I'm currently using a Philips 43" IPS monitor and the PPI is perfect for desktop use, if someone would rip the chips out of of the 65" TV and a bung them behind a decent 43-46" panel (curved would be a bonus) then I'd buy three in a heartbeat!
NVidia announce 4K 65" 120Hz HDR GSync
- Thread starter Squid Vicious
- Start date
One thing which people have stated about the above VRR and TVs, nvidia cards won't be able to take advantage of this.... So maybe this will start to put the pressure onto nvidia supporting the industry/open adaptive/free sync standard.....
Yup no doubt there are some that are vastly into that stuff and will also be using m+K via 3rd party hardware but we are talking about a very small minority. I certainly can't see anyone in the console sub forum giving up their OLEDs and the like just to go back to LCD for a sub 5ms input lag reading.
Yup no doubt there are some that are vastly into that stuff and will also be using m+K via 3rd party hardware but we are talking about a very small minority. I certainly can't see anyone in the console sub forum giving up their OLEDs and the like just to go back to LCD for a sub 5ms input lag reading.
A small minority but a reasonable sized percentage of the relatively small number of people who'd be opening their wallets for a display like this.
Having got into The Division recently its been a bit of a hoot (from a PC perspective) seeing how some of the hardcore players approach the game on the console side :s
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,960
Tbh I think that's wrong, 2.1 being an actual standard and all they won't be able to chop stuff out surely?
Apparently VRR isn't going to be a mandated part of the standard despite some talk of that originally.
The above video is saying that this is possible without HDMI 2.1.
HDMI 2.1 TVs won't be here until the end of the year or very possibly next year.
That's why I said "Here's hoping that it will be possible to enable this on some current TVs with a firmware update!"
Could very well be possible as a lot of people were able to enable freesync on non-freesync monitors via CRU.Also, aren't the latest nvidia cards using the latest DP which has the adaptive sync standard yet nvidia still has it disabled? So yeah, I don't think nvidia care
Permabanned
I kinda like the idea of not having separate displays for TV (media PC) and PC. Perhaps this one could serve as both.
Associate
i have a 55" and it is too big to game on comfortably without sitting at least 6' away minimum. a 65" is ridiculous for desktop gaming.
would be fine for sofa gaming
would be fine for sofa gaming
i have a 55" and it is too big to game on comfortably without sitting at least 6' away minimum. a 65" is ridiculous for desktop gaming.
would be fine for sofa gaming
Yup that is utterly ridiculous!
Best setup for 40+" displays is to have the display mounted as you would with a big TV and sit far back on a comfortable couch/chair and then have a normal sized monitor for the desktop. Of course you need a somewhat big room to pull this of though.
I could manage a 40" wall mounted from my current seated position. My 34" is nearly 10" away from the wall and just right, so a 40" flat against the wall would be great... anything more would not be practical for daily use.
As said, this seems to only be for those people with powerful HTPC's in the living room... unless you would stream via Shield to this? Seems to me that the far bigger market (albeit still somewhat niche) is around the 40" size. 65" is nuts for most people and I can't begin to imagine how expensive this will be.
As said, this seems to only be for those people with powerful HTPC's in the living room... unless you would stream via Shield to this? Seems to me that the far bigger market (albeit still somewhat niche) is around the 40" size. 65" is nuts for most people and I can't begin to imagine how expensive this will be.
Last edited:
Soldato
I use a 32" BenQ monitor at 4K. For desktop use, the PPI is just on the usable side at 1:1 with no UI scaling. Something like 34-36" I think would be absolutely perfect for anyone to use comfortably.
32" should be fine, much bigger and it starts looking a bit ridiculous on your desk, tried with a 40" once and it just doesn't work, you would need a huge desk.
Permabanned
Wonder if they can even make one without quality control issues.
I got a sneaky suspicion that Nvidia is doing this because of Gsync, and they are trying to milk as much as they can from Gsync, before VRR,120hz @4k with HDMI 2.1, which is basically free-sync with more bandwith through hdmi, for tv's, which should take over by next year,
and it means they would have have to support, VRR, with there new graphics cards, and hopefully they would eventually lose g sync, as no one will want it and pay a premium for gsync over hdmi 2.1 and all the benefits that come with it!!
I am pretty they will have no choice but to support it, with there new cards, or are they trying to corner the large screen TV market with gsync?
and it means they would have have to support, VRR, with there new graphics cards, and hopefully they would eventually lose g sync, as no one will want it and pay a premium for gsync over hdmi 2.1 and all the benefits that come with it!!
I am pretty they will have no choice but to support it, with there new cards, or are they trying to corner the large screen TV market with gsync?
Last edited:
Associate
65" is really stupid. People don't have their gaming PC's in their living rooms and use them sitting on the couch. 40" would have been a massive hit.
If it had a real proper working picture-by-picture mode I might be tempted - stick like 2560x1440 in one corner for normal use and even a lot of gaming and have the option to display other information around it or swap over to "fullscreen" for certain things.
Personally don't get on with "4K" type resolutions for the main/primary display for a lot of my usages.