Where are the 8K Monitors?

Happy Hopping said:
https://sg.sharp/products/tvav/60-inch-8k-tv-8t-c60dw1x?v=1514

suppose someone use this 8K TV as a monitor, and this 8k TV is 7680x4320.

1) how would you find out the chroma is 4:4:4?

2) what would be a very high quality 220V to 115V transformer, and how do you find the plug that convert from Asian country 220V wall plug to 115V NEMA-15?
Click to expand...

Typically you have to set a gaming tv's hdmi input to "PC" in the settings. May also have to set it to RGB in the PC display settings if a gpu auto detected a tv and set it otherwise for some reason. PC = RGB = 4:4:4


From RTINGs

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/qn900d-8k-qled/settings

"The QN900D usually automatically detects when it's connected to a PC and enters 'PC' mode to ensure proper chroma 4:4:4 support, which is essential for clear text from a PC. You can manually change the Source from the home menu to 'PC on TV.' To get a low input lag in 'PC' mode, you must also enable Game Mode."

config-154-large.jpg

.

"The Samsung QN900D has a huge selection of accessibility features. It supports automatic closed captioning, high contrast mode, or even grayscale mode, just to name a few. There's also an option to disable the picture entirely, leaving the audio, which is great if you want to listen to music and don't need the screen on."

. . . .

Note that according to reports in threads on reddit , one of the older samsung 8k screens had a blurriness in text caused by forced dithering but it was avoidable by setting everything to VRR game mode. Shouldn't be an issue on the 900c and 900D, but worth mentioning.
 
Last edited:
I read about that long ago. But w/o buying the Sharp, it would still be a gamble. I mean, what if it turns out not to be 4:4:4. Neither search engine show what the ratio is. And Sharp of Singapore never answer email

Are you saying that most brand should automatically cover chroma 4:4:4 these days?

Also, I want to buy the Samsung 8K, but the 50" are all discontinued. Woot no longer have it
 
Most major branded tvs marketed as having gaming tv functionality have a pc mode for 444 (RGB) and have gaming mode for low latency.

The 900D claims to auto detect when a pc is connected but you can also manually set which type of device is connected to each each hdmi port, as shown in the screenshot in the previous post.

Idk specifically about a sharp model. I'd scour google and forums on anything I wasn't sure of.

.....

Incidentally, I visited a 85 inch 900D 8k at best buy today a half hour ago (they didn't have a 65 inch on display). I only watched it for around 5 minutes or so while it cycled through some content. I didn't see any obvious blooming or black lifting at a glance.
 
Last edited:
Sharp is very low key, both search engine shows nothing on their Singapore 8K models.

I would be very happy w/ their 50" 8K model if it's still available, I think they called it the 8 series
 
I don't think Sharp makes a 50" either any more. The smallest model they offer in Japan is 60". And also it is limited to 8K 60Hz like the Samsung QN900D even though it has a native refresh rate of 120 Hz, so its HDMI 2.1 ports may be limited to 32 Gbps or something.

I hope CES 2025 brings the first 8K 120Hz display. So far LG is a bust.
 
as i said above, any 40 to 50" 8K at CES 2025, I'll fly down there. Any frequency, 60Hz, I'll take it.
 
elvn said:
Most major branded tvs marketed as having gaming tv functionality have a pc mode for 444 (RGB) and have gaming mode for low latency.

The 900D claims to auto detect when a pc is connected but you can also manually set which type of device is connected to each each hdmi port, as shown in the screenshot in the previous post.

Idk specifically about a sharp model. I'd scour google and forums on anything I wasn't sure of.

.....

Incidentally, I visited a 85 inch 900D 8k at best buy today a half hour ago (they didn't have a 65 inch on display). I only watched it for around 5 minutes or so while it cycled through some content. I didn't see any obvious blooming or black lifting at a glance.
Click to expand...
As I recall it, my QN900C also autodetected the input as PC and made all the necessary adjustments that you previously had to to manually. Still might have to struggle with that GSync/sharp text issue though but have already posted info on how to do that.
 
So it's 2025 and still no indication of any 8K OLED monitors? GTFOH. I'm done w/ monitors for now - 4K 240Hz OLED, 57" Neo G9, PG32UQX (4K 144Hz).

NEED THAT 8K 120Hz OLED DP2.1a (32" or even 38").
 
Just a heads up in case anyone visiting this thread doesn't follow the avsforum thread on the samsung 900D 8k gaming tv that can do 240Hz 4k upscaled in some fashion:

A few people have reported that the response time on the screen is poor. That, especially as compared to OLED, but comments about text quality in dark modes (pages that use dark grey or black backgrounds) , trailing artifacts/smearing in high speed gaming motion, etc. were said from two owners. They did say the 240Hz works and increases motion definition/smoothness but that the panel is too slow to keep up (on dark transitions).

Some excerpts from a few commenters (not my comments quoted) from recently on the avs forum thread: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/20...ussions-qn800d-owners-welcome.3298856/page-24

===============================================

My 85 inch QN900D arrived today. I was hoping it would replace 65 inch LG OLED as a PC monitor used mostly for gaming but it is a huge disappointment.

I really want to got higher than 120Hz with fast paced gaming. QN900D has true 240Hz modes for 3840x2160 and lower resolutions. Interestingly enough it also works with 2560x1440@240Hz which is not listed as supported in the manual. The response to mouse movement in 240Hz is very noticeably snappier than in 120Hz and also the animations feel much smoother. Mouse cursor is where it's the easiest to tell that 240Hz is really on.

But there are huge issues with using this with PC as 240Hz monitor.
Click to expand...

.
First and biggest show stopper is the pixel response time. It looks okay only for very slow movement in FPS games. Move your mouse faster and the result is so much motion blur that the whole image is illegible. You have to stop and wait for the picture to become clear again, which of course, defeats the purpose. I never expected such slow response time from flagship device! There are lots of artifacts, like white text scrolled on dark background changes color to slightly dark red due to red subpixes being the only ones that respond quickly to the motion. It's as bad as on those 50$ cheapo monitors, completely unusable for me.
Click to expand...

.
issue is that backlight algo has a huge delay in 240hz modes and it makes things like white cursor on black background dissapear during movement. Only completely disabling backlight zoning addresses the problem but it introduces another show stopper. With it's disabled black becomes gray and colors are very washed out. I was not expecting the TV to be so slow in computing optimum backligthing for zones - it takes a fraction of second to up to few seconds for it to kick in
Click to expand...

I had several hours of gzdoom, quake and other games on QN900D today and I really enjoy smoothness and responsiveness of 240FPS but the subpar pixel response is something that I wouldn't get used to even in long term. It creates distracting artifacts which take away enough pleasure from the experience. I am still returning it and will wait until high refresh rate OLED TVs come to the market.
Click to expand...

. . . . . . . . . . . .

is saying is completely right. Reading reddit on dark mode in 240hz looks very bad when scrolling white on black background.
It's unfortunate and myself as well was fooled into buying this 240hz DLG gimmick but i'm too conceited to return it so F it.
120hz mode is on par with typical VA panel response times , meaning it's bad in grey to grey.

It's fine in 240hz in coding apps for me but maybe my fonts are just more clear and customized. In gaming 240hz is ok for shooters but very bad for single player like God of War ragnarok due to bad response time during night time.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

. . . . . . . . . .

The first guy in the first several quotes was trying to force 1440p and 4k integer scaling, especially 1440p scaling in games - so I at first suspected he was just fussing around with indirect settings and perhaps was disgruntled about that not working out with the tv's scaling like he would have liked. However he assured me he had also started all of his tv , OS, and gpu display settings over from scratch and had tried a normal 3840x2160 120hz 4k (4k TV) RGB 10 bit setting from his PC, assured that he had forced pc setting on the hdmi input on his tv, had checked/forced gaming mode in the tv settings, etc.

The second guy had less issue with text on brighter backgrounds in coding and apps generally, but agreed that the response time is too low for contrasted material/darks, assumingly because of slow to/from black transition smearing~artifacts.



RTings: "The Samsung QN900D has an excellent response time for minimal blur behind fast-moving objects. Unfortunately, the response time is slower when coming out of dark states, so there's some noticeable black smearing in dark transitions."

(RTings) Samsung 900D 8k, 80% Response Time: 3.9ms, 100% Response Time: 7.8ms
(RTings) LG G4 OLED . . . . . 80% Response Time: 0.2ms, 100% Response Time: 2.3ms


. . .

It's sounds like old school VA transitions to me, perhaps exacerbated by FALD transitions. Samsung gaming tvs have been criticized for having slower transitions and across a wider # of zones when in game mode. Perhaps it's better in media modes but for people seeking fast 4k 240hz from a PC on a 900D it might be a big con, especially considering the price tag (and size limitations).
 
Baasha said:
So it's 2025 and still no indication of any 8K OLED monitors? GTFOH. I'm done w/ monitors for now - 4K 240Hz OLED, 57" Neo G9, PG32UQX (4K 144Hz).

NEED THAT 8K 120Hz OLED DP2.1a (32" or even 38").
Click to expand...
8K at 120Hz would have the bandwidth to allow 4K at 480Hz, 1440p 720Hz and 1080p at 960Hz... and an 8K panel could do all of those resolutions as an integer scale.
 
Baasha said:
So it's 2025 and still no indication of any 8K OLED monitors? GTFOH. I'm done w/ monitors for now - 4K 240Hz OLED, 57" Neo G9, PG32UQX (4K 144Hz).

NEED THAT 8K 120Hz OLED DP2.1a (32" or even 38").
Click to expand...
Gonna get one of the 27" 240Hz oled panels myself this year and wait for 8k120 happily, myself. Even 5 or 6k high refresh would be nicer for 32". I don't like the lower ppi on 32" at 4k at my normal 2 foot seating distance for a monitor.
 
I hope that Samsung's news 2025 8K TVs finally have a chip that supports DSC 30:9 so that we can get 8K, 120 Hz, 10-bit, 4:4:4 input at the cost of a bit more compression.

The Samsung 2024 8K TVs already already had a 8K, 120 Hz, 10-bit, 4:4:4 panel, but their chip only had DSC 30:18 support for 8K, 60 Hz, 10-bit, 4:4:4 input and no DSC 30:9 support.
 
I feel like it's mostly the infrastructure support for 8K is why there aren't 8K monitors. When Blu-Ray was popular, the infrastructure wasn't needed. Now, it's online streaming, and I don't think Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, etc. have the bandwidth to support 8K 120Hz streaming. Not to mention that you'd need at least DP 2.1b with cables that support 8K 120Hz, as well as a graphics card that support it. I think right now the best they have with DP 2.1 are 16K cables that support 8K @60HZ.

If Blu-Ray went 8K with HDR support, and used a format better than Blu-Ray discs, I think we'd have 8K monitors by now. Instead of 8K monitors, I think they're going VR now, anyway.
 
El_Capitan said:
Not to mention that you'd need at least DP 2.1b with cables that support 8K 120Hz, as well as a graphics card that support it. I think right now the best they have with DP 2.1 are 16K cables that support 8K @60HZ.
Click to expand...
Actually, currently available DP40, DP54. DP80 cables can all do 8K, 120Hz, 10-bit, 4:4:4 with using at least DSC 30:8. https://saji8k.wordpress.com/displayport/
No cable can do 8K, 120Hz, 10-bit, 4:4:4 uncompressed.
Existing AMD and Intel GPU should be able to output 8K, 120Hz, 10-bit, 4:4:4 DSC 30:8 over DisplayPort. The new Nvidia GPU will be able to as well.

The hold up is no DisplayPorts on 8K TVs (which will probably never happen) and 8K TVs not supporting 8K,120Hz input over HDMI ports (which at least Samsung should be able to do).
 
DSC works well, it's "visually lossless"

DSC is good, especially at higher resolutions with tinier perceived pixel sizes vs view distances (higher PPD). Many of us are already using DLSS generated from a lower resolution, and sometimes frame gen to put a quasi-frame in between besides. Console user's demanding games use dynamic resolution too so are upscaling regularly for console 4k. So fewer people are actually seeing native content anymore on the most demanding games, and getting very good results.

There are different amounts of DSC that may be applied.

https://linustechtips.com/topic/729232-guide-to-display-cables-adapters-v2/?section=calc

DSC quality comparisons (from 2022).


[Colour Space Conversion (CSC)—or more precisely, chroma sampling—is a video technique that reduces bandwidth required by a video signal by maintaining the luminance data but lowers the colour information. This technique was developed in the 1950's, along with colour encoding to support the shift from black-and-white television broadcast to the introduction of colour. ]


https://www.pulse-eight.com/News/BlogDscVsCsc

DSCvsCSCVideoRandomPixelExample_RGB.png


. . . . . .

Not currently available, as was said, but eventually hdmi bandwidth will increase though, too

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-r...-2-2-of-the-hdmi-specification-302336817.html

"LAS VEGAS, Jan. 6, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- HDMI Forum, Inc. today announced the upcoming release of Version 2.2 of the HDMI Specification. The new HDMI Specification delivers enhanced options for the vast HDMI ecosystem, with more advanced solutions to create, distribute and experience the best end-user outcome."

.
"
The specification includes a new Ultra96 HDMI® Cable supporting 96Gbps bandwidth and enabling all the HDMI 2.2 Specification features. It is part of the HDMI Cable Certification Program requiring each model length to be tested and certified and display a Certification Label.

The new specification will be available to all HDMI 2.x Adopters and they will be notified when it is released in H1 2025."
 
MistaSparkul said:
That Mini LED can only do 1200 nits peak while the newest OLEDs are now doing 2000+. How the tables have turned :ROFLMAO: Yes yes I know it's not apples to apples comparison but it's still funny to see the "Mini LED MOAR BRIGHT" argument no longer apply here.
Click to expand...

But yes of course you know there is more to it than 2% window numbers. OLEDs are still quite dim compared to LCD's. An example; a C4 at 25% window is peak 490 nits according to RTings, my LCD TV at 25% is 1,700 nits. OLED would have to like triple in brightness to compete in my bright room. Dark room use only yes; OLED is king.

This CES has cemented my thought that nothing will replace my PG32 for quite a while. Especially since it's nice to not have to baby the monitor with screen savers, hiding taskbars etc. I hate that aspect of OLED.
 
Vega said:
But yes of course you know there is more to it than 2% window numbers. OLEDs are still quite dim compared to LCD's. An example; a C4 at 25% window is peak 490 nits according to RTings, my LCD TV at 25% is 1,700 nits. OLED would have to like triple in brightness to compete in my bright room. Dark room use only yes; OLED is king.

This CES has cemented my thought that nothing will replace my PG32 for quite a while. Especially since it's nice to not have to baby the monitor with screen savers, hiding taskbars etc. I hate that aspect of OLED.
Click to expand...

C4 is doo doo for sure. But the 2025 OLEDs so far, or at least the Samsung S95F, said it will do 2200 nits on a 10% window which actually surpasses the PG32. The 4000 nits crap is just pure marketing BS but seeing that last year's S95D managed 1600 nits on a 10% window in real testing I think there's a good chance the S95F will do 2000+. At this point the PG32 would only be brighter in the 25% window sizes and up and even that gap is starting to close.
 
MistaSparkul said:
C4 is doo doo for sure. But the 2025 OLEDs so far, or at least the Samsung S95F, said it will do 2200 nits on a 10% window which actually surpasses the PG32. The 4000 nits crap is just pure marketing BS but seeing that last year's S95D managed 1600 nits on a 10% window in real testing I think there's a good chance the S95F will do 2000+. At this point the PG32 would only be brighter in the 25% window sizes and up and even that gap is starting to close.
Click to expand...

True, but that's also a big TV vs a 32" monitor. OLED monitors are way dimmer than OLED TV's. I've done the whole big TV on the desk thing and always got rid of it. For my use I've found a 32" monitor for desktop/FPS and a 65" TV off to the side for single player games/flight sims works best. Trying to do everything on one screen catch-all IMO is futile. But then again my use case(s) are quite broad for a single display.
 
Vega said:
True, but that's also a big TV vs a 32" monitor. OLED monitors are way dimmer than OLED TV's. I've done the whole big TV on the desk thing and always got rid of it. For my use I've found a 32" monitor for desktop/FPS and a 65" TV off to the side for single player games/flight sims works best. Trying to do everything on one screen catch-all IMO is futile. But then again my use case(s) are quite broad for a single display.
Click to expand...

100%. I have my 4K 240Hz OLED for desktop and fps games but plan on getting a new TV this year for single player games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vega
like this
Even if they do make 8K monitors and you have a $3,000 GPU you're still probably going to get like 9fps in games like Crysis Alan Wake 2.
 
Any refinements or corrections, or different takes welcomed, but the way understand it is that to get the "true" HDR mastered color mapping 1:1 without sliding and lifting the scale to combat relative lighting conditions, HDR reference environment or near to it would be required, even for brighter FALD LCDs. Otherwise you end up needing, for example, to output 250 to 300 nit to get back to seeing "100nit" reference to your eyes due to how we see everything relatively.. Having to lift the range like that will likely have some effect on the peak output you can see, since screens have different % of screen brightness limitations.


There are some variables at play, as I see it.


..screens viewed farther away get some light intensity drop-off due to the inverse square law. Light intensity starts dropping off from up-against the screen measurements at any distance away from a screen, but realistically could have some more noticeable effect on perceived output with larger displays viewed considerably farther away.

.. settings and output parameters, including intensity, numbers based on being measured up against the screen, will be swinging up/down to the your eyes as ambient lighting changes over time or will have changed to your eyes in different static lighting setups due to how we see things relatively.

.. when running higher than reference brightness output levels vs ranges to compensate for brighter environments, I suspect that portions of hdr ranges may be static tone map compressed differently into a screen's parameters (with color detail/values lost the more it is compressed in the top portion of the range), that or the metadata left still trying to push values but just running out of the screen's range to bright blobs/fogs (clipping).


.. PPD changes with view distance (v.s. screen size) obviously, too.

.. as mentioned, OLED gaming monitors often have lower peak brightness than OLED gaming TVs (perhaps since they are expected to be doing more static material than a "TV" throughout their lifetime). Even though the inverse square law may make the perceived brightness of larger display viewed farther away somewhat less than it's up-against-the-screen specs, the gap in brightness between oled monitors and gaming tvs can still be a lot.

. . Getting features/specs only available in gaming tvs is still doable with a similar viewing angle and perceived screen size for those willing to decouple the screen from a desk and set it back ~ a foot from the far end of a desk. An OLED gaming tv works fine (for gaming at least), barring any discrepancies in features between OLED gaming tvs and monitors (currently, 240Hz 4k is limited for the most part to gaming monitors but a new hdmi 2.2 spec is being released which might change that in the following years).




. . . . .


Vega said:
Trying to do everything on one screen catch-all IMO is futile.
Click to expand...


I was interested in that 900D 8k FALD, despite it's size, during it's product cycle at some point (with discount) - but the response time is poor with some pretty damning reports from a few pc gamers that own it recently. Samsung TV's are also continually reported by hdtvtest to while in game mode have slower FALD transitions and transitions across a wider # of zones, so that may be contributing to the reported performance too. I know not all FALD LCD displays are the same vs response time and overdrive but considering what I've learned and mulled over, I don't think I'd be happy with spending a lot of money on one for gaming use compared to an OLED tradeoff wise, especially in the years ahead with much higher fpsHz capable screens and gpu tech benefiting more from extremely fast response times. I don't like using OLEDs for static desktop/app use, so using different tools for different jobs is still the way to go for me, too.
 
Last edited:
El_Capitan said:
I feel like it's mostly the infrastructure support for 8K is why there aren't 8K monitors. When Blu-Ray was popular, the infrastructure wasn't needed. Now, it's online streaming, and I don't think Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, etc. have the bandwidth to support 8K 120Hz streaming. Not to mention that you'd need at least DP 2.1b with cables that support 8K 120Hz, as well as a graphics card that support it. I think right now the best they have with DP 2.1 are 16K cables that support 8K @60HZ.

If Blu-Ray went 8K with HDR support, and used a format better than Blu-Ray discs, I think we'd have 8K monitors by now. Instead of 8K monitors, I think they're going VR now, anyway.
Click to expand...

I agree that the streaming bandwidth already being so limited that it has to use dynamic compression (kind of like console 4k uses dynamic resolution in a way) is definitely a factor, that and the fact that the general population probably streams most things instead of using disc based content out of convenience and cost.

However I also think a major factor is that 8k is not as valuable to most people's living room/home theater setups for media use, because most people don't have 100"+ tvs and they sit a fair distance from the display. At their typical viewing distances with typical tv sizes, a lot of people are probably getting over 100 PPD at 4k already while people using a 4k monitor (or 4k central space based uw) at a desk might be getting 60 PPD or so. Media playback at ~ 100PPD+ already looks pretty tight. Combine that with the fact that the price gap between a premium 4k tv and a 8k tv (with AI upscaling for 4k to quasi 8k) is so large, while the best 4k displays outperform the 8k displays in several facets to boot.

Considering both of those factors, there just isn't a big incentive to go to 8k for living room media use.

. .

Hulk said:
Even if they do make 8K monitors and you have a $3,000 GPU you're still probably going to get like 9fps in games like Crysis Alan Wake 2.
Click to expand...

You could always run 8k worth of desktop/app real-estate on a large enough screen, and optimally you'd be able to play games in different scenarios: using DLSS+Frame Gen. . at 8k, or at 4k upscaled to 8k, or resolutions of different sizes and aspect ratios letterboxed, e.g. ultrawide resolutions of 7680x2160, 5120x2160, and framed 16:9 resolutions like 4k, 5k, 6k, etc.

Outside of the potential of 8k to provide a much larger area of high ppd desktop/app real-estate on larger screens (without middle bezels from multiple monitors), providing more detailed images, and potentially better text on pcs, which would be nice (probably best in a true micro LED someday for all in one usage) . . . . I think 8k+ resolutions will be provide a lot more benefit in more advanced MR glasses in the long run because the entire FoV is "Screen space". That big of a working space means VR/MR's perceived pixel sizes are pretty huge as of now, (and in VR's case, as a lot of them are designed now, with a sweet spot resolution wise in the middle with the peripheral even worse PPD). I look forward to when a lightweight MR/VR set of glasses can show a 4k virtual screen PPD within it's larger world grid, that assuming I'm still around by then.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top