• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Nvidia Kepler cards to get 4K@60Hz over HDMI (well sort of)

It'll look kind of awful with very solid dark areas and certain other colors being very solid and lacking definition. Interesting though none the less.
 
I read something about this earlier but thought it was a mistake. Good stuff if true and handy for those who have a 4K TV.
 
Rroff said:
It'll look kind of awful with very solid dark areas and certain other colors being very solid and lacking definition. Interesting though none the less.
Click to expand...

im not too sure about that.

Perceptually 4:2:0 is an efficient way to throw out unnecessary data, making it a good way to pack video, but at the end of the day it’s still ¼ the color information of a full resolution image. Since video sources are already 4:2:0 this ends up being a clever way to transmit video to a TV, as at the most basic level a higher quality mode would be redundant (post-processing aside).
Click to expand...
 
Depends on the source of your media, etc. though it might be useful for some video sources, etc. if you try and drive a game through it, it will look kind of bad.
 
Its daft actually because anything I want to view from any of the pc's in the house show up on the network and are accessible by the TV anyway, hence why I haven't used the 15m HDMI cable I bought.

I might just have to hook it up though just so I can see world of tanks in 4K, my 670 won't run it faster than 30fps I expect, so 30Hz wont be too much of an issue.
 
When Sony announced the "Hdmi 2.0" patch for their first gen 4K TV's, this is exactly how they did it too, so according to Sony's rules, nvidia just made their kepler cards HDMI 2.0

4:2:0 looks bad at 1080p, but at 4k I wouldnt mind betting that it isnt all that noticeable as the pixel density is so high anyway that itll make up for some of the per pixel loss of colour info
 
Last edited:
Orangey said:
This should not be necessary tbh, these next gen standards are taking way too long to appear in products.
Click to expand...

Don't get me started :p

It is genuinely ridiculous how the industry can be so held back by not being able to get people together in a room and come up with a cable to carry more information.

We hit 1080p as a "standard" and got utterly stuck in the mud. 1440p at over 60Hz took ridiculously long. I don't think anyone has come up with an official 120hz 4k standard, though I presume a monitor maker that was willing to do so could tile 2 half images and send them down two DP cables at 120hz a piece.
 
Let's get 60hz 4k sorted properly before we worry about 120hz 4k :p not much graphics setups could justify 120hz 4k anyway.
 
it is pretty obvious, standards are driven by what the market thinks will see mass market adoption, it is a bit chicken and egg, as the standards makers won't issue a new standard until the consumer technology is ready to take advantage of it, but the consumer technology can't take advantage of it until the standards are agreed and issued

things like 1440p and 120hz(+) are not mass market and only get enabled as a by-product of enough bandwidth being added for mass consumer standards e.g. 4K-60hz now allows 1440p-120hz, just like 1080p 120hz wasn't added to HDMI until set makers started wanting to add 3D to their sets
you won't get 4K-120hz over HDMI until someone comes up with an actual 4K 3D disc standard, which seems ever unlikely as 4K content looks to be moving to an online standard, so probably just a new codec gets added to TV sets and no one actually uses HDMI to view content anymore

consoles will be another 2 generations off running games at 4K, so no one will care for 10 years
 
How many people use their pc for a single use, if most don't why are screens aimed at single use scenarios.

Fact is people swarmed all over 120hz 1080p screens when they finally became available so they pushed, and made 144hz screens, people got them, then they finally made faster slightly higher res screens, and people bought them. The demand is there, the manufacturers are just stupid.

I both use the desktop and want more screen space and resolution to fit in say netbeans, a pdf and webpage all without having to app switch constantly. But I also game, and maybe I won't have the best graphics cards.

Put it this way, I have a 1080p 120hz screen now(well a few of them), so if I bought a 4k 120hz screen, primarily for the desktop advantage, and then I had a 1080p image upscaled to 4k, I wouldn't have a worse image, maybe no better, but I'm still better off for the majority of my screen usage. If I actually have the graphics cards then I have an advantage.

120hz is smoother in windows, on the desktop, 120hz is smoother in games regardless of if your fps is 5fps or 500fps. higher refresh rate means less screen blur for one thing which is a massive difference. 1080p 120 vs 60hz is night and day for most people. Everything feels smoother and better, less blurry. Scrolling on a webpage is smoother and less blurry. 60hz is just rubbish, it's a standard that should utterly die. It sucked on CRT's badly, and it sucks on LCD, for different reasons, CRT it was flickering and on LCD it's screen blur.

Every time they make a higher res screen with a decent refresh rate it sells by the bucket load, I can't believe they aren't pushing it.
 
drunkenmaster said:
How many people use their pc for a single use, if most don't why are screens aimed at single use scenarios.

Fact is people swarmed all over 120hz 1080p screens when they finally became available so they pushed, and made 144hz screens, people got them, then they finally made faster slightly higher res screens, and people bought them. The demand is there, the manufacturers are just stupid.

I both use the desktop and want more screen space and resolution to fit in say netbeans, a pdf and webpage all without having to app switch constantly. But I also game, and maybe I won't have the best graphics cards.

Put it this way, I have a 1080p 120hz screen now(well a few of them), so if I bought a 4k 120hz screen, primarily for the desktop advantage, and then I had a 1080p image upscaled to 4k, I wouldn't have a worse image, maybe no better, but I'm still better off for the majority of my screen usage. If I actually have the graphics cards then I have an advantage.

120hz is smoother in windows, on the desktop, 120hz is smoother in games regardless of if your fps is 5fps or 500fps. higher refresh rate means less screen blur for one thing which is a massive difference. 1080p 120 vs 60hz is night and day for most people. Everything feels smoother and better, less blurry. Scrolling on a webpage is smoother and less blurry. 60hz is just rubbish, it's a standard that should utterly die. It sucked on CRT's badly, and it sucks on LCD, for different reasons, CRT it was flickering and on LCD it's screen blur.

Every time they make a higher res screen with a decent refresh rate it sells by the bucket load, I can't believe they aren't pushing it.
Click to expand...

+1
 
What are they doing?


Now how will people know what is true HDMI 2.0? Who the heck wants the colors clipped like this. This from the same company who STILL force RGB limited to computer monitors through HDMI?


No doubt clipped chromo and RGB limited will look amazing on a 4K playing RGB full content haha.
 
Last edited:
Rofflay said:
What are they doing?


Now how will people know what is true HDMI 2.0? Who the heck wants the colors clipped like this. This from the same company who STILL force RGB limited to computer monitors through HDMI?


No doubt clipped chromo and RGB limited will look amazing on a 4K playing RGB full content haha.
Click to expand...

sony hdmi 2.0 ports only support 4:2:0
In fact I cant find a single Tv that supports 4:4:4 or even 4:2:2 via hdmi
All existing TV's as far as I can find, only support 4:2:0

Blu ray also only supports 4:2:0


At least nvidia are not claiming its hdmi 2.0, unlike TV manufacturers
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom