• 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.

Next Gen Display Experiences! HDR Polaris graphics

Is there a HDR standard at the moment? How many bits are we talking? NVidia cards can do 12bit colour depth. This sort of thing has come a long on drivers for a while. I would assume it'd be down to drivers and connection bandwidth?



Zv929HV.jpg.png
 
If i'm looking to spend £300 on a GPU i'm not going to spend near £500 on a screen am i? :p

If 1440P Free-Sync is around the £400+ mark its really defeating the objective of it

As i said in the thread i linked, people who don't spend mega £ on GPU's to drive 1440P at high frame rates to keep the game smooth are also not going to spend mega £ on a screen.

If some of those £250 1440P screens were Free-Sync a lot of them probably would upgrade their 1080P screens because they wouldn't need mega £ GPU's to drive them smoothly.

Instead what they have done is make it a feature only for some of the expensive screens where pepole don't actually care as much.

I can see screen vendors having exactly the same greed Derp thinking with HDR.
 
I did :p 27" 1440p 144hz Freesync is worth it my opinion. It's still cheaper than the competition.

HDR display same what I paid for this BenQ XL2730Z I'll be happy.
 
Considering HDR monitors dont even exist and this is just another of many 'promised' capabilities that may or may not transpire, then no, I'm not at all 'excited' about it at the moment.

I'll be excited for it when it actually becomes available and the results are there to be seen.
 
I know that - I mentioned it in my post. I was just pointing out a good monitor for gaming and other tasks that is in your budget range.

If you want a 1440p monitor designed specifically for gaming then good luck trying to find one under £400.

Yeah my bad :)

The saying "you get what you pay for " comes to mind..;)

Well, there are a lot of good 1440P screen for around the £250 - £300 mark, not one of them Free-Sync, well, one, with a useless range.

it seems to me they are trying to use it as a feature to drive sales of very expensive screens, which is really cynical and completely flawed, people who spend that kind of money on screens are more often not looking for Free-Sync than those in the lower price bracket.
 
If i'm looking to spend £300 on a GPU i'm not going to spend near £500 on a screen am i? :p

If 1440P Free-Sync is around the £400+ mark its really defeating the objective of it

Although I want to see it as cheap as possible of course, I think this isn't necessarily true.

A monitor can last you 3 GPU changes easily. So I think people may be inclined to spend up to double what they'd spend on a GPU.
 
Yes, there is a standard agreed upon now.

10-bit color.
90% P3 color gamut
1000 nits brightness

Sorry to sound like a broken record then, but if it's just 10bit that the GPU has to render and chuck out, that's nothing special, nor taxing for it surely?. The rest is just monitor right? It just seems to be that we need the game devs to get on board and the monitor tech at hand.
 
Last edited:
Well, there are a lot of good 1440P screen for around the £250 - £300 mark, not one of them Free-Sync, well, one, with a useless range.

it seems to me they are trying to use it as a feature to drive sales of very expensive screens, which is really cynical and completely flawed, people who spend that kind of money on screens are more often not looking for Free-Sync than those in the lower price bracket.

Would you really consider a 60hz monitor for gaming? Because those are the only 1440p monitors available for under £300. The Acer XF270 is one of the cheapest 1440p 144hz monitors out there, and as an added bonus it's an IPS monitor.
 
So something that doesn't exist (HDR monitor) dictates your purchasing decisions? :confused:

Yes. I like to get on the bus that is leaving, not the one that is arriving. Given I expect to want a HDR monitor when available, it makes sense to get a card that will support it.
 
Sorry to sound like a broken record then, but if it's just 10bit that the GPU has to render and chuck out, that's nothing special, nor taxing for it surely?. The rest is just monitor right? It just seems to be that we need the game devs to get on board and the monitor tech at hand.
Everything's about the monitor as far as I understand. Not really sure what was ever stopping modern GPU's from being able to process this in general, it was mainly about the application actually outputting the full HDR signal and having a display that could display it.

Would you really consider a 60hz monitor for gaming?
The vast majority of PC gamers(and gamers in general) get along with 60hz displays just fine.
 
Yes. I like to get on the bus that is leaving, not the one that is arriving. Given I expect to want a HDR monitor when available, it makes sense to get a card that will support it.

That's not gonna be here for at least another year or two, and I'm not even talking about affordable here, just here. Meanwhile new GPUs will be out and you will be able to cycle through other cards at that time if you really want it - all the while enjoying extra performance now. But making a decision based on things not being able to affect you yet? It's not that great of a decision. It's like opportunity cost, except in this case it's opportunity enjoyment.
 
Yeah my bad :)



Well, there are a lot of good 1440P screen for around the £250 - £300 mark, not one of them Free-Sync, well, one, with a useless range.

it seems to me they are trying to use it as a feature to drive sales of very expensive screens, which is really cynical and completely flawed, people who spend that kind of money on screens are more often not looking for Free-Sync than those in the lower price bracket.

The thing is, and I'm probably not alone here, I don't change a monitor as often as I change a GPU. It's the same reason I'll pay a bit more for a case or PSU, they're things I expect to last. I could buy a £25 case and a £35 PSU, but I'd rather get something decent as I'll probably want it to last. RAM I'm more likely to upgrade with a motherboard so I might buy the £100 set rather than the £250 set. I might buy the £300 CPU instead of the £800 CPU for the same reason.
A GPU is only half of the story, the monitor is the other half. No point paying a chunk of money for one if you cheap out on the other, in my option. A £500 4K gaming display with a £75 GPU seems like it wouldn't be getting the most out of the monitor. I suspect that reversing it is also true.

Also remember that unlike GSync Freesync doesn't increase the price by more than a few pounds.
 
That's not gonna be here for at least another year or two, and I'm not even talking about affordable here, just here. Meanwhile new GPUs will be out and you will be able to cycle through other cards at that time if you really want it - all the while enjoying extra performance now. But making a decision based on things not being able to affect you yet? It's not that great of a decision. It's like opportunity cost, except in this case it's opportunity enjoyment.

You seem very interested in my purchasing decisions. I expect HDR monitors to start appearing before the year is out. I currently have an R9 285 and buy a graphics card not more often than once every two years, generally when I want access to new features. So yes, it makes sense for my next purchase to be a current gen card.

Again you repeated explicitly the same unintelligent thing: "making a decision based on things not being able to affect you yet? It's not that great of a decision." I know something is coming and I plan for it. One wonders how you make it through the year and stay employed if you actually act the way you profess that I should.
 
Back
Top Bottom