display).
JU7500 is the left, JS9000 is the right. The block pattern moves left to right, but the faster display should ideally be placed on the right side, but I have to set it up on the left. To counter this, I swapped the display placement in Windows. So when the split comes up on the right display, the blocks will begin filling on the left display.
PC mode
Four blocks are shown (lag), and the shared block is fading on the 7500 while fully lit on the 9000. 7500 is faster.
Four blocks again, shared block is lit on 7500 and dark on 9000. 7500 is faster.
Game mode
3 blocks are lit - no difference between dislays (remember, shared blocks equal 1 block). Equal.
And again (one fading in/one fading out = 1 block). Equal.
Equally fading the shared block.
Auto Motion Plus (artifacting can occur with AMP, as shown here)
Shared block is lit on the 7500, but not the 9000. 7500 is faster.
More than 3 blocks, 7500 has faded but 9000 has not. 7500 is faster.
From this point on the firmware on the 7500 has been updated to 1215.
Auto Motion Plus
Equal. 7500 got slower.
Equal. 7500 got slower.
Game mode
9000 has lit its first edge block before the 7500 even began filling its last edge block. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
9000 has filled all three blocks including shared block, the 7500 has not filled the shared block. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
9000 is ahead on edge blocks again, appears to be 2 frames ahead of the 7500. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
9000 is fading last full block and filled shared block, 7500 has not began filling shared block nor the 3rd block. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
Since I received my JS9000, I decided to test again... The JS9000 is running version 1215 and the 7500 was running 1003, and then tested again with the latest 1215. Here were the results...
First on the word of color... holy smokes, the JS9000 is like IPS versus TN monitors all over again. Blues are about the same between units, but whites are whiter and brighter, red is very punchy and actually RED... on the JU7500 red is actually orange-ish when comparing them side-by-side. Greens are also a bit better on the JS9000, and pretty much every other color as well. Hands down, the JS9000 is way more than 10% better - I'd say 100% with certain colors. Ghosting and motion blur are also, as stated, a touch better with the JS9000. I wanted to get pictures of the color differences, but I can't quite get my camera to do it... you really have to see it for yourself.
JS9000 1215 v JU7500 1003
-PC mode is about 1 frame slower on the JS9000.
-Game modes are equal, tested with dynamic contrast set to low, dark level set to dark, smart LED set to low. I have not noticed any additional lag from using these processive effects, and like the look of them - so I continue to use them in game mode.
-In TV mode with only Auto Motion Plus, set to custom with blur reduction set to 10, the JS9000 is about 1 frame slower.
JS9000 1215 v JU7500 1215
-PC modes are now equal, meaning the JU7500 got slower.
-Game mode is now about 2 frames slower on the JU7500.
-In TV mode with Auto Motion Plus, both are equal, meaning the JU7500 got slower.
Proof is in the pictures. Some people have discounted my testing methodology. If you don't want to put stock into what I'm saying, don't - I don't care. I have spent hours and hours comparing displays on this forum to provide info to my fellow members. This isn't scientific and 100% accurate, but my test has always proved accurate when I felt a difference when using a new display/firmware.
For those of you who haven't seen my test, I am extended the desktop since I can only connect one display to one GPU. I use BlurBuster's frameskip motion test. What we are looking for is a discrepancy in the speed that blocks go white and fade to black. It should be 100% fluid and "equal." The areas I focus on, and show pictures of, are when the blocks split between the displays, and when the blocks light/fade on opposite displays.
For instance, if on display one, blocks 1, 2, and 3 are lit, but on display two, blocks 5 and 6 are lit... that means display 1 is lagging behind as it hasn't lit block 4, and blocks 1 and 2 should have gone dark by now. The number of blocks shown as lit will depend on camera settings. My camera will almost always shows 3 blocks when I set it to specific settings. Any more or less between the two displays means a display is lagging (split block counts as 1/2 for each display).
JU7500 is the left, JS9000 is the right. The block pattern moves left to right, but the faster display should ideally be placed on the right side, but I have to set it up on the left. To counter this, I swapped the display placement in Windows. So when the split comes up on the right display, the blocks will begin filling on the left display.
PC mode
Four blocks are shown (lag), and the shared block is fading on the 7500 while fully lit on the 9000. 7500 is faster.
Four blocks again, shared block is lit on 7500 and dark on 9000. 7500 is faster.
Game mode
3 blocks are lit - no difference between dislays (remember, shared blocks equal 1 block). Equal.
And again (one fading in/one fading out = 1 block). Equal.
Equally fading the shared block.
Auto Motion Plus (artifacting can occur with AMP, as shown here)
Shared block is lit on the 7500, but not the 9000. 7500 is faster.
More than 3 blocks, 7500 has faded but 9000 has not. 7500 is faster.
From this point on the firmware on the 7500 has been updated to 1215.
Auto Motion Plus
Equal. 7500 got slower.
Equal. 7500 got slower.
Game mode
9000 has lit its first edge block before the 7500 even began filling its last edge block. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
9000 has filled all three blocks including shared block, the 7500 has not filled the shared block. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
9000 is ahead on edge blocks again, appears to be 2 frames ahead of the 7500. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
9000 is fading last full block and filled shared block, 7500 has not began filling shared block nor the 3rd block. They were equal before, meaning the 7500 got slower.
Last edited:
nothinglitup
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2015
- Messages
- 31
Zarathustra[H];1041671655 said:
I was in the middle of replying to this when we ha a lightning strike that fried a bunch of our stuff, including my modem, so I'm replying to this via my cell with one bar of service. Any other replies will have to wait till my modem is replaced, as this is really painful typing this way! My old tv was a 10 year old 32" Samsung that had a resolution of I believe 1360x768. If you can wait till I'm back online, I can screen cap what my destop and steam look like on the new tv.
PS if that strike had taken out this tv, I probably would have stroked out and died.
PPS new cable seems to have made a huge difference. Now I just need to figure out why the pic is so dark.
Lateralus
More [H]uman than Human
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2004
- Messages
- 18,493
I am one of the JS9000's biggest fans, and I too think that it's worth the premium over the JU series, but I purposely held back from recommending it to Zarathustra (not that it matters, as it's both bigger and more expensive than he's willing to go). The reason is because of this statement: "I even run my U3011 in sRGB mode rather than game mode, as I find game mode comically oversaturated. I prefer more realistic unpopped colors."
This alone was enough for me to skip recommending the JS9000 to him, even if the size and price were non-issues. The JS9000 with its 10-bit panel is wide gamut. This allows it to display more colors, but it also means that most content is going to be very vibrant and saturated. Some people do not like that. I remember many people here and Anandtech hating on the Dell 3007WFP-HC because it displayed normal content as over-saturated and cartoony compared to Dell's other 30" non wide gamut displays. I wouldn't describe the image on the JS9000 as cartoony, but it's certainly very vibrant and less flat than on the JU series. I even noticed it on the red bars on this forum. Sure you can tone it down via menu settings and NVCP to look more like the 6xxx and 7xxx, but why pay the extra money for the improvements to PQ only to tone them down?
I can see where some could make a case that they didn't like the extra saturation on the desktop (I do like it), but that added vibrancy in games is really stunning. I am just in awe of the image this thing puts out.
Ah, it was YOU! (and Wiz33)
Mr. Neverbicker
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2015
- Messages
- 48
So many reports of the JS9000 with dead or stuck pixels. Maybe that's part of the reason for the promotions. I wonder how many out there actually have no pixel issues.
Last edited:
Lateralus
More [H]uman than Human
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2004
- Messages
- 18,493
It's a thing of beauty indeed. I feel like Samsung should have programmed a startup sound of angels singing when you power the display on, and light should shine down on your face from the set (oh, it does...that's just the bright backlight!). Thanks for the new info. It's too bad we don't have measurements comparing the factory firmware on the JS9000 with 1215...it could be in my head, but I feel like PC mode might have gotten a touch slower after I updated. I can feel enough lag that it puts me off from using it because I feel as if I am less accurate with the slightly more sluggish mouse...lately I've remained in Game mode where everything is nice and fast/responsive. PC mode has always been slower, but for some reason I find it to be a hair too laggy for my tastes on the JS9000 with firmware 1215 (I didn't feel that way prior to the update or on my 6700 or 7500).
Ouch, that stinks! What else got fried?
Make sure you tell us in great detail...I'm thinking oh, a paragraph describing each item will do.
My JS9000 is thankfully without any screen issues (stuck pixels, etc). I also got lucky with the 3 JU6700's and that they didn't have any issues either.
Could shipping cause the screen issues (stuck pixels)? I bought all 4 from my local store (RC Willey) and they are very aggressive with how much care they treat the TVs with. In talking with the warehouse guy, he said that they have seen a lot less returns for screen issues since they started being very proactive on handling the TVs. Just a thought...
Which unit was primary? If you swap the primary monitor, does the results stay consistent?
Mr. Neverbicker
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2015
- Messages
- 48
That's interesting. It was packed very well, I'd be surprised if it happened in shipping. I'd buy local if I could.
Nitemare3219
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 206
Can't say I remember. I never noticed that to make a difference in any of my prior tests, and the displays didn't get disconnected or anything at any point during testing so the primary display must have stayed the same, even though the results changed between modes/firmwares.
dragonageinquisition
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2014
- Messages
- 601
Based on this press release: http://www.videoaktiv.de/2015061513870/news/prasentation/samsung-ue850-uhd-monitorserie-fur-profis.html
Looks like Samsung UE850 32" IPS UHD Freesync monitor will be $1209 Euros, or possibly as high as $1399.
So for those of you considering 32" 4K gaming you are looking at these kind of tradeoffs:
AMD Fury X $650 + $1399 Samsung UE850 = $2050 for 40Hz Freesync performance
980Ti SLI $650 x 2 + $700-750 Acer B326HK = $2000-2050 for 60Hz Vsync performance.
One requires less GPU power but the monitor is costlier, and we don't know how long Freesync support will last and when Adaptive Sync will take over as the standard.
Looks like Samsung UE850 32" IPS UHD Freesync monitor will be $1209 Euros, or possibly as high as $1399.
So for those of you considering 32" 4K gaming you are looking at these kind of tradeoffs:
AMD Fury X $650 + $1399 Samsung UE850 = $2050 for 40Hz Freesync performance
980Ti SLI $650 x 2 + $700-750 Acer B326HK = $2000-2050 for 60Hz Vsync performance.
One requires less GPU power but the monitor is costlier, and we don't know how long Freesync support will last and when Adaptive Sync will take over as the standard.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1707758471){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
Zarathustra[H];1041672750 said:Appreciate the input.
The JS9000 isn't an option for me regardless of size. Spending grand on a screen is enough of a frivolous splurge for me, no matter how nice it is.
It's not that I couldn't afford it, it just seems overly frivolous to me. I have enough buyers remorse and get enough disapproval from significant other / family at the ~ one grand level
You know what?
I take back what I said.
Go big or go home.
I just ordered a 48" JS9000 and a 980 Ti
Going to have this for a long time. Might as well get something of high quality.
Last edited:
Killahurtz
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 671
you will dig the screen Zarathustra[H]
Nitemare3219
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 206
Zarathustra[H];1041673280 said:
That's the spirit!
I went from struggling to pay $800~ for a monitor, like the ROG Swift, to trying out 4K at about $600 at first (but hated TN and 60 Hz was awful in most games for tearing at 4K with a "small" 28" screen). Then went up to a $1,000 BenQ IPS 4K and Acer (<-- junk)... but still wasn't satisfied, as I came across these. Knew I wanted the curve, so I puckered my anus for the $1,399 40" 7500, then wanted more... so came the $1,599 48" 7500... but then saw people talking about the JS9000 and the price drop. And here I am, $2,000 later with a fantastic screen and an aching wallet LOL. Retailers probably hate me with how much I've tried stuff until I found the perfect fit.
These are great displays. I wish the warranty were longer, but tech rarely fails like that. I've never seen a TV just go kaput. That would be a hard hit... but I guess Samsung would allow you to pay for repairs. I figure whenever something better comes out, which is hard to imagine since it'll be damn near impossible to go down to regular monitor sized screens again, this TV can go to actual TV/movie duty 24/7. I wish OLED were viable already, but it's too expensive and just not quite there yet maturity wise.
Mr. Neverbicker
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2015
- Messages
- 48
I'm not sure I'd want OLED for full time office use because it's organic with limited life.
I'm confused about the AMD Fury support for HDMI 2.0. All of the press "leaks" specify 3 DisplayPorts and a single HDMI 2.0 port. It seems the rumors of no HDMI 2.0 stems from just one post from an AMD rep. I'm not sure I could trust a single post over all the previous reports of support for HDMI 2.0.
I'm confused about the AMD Fury support for HDMI 2.0. All of the press "leaks" specify 3 DisplayPorts and a single HDMI 2.0 port. It seems the rumors of no HDMI 2.0 stems from just one post from an AMD rep. I'm not sure I could trust a single post over all the previous reports of support for HDMI 2.0.
It really seems stupid, even for them, like hard to believe that's true. How could they make such a colossal mistake...NPD shows that 84% of all 4k gaming being done currently is via "television".
Insane. Hope you're right, otherwise the Fury X is DOA for the 4k market.
I'll wait until the first actual reviews come out - if no HDMI 2.0 (or 2.0a) then I'm good with the 980Ti. If it actually does have HDMI2.0(a) then I'll see how it performs.
DarkStar02
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,144
I was one of the first people in this thread to grab a 48" JU7500 because the 40" wasn't in stock. Tried it for 29 days before returning it and getting the 40" because I thought it would be more practical given my desk space and distance to the monitor. 29 days after that I went and exchanged it for the 48" version again. It's been a couple weeks and now the JS9000 is $2000 cheaper.. to exchange or not to exchange? Opinions?
I made that decision three weeks ago, I wanted to 'want' the 9000 honestly, but the truth was it wasn't dramatically different in my tests versus the 7500. Small jump in other words.
I did feel the 6700 to 7500 jump was worth it, but not the 7500 to 9000 jump.
All of them are great truthfully.
Which differences specifically made the jump from 6700 to 7500 worth it?
Nitemare3219
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 206
How many bad pixels? Are they stuck on a certain color, or dead?
Do it. Read the last page with my impressions and tests... that should help a lot.
How in the hell did you not find it to be worth it for $400-$500? Did you even bother comparing colors?! That is the biggest difference my friend! It is a phenomenal difference... it is like going from a TN panel to an IPS! When I put them side-by-side running the same color pallette test, the 7500 looked like GARBAGE!
In other words, I love seeing peoples reactions when I tell them I spent $2,000 on a 48 inch TV - people think inches is entirely relative to cost. 4K is just now getting into some peoples' heads, but they still don't understand... that's like getting freaked out because someone dropped $50,000 on a new BMW rather than a new Honda... "but they both do the same thing!" - no my friend, they don't.
WorldExclusive
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,548
I've cut the cord because of this TV.
It's does everything I need. Productivity, Gaming and Streaming TV.
I will definitely invest in the larger JS9000 series later this year for the living room.
Best PC investment this year.
It's does everything I need. Productivity, Gaming and Streaming TV.
I will definitely invest in the larger JS9000 series later this year for the living room.
Best PC investment this year.
How many bad pixels? Are they stuck on a certain color, or dead?
Do it. Read the last page with my impressions and tests... that should help a lot.
How in the hell did you not find it to be worth it for $400-$500? Did you even bother comparing colors?! That is the biggest difference my friend! It is a phenomenal difference... it is like going from a TN panel to an IPS! When I put them side-by-side running the same color pallette test, the 7500 looked like GARBAGE!
In other words, I love seeing peoples reactions when I tell them I spent $2,000 on a 48 inch TV - people think inches is entirely relative to cost. 4K is just now getting into some peoples' heads, but they still don't understand... that's like getting freaked out because someone dropped $50,000 on a new BMW rather than a new Honda... "but they both do the same thing!" - no my friend, they don't.
Any pictures oft he comparison?
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
Yeah,
I'm usually one to wait for official information before making any decisions, and I was following the "coming soon, few weeks" thread since January. I was hoping to support AMD and get a top end AMD GPU this time around, but apparently that isn't happening.
Usually I would have waited until the final reviews, but coming - as it did - from an actual AMD Rep, I decided it was more reliable than most rumors, and I didn't want to be stuck on the flipside once Fury-X reviews drop, fighting for available 980ti inventory, so I decided to go for it.
Now I'm trying to decide if - for the older titles I play - a single 980ti will be sufficient for 3840x2160, or if I really ought to get another one...
It's difficult to find good figures on it. How much faster - on average - would you guys say a 980ti is than the original Titan, specifically in Unreal Engine 3 titles if possible? I can't find numbers on this at all.
I'm going under the assumption that since 3840x2160 has double the pixels of my 2560x1600 screen, if everything scales linearly I'll need double the GPU power for the same frame rates. (this may be a bad assumption though)
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
In other words, I love seeing peoples reactions when I tell them I spent $2,000 on a 48 inch TV - people think inches is entirely relative to cost. 4K is just now getting into some peoples' heads, but they still don't understand... that's like getting freaked out because someone dropped $50,000 on a new BMW rather than a new Honda... "but they both do the same thing!" - no my friend, they don't.
Yeah, still probably not worth it as TV's though. My 60" Panny plasma isn't going anywhere.
These are essentially monitors in TV clothing, and as monitors they are fantastic. Just wish they had monitor-like inputs.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
That's the spirit!
I went from struggling to pay $800~ for a monitor, like the ROG Swift, to trying out 4K at about $600 at first (but hated TN and 60 Hz was awful in most games for tearing at 4K with a "small" 28" screen). Then went up to a $1,000 BenQ IPS 4K and Acer (<-- junk)... but still wasn't satisfied, as I came across these. Knew I wanted the curve, so I puckered my anus for the $1,399 40" 7500, then wanted more... so came the $1,599 48" 7500... but then saw people talking about the JS9000 and the price drop. And here I am, $2,000 later with a fantastic screen and an aching wallet LOL. Retailers probably hate me with how much I've tried stuff until I found the perfect fit.
These are great displays. I wish the warranty were longer, but tech rarely fails like that. I've never seen a TV just go kaput. That would be a hard hit... but I guess Samsung would allow you to pay for repairs. I figure whenever something better comes out, which is hard to imagine since it'll be damn near impossible to go down to regular monitor sized screens again, this TV can go to actual TV/movie duty 24/7. I wish OLED were viable already, but it's too expensive and just not quite there yet maturity wise.
Thanks for the encouragement guys! It's helping with the typical "oh my god, what have I done" sinking feeling in my stomach after an "irresponsible" computer purchase
I'm just hoping my desk will be wide enough to still fit my side monitors.
Read the specs on the screen. It is 42 2/3" wide. My desk is 62 2/3", which gives me 10" on either side to fit 20" 4:3 monitors in portrait. It might work, depending on the angle... Hopefully the curve will mean a sharper angle feels right, and thus everything will fit. It will be VERY close though.
Current setup:
WorldExclusive
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2009
- Messages
- 11,548
Zarathustra[H];1041674011 said:
PC World has the specs:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2937...x-tech-specs-and-design-details-revealed.html
It says HDMI 1.4a.
Don't worry. You know both of us will be upgrading to a proper 40" OLED/Quantum Dot monitor next year.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
I'm just trying to decide if I should grab a second 980ti now, so I can have two identical cards, while they are still in stock, rather than waiting for the first one to decide whether I need it or not...
This is starting to get into The Vacation Budget™, which may imply some nights of Sleeping on the Couch™.
This is starting to get into The Vacation Budget™, which may imply some nights of Sleeping on the Couch™.
Tyler-Durden
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,302
Based almost entirely on the comments in this thread, I just ordered the 48" JS9000 from Crutchfield.
It'll be my new TV, not computer monitor. Once I figured out how to mount it on my desk with an arm, the 40" 7500 was perfect for me. Only a 40" JS9000 would get me to dump it.
It'll be my new TV, not computer monitor. Once I figured out how to mount it on my desk with an arm, the 40" 7500 was perfect for me. Only a 40" JS9000 would get me to dump it.
Don't worry. You know both of us will be upgrading to a proper 40" OLED/Quantum Dot monitor next year.
You mean a proper 48 inch via one connect box upgrade , don't ya
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
Zarathustra[H];1041674541 said:I'm just trying to decide if I should grab a second 980ti now, so I can have two identical cards, while they are still in stock, rather than waiting for the first one to decide whether I need it or not...
This is starting to get into The Vacation Budget, which may imply some nights of Sleeping on the Couch.
Well, it is done. Couch, here I come.
Just hoping EVGA's ECX 2.0+ coolers are good. Couldn't find any reviews of them on 980 Ti's
Owner of js9000. Running win 10. Sometimes still have hdmi problems. Screen going blank sometimes. Bet it is copy protection handshake. Anyone else have same issues? All settings correct. Good cable. I'm thinking my video card might just be flaky or Samsung box needs replacing. Motherboard is new.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Not all good cables are good.
And not all cables that are good work perfectly.
Try another cable.
Mr. Neverbicker
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2015
- Messages
- 48
PC World has the specs:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2937...x-tech-specs-and-design-details-revealed.html
It says HDMI 1.4a.
Thanks AMD. Giving you tomorrow's video card with yesterday's tech. Just ordered GTX 980 Ti.
Last edited: