this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
126 points (94.4% liked)

Technology

37676 readers
119 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 55 points 11 months ago (10 children)

"Now wait for 1,000 Hz content and capable GPUs."

Forget the content and GPU, you need an input port capable of that.

HDMI 2.1 and Display Port 1.4 cap out at, what? 240?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

Easy, just connect 4 cables!

[–] [email protected] 24 points 11 months ago (5 children)

With DSC DP 1.4 can do 4k 360 but it still ain't close to 1000

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

So you just need 3 4090's with 1 displayport each to the monitor and a whole new version of sli.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

.. I actually wonder if the graphics cards could multiplex across multiple dp to a single display.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I vaguely remember that being a thing for early commercial 8k projectors, but I don't know anything about the implementation.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Two ports at once have been used for Samsung's 5120x1440 240hz monitors. Each port refreshes half of the screen and there are two scanlines going from left to right. Using the calc here you might be able to use two DP2.1 UHBR80 cables with DSC and nonstandard timings to run 4k 1000hz 10bit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Who needs 1000hz refresh rate? I understand it's impressive, but 120hz already looks smooth to the human eye.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Who needs 4K when 1080 already looks sharp to the human eye.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

Yeah, for me, I'm looking for prettier not fastest after 120 Hz or so

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Competitive (professional) gamers?

Seems there are diminishing returns, but at least some gains are measurable at 360.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

In thought that 60Hz was enough for most games, and that for shooters and other real time games 120 or 144 was better. However, it reaches a point where the human eye can't notice even if it tried.

Honestly, going up in framerate t9o much is just a waste of GPU potency and electricity.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (3 children)

It's pretty easy to discern refresh rate with the human eye if one tries. Just move your cursor back and forth really quickly. The number of ghost cursors in the trail it leaves behind (which btw only exist in perception by the human eye) is inversely proportional to the refresh rate.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago

A better way to look at this is frametime.

At 60 FPS/Hz, a single frame is displayed for 16.67ms. At 120 Hz, a single frame is displayed for 8.33ms. At 240 Hz, a single frame is displayed for 4.16ms. A difference of >8ms per frame (60 vs 120) is quite noticeable for many people, and >4ms (120 vs 240) is as well, but the impact is just half as much. So you get diminishing returns pretty quickly.

Now I'm not sure how noticeable 1000 Hz would be to pretty much anyone as I haven't seen a 1000 Hz display in action yet, but you can definitely make a case for 240 Hz and beyond.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

So it's not really a 4K 1000Hz screen then, if it's just togglable between being a 4k 240 Hz screen and a 1080p 1000 Hz screen.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 11 months ago

From what I understand in the article the prototype TCL panel being demonstrated is actually 4k@1000hz. They mention a few competitors with multiple modes right after which could be where the confusion comes from.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's not what the article says?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Oops, I misread, that was a different monitor

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

"Create your own penis showing game"

That's what the tech world has come to recently, especially with monitors and smartphones.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Recently?

Tech has always been about pushing boundaries. And that's not a bad thing

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand this comment; are they not supposed to improve?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Why only 4K? We have 8K monitors now.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

Performance Mode > Quality Mode ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›