Keep in mind that this was possible decades ago on CRTs.
I love 120 Hz (or higher) so much, but man, it's incredibly difficult to reach with any reasonably demanding games. Hitting a rock solid 60 fps is hard enough with high-end PC games let alone 120 fps. It takes serious muscle.
At least with g-sync we can escape the need to hold a steady frame-rate.
Indeed. I've frequently noted colorization issues with extra dithering and banding often becoming visible when using these modes. Awful.
A lot of people do other stuff besides gaming on the PC, and besides gaming PVA/IPS > 120hz always.
Preach it.
Both IPS and TN need to be replaced.
That would be so amazing. I cannot believe it never went anywhere. That and FED from Sony which was similar.#BringBackSED
Or rather bring it in the first place since it never really materialized.
I hope there will be 1080p/1980x1200 G-sync monitors on the market.
I'm not really interested in 1440p,since the trade-off between resolution and power required to achieve decent performances starts to become too inconvenient.
I would be far more interested in G-synced monitors with better panel technology rather than higher resolution.
I hope there will be 1080p/1980x1200 G-sync monitors on the market.
I'm not really interested in 1440p,since the trade-off between resolution and power required to achieve decent performances starts to become too inconvenient.
I would be far more interested in G-synced monitors with better panel technology rather than higher resolution.
OLED is just as good though, and you can actually build it.That would be so amazing. I cannot believe it never went anywhere. That and FED from Sony which was similar.
Had the potential to wipe the floor with every other display technology.
I disagree. Some panel technologies are much better than others. Throwing your hands in the air and saying "everything sucks" isn't all that helpful.IPS has its own problems. None of these panel technologies are the ones we deserve and the arguing is totally pointless.
OLED is just as good though, and you can actually build it.
I disagree. Some panel technologies are much better than others. Throwing your hands in the air and saying "everything sucks" isn't all that helpful.
I hope there will be 1080p/1980x1200 G-sync monitors on the market.
I'm not really interested in 1440p,since the trade-off between resolution and power required to achieve decent performances starts to become too inconvenient.
I would be far more interested in G-synced monitors with better panel technology rather than higher resolution.
OLED is very good, no doubt, but it's still sample and hold by nature.OLED is just as good though, and you can actually build it.
The drawbacks of PVA still outweigh IPS and TN. As in, there is simply no reason to consider an IPS or TN panel if an equivalently featured PVA panel is available. IPS received a lot of attention for color reproduction but it fails so hard in motion resolution and, most importantly, contrast. It cannot produce a properly black image (it's gray all the way) without resorting to dynamic adjustments (which are never a good solution).Helpful for what? You know full well that all current LCD panel types have their own shortcomings and Asus specifically address why this panel type was chosen on their product page.
OLED is fast enough that you should be able to do everything with it, motion wise, which you could with SED (i.e. pulse it to approximate a phosphor response).OLED is very good, no doubt, but it's still sample and hold by nature.
SED was completely different in that regard and could natively produce flawless motion with a 60 Hz input.
To educate people about these shortcomings and the advantages of various LCD types? I mean, most people seem to just think TN = bad and IPS = good, which is a start I guess, but adding PVA to their understanding and making it a bit more nuanced probably helps.Helpful for what? You know full well that all current LCD panel types have their own shortcomings and Asus specifically address why this panel type was chosen on their product page.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but pulsing the image (or backlight in an LCDs case) requires an input higher than 60 Hz.OLED is fast enough that you should be able to do everything with it, motion wise, which you could with SED (i.e. pulse it to approximate a phosphor response).
That depends on how you do it. If you do a full, hard on/off (1/0) pulse at 60 Hz, it will flicker. You need ~72 Hz at least for flicker fusion. But I wonder what would happen if you try to approximate a phosphor response curve in terms of brightness instead.Correct me if I'm wrong, but pulsing the image (or backlight in an LCDs case) requires an input higher than 60 Hz.
OLED is very good, no doubt, but it's still sample and hold by nature.
OLED is faster than LCD by default, but they both require tricks to work around motion issues.
Well obviously, because they built it with the wrong panel typeYeah yeah yeah yeah yeah
Panel type arguments are always par for the course when this monitor is discussed.
I don't know if I'd take it over the Eizo.It is the best, most awesome gaming panel that has been announced.
Yes. /dreamUsing OLED panel with strobing tech similar to Eizo 2421 would make godlike gaming monitor.
No such thing as a high quality TN panel
You can polish a turd but it's still a turd, it's inherently flawed technology it needs replacing not 'improving'
(not that IPS is better for gaming unless you like to look at smeared blurryness)
Saw a 4500 euro OLED tv in some store folder earlier this week, if only oled was still going to replace LCD techIt has less of the fundamental flaws of lcd technology at least it would be a good hold me over technology till someone invents something that functions like a CRT.
pixels that produce light and exponentially better response times (still sample and hold though) is so much better than the abomination that is backlit slow pixels sample and hold guttertrash lcd technology.
As for the 'dog food analogy', it's more like all restaurants were closed because they weren't 'trendy' enough anymore and have been replaced by 'trendy' high profit margin mc donalds, and now all you can eat is mc donalds slop.
OLED is very good, no doubt, but it's still sample and hold by nature.
SED was completely different in that regard and could natively produce flawless motion with a 60 Hz input.
OLED is faster than LCD by default, but they both require tricks to work around motion issues.
Plasma has better motion resolution than both of them but has other issues (slightly varied persistence between red, green and blue elements).
That said, an OLED PC monitor would be a dream and I hope someone decides to build one.
The drawbacks of PVA still outweigh IPS and TN. As in, there is simply no reason to consider an IPS or TN panel if an equivalently featured PVA panel is available. IPS received a lot of attention for color reproduction but it fails so hard in motion resolution and, most importantly, contrast. It cannot produce a properly black image (it's gray all the way) without resorting to dynamic adjustments (which are never a good solution).
I get subjectivity and all that, but your desire for colors I think mostly stems from wanting a workstation display first, and a gaming display second. A lot of the games that you are into don't really benefit from the things that make gaming panels gaming panels.Well obviously, because they built it with the wrong panel type
I don't know if I'd take it over the Eizo.
Yes. /dream
The yields keep improving, we will keep seeing price drops as the technology improves.
Sony doesThat said, an OLED PC monitor would be a dream and I hope someone decides to build one.
I actually don't care about color accuracy that much -- more about angle dependence. But I care a lot about contrast (which I'd argue is also highly relevant for gaming), and the Eizo is completely unmatched in that.I get subjectivity and all that, but your desire for colors I think mostly stems from wanting a workstation display first, and a gaming display second. A lot of the games that you are into don't really benefit from the things that make gaming panels gaming panels.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find many gamers who truly place color accuracy above motion resolution and illusion of motion. I'm sure there's a handful that think they do, but only because they're hard on the IPS bandwagon after being told countless times it's the best display type. Kind of like confirmation bias.
I said this on in other thread on this Monitor, but where is the other G-Sync partners? it's almost a year since G-sync announcement and we got nothing. and why Asus is the only one is making G-Sync monitors (and sadly this is the 2nd one and it is still TN and very expensive as well). I really need something else like VA LCD or Oled G-sync monitors and Asus don't seems to care about making that.
Not sure if I should blame Nvidia or the G-Sync partners (Acer, Philips, ViewSonic, AOC..ect) on this situation.
Considering no one except Eizo builds VA gaming monitors, and no one period builds OLED consumer monitors, I think it's pretty easy to see who's to blame.I really need something else like VA LCD or Oled G-sync monitors and Asus don't seems to care about making that.
Not sure if I should blame Nvidia or the G-Sync partners (Acer, Philips, ViewSonic, AOC..ect) on this situation.
All this talk about OLED and motion resolution made me realize something slightly amusing. Outside of resolution (and that's a huge one, sadly), the best gaming display I'll own will soon be a virtual screen on the Rift DK2![]()
I doubt it, unfortunately.OLED
1440p
G-Sync
120Hz(?)
Make it happen
Hopefully it can be consumer priced by the end of 2015.
OLED
1440p
G-Sync
120Hz(?)
Make it happen
Hopefully it can be consumer priced by the end of 2015.
Is this going to be like every other TN I've used that basically looks like crap when oriented vertically? I'm looking for a monitor of this size for a vertical application.
Considering no one except Eizo builds VA gaming monitors, and no one period builds OLED consumer monitors, I think it's pretty easy to see who's to blame.
Without NV, we probably wouldn't even have 120/144 Hz monitors.
(Oh, and Acer at least has announced G-sync monitors. Even a 4k one)
This is for gaming. If you want a vertical monitor you should get something that is intended for workstation use.Is this going to be like every other TN I've used that basically looks like crap when oriented vertically? I'm looking for a monitor of this size for a vertical application.
Short Answer: You'd typically still get Flicker.But I wonder what would happen if you try to approximate a phosphor response curve in terms of brightness instead.
edit: this is a inverse plot, if this isn't obvious.
Sony still builds OLED monitors.I thought samsung pretty much gave up on OLED R&D and no longer plan to move on to OLED from LCD ?
Sony has given up too,no?
Oh yeah, that'll be nice.All this talk about OLED and motion resolution made me realize something slightly amusing. Outside of resolution (and that's a huge one, sadly), the best gaming display I'll own will soon be a virtual screen on the Rift DK2![]()
I mix and match.Do people have dual monitor setups with two 1440p monitors or is most common to use two 1080p monitors? For that matter, do people mix and match?
Doesn't even have a single HDMI.. And its how much again?
Once you go IPS you never go back, it's like eating real food and then suddenly going back to dog food(TN panels).
As noted, you can't transmit 1440p @ 144 Hz over HDMI 1.4.Doesn't even have a single HDMI.. And its how much again?
Generally yes. If you're obsessed with IQ and screenshots, no.Isn't TN better for gaming? I heard at least....
Will wait for reviews, i have bad exerpience with so called 'turbo' buttons on displays for higher refresh rate. Also high quality TN is still shit. Besides you really need a beastly gpu setup for 120hz at 1440p with settings on max.
A lot of people do other stuff besides gaming on the PC, and besides gaming PVA/IPS > 120hz always.
wow, the base is hideous