| LG's 84-inch prototype 4K display will join a growing number of 4K TVs at CES. Photo: LG |
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/12/lg-84-inch-4k-display/
| LG's 84-inch prototype 4K display will join a growing number of 4K TVs at CES. Photo: LG |
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/12/lg-84-inch-4k-display/
They say it is a 3D display, wouldn't that by default 120hz minimum?Originally Posted by microfister
i notice they fail to list a refresh rate...
what i want is a 27 inch 1600p monitor that has 120hz refresh rate and supports 3d....
I know but you get the idea of just using same pixel density and combining 4 x 1080p screens to make this. If they get a 40< model then its a true 3840×2160 even though 84 is true 3840×2160. TVs today dont lack quality they display but source. 90% of content i play in my 1080p is SD and PS3 and XBOX are the only 720p source.Originally Posted by djriful
But there is bezel edge (border)!
no, alot of the monitors that support 3d are only 60hz, which means at most 30hz per eye.Originally Posted by djriful
They say it is a 3D display, wouldn't that by default 120hz minimum?
I don't know if it makes any difference, but you realize that this is a TV and not a monitor, right?Originally Posted by microfister
no, alot of the monitors that support 3d are only 60hz, which means at most 30hz per eye.
the 120hz 3d monitors are quite expensive. and i dont believe there is a 1600p monitor anywhere that has 120hz refresh rate... too much for it to handle
I disagree with that. Today we have fast enough and cheap enough to broadcast them in 1080p, is just the ISP company being a cheapbutt to make them cheaper and trying to milking in anyway they could..Originally Posted by chinesekiwi
People do understand that digital TV is 50Hz / 60Hz right and that HDTV is 1080i right?
The bandwidth cost to broadcast in 1080p and higher is far too high at the moment.
for TVs, the 100 / 120Hz is interpolated. 120Hz TVs are not the same as 120Hz monitors.
plus almost every cable company in america is a legal monopoly in its own market meaning there is no competition for prices or bandwidth.Originally Posted by DrDarkTempler
I disagree with that. Today we have fast enough and cheap enough to broadcast them in 1080p, is just the ISP company being a cheapbutt to make them cheaper and trying to milking in anyway they could..
Today Tech can easily make 1Gbps for less then $100/mo
unless Unionized worker stop asking for more money and ISP company making them cheaper for consumer, then we can see 1080p 1600p or 9999p broadcasted
Most people can tell the difference between (real) 120hz and 60hz. It looks smoother.Originally Posted by Darkpriest667
plus almost every cable company in america is a legal monopoly in its own market meaning there is no competition for prices or bandwidth.
Frankly... ME want... this would be a nice upgrade from my 47' monitor right now.
And genius above.. if your eyes even see faster than 70 frames a second (60 is what youll get on a 60hz MONITOR or a 120HZ tv) THE NSA would like a word with you. I say this repeatedly and no one gets the connotation .. maybe someday someone will.
Yes they are, and that's why we have really REALLY crap service.Originally Posted by Darkpriest667
plus almost every cable company in america is a legal monopoly in its own market meaning there is no competition for prices or bandwidth.
Frankly... ME want... this would be a nice upgrade from my 47' monitor right now.
And genius above.. if your eyes even see faster than 70 frames a second (60 is what youll get on a 60hz MONITOR or a 120HZ tv) THE NSA would like a word with you. I say this repeatedly and no one gets the connotation .. maybe someday someone will.
So what I'm hearing is that all these 1ms monitors are a waste of money? =pOriginally Posted by OwnedINC
Yes they are, and that's why we have really REALLY crap service.
And human eyes don't see in fps, annnnnd the human eye has been shown to be able to detect upto 3ms.
Where do I submit my resume? Never thought to put "can play video games at 120hz!" on it.Originally Posted by Darkpriest667
So what I'm hearing is that all these 1ms monitors are a waste of money? =p
You're right they don't see FPS they see response times and I'm telling you anyone that has an eye to brain response time faster than what we would consider 60+ FPS has some real opportunity working with people in the intelligence agencies. Making a hell of a lot more money than they probably make now.
