qubitIt would be absolutely awesome for car racing games. When BenQ release one like this it will also have their blur reduction technology which will take smoothness to another level.

<--- The hole point of my new build Now the wait for Pascal :D

cracklezI was talking about your particular setup, which in your specs reveals you have Titan-X tri-SLI. Probably even less of a percentage of people that I mentioned that have that.

I understand why you don't enable Hairworks, but not full AA? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of being able to "max" out a game so to speak? I stand corrected. I'd like to see you bench that game with everything maxed with no Hairworks and see what the average FPS is if you have the time.

980ti is basically a Titan X, and adding a 3rd card doesn't grant much benefit in games. So that being said what I said is relevant to 4k performance discussion. What you're saying is nobody will get high FPS in TW3 at 4k which is wrong. I don't need AA with 4k, only simple edge smoothing like FXAA which almost does nothing in terms of performance. If it's ok with the folding guys I'll bring home my second Titan X to show you this performance (I leave 2 at work to fold).

my cards dont seem to have a problem with 2560 x 1440 @ 165 hrz.. with just one display port cable.. mind you i can still only manage 75 fps in witcher.. :)

is somebody saying that these new extra wide high refresh rate monitors are not going to work with current hardware because if so i think they are talking bollocks.. why make the things if this is the case..

trog

I don't have enough first-born sons to get one of these.

trog100my cards dont seem to have a problem with 2560 x 1440 @ 165 hrz.. with just one display port cable.. mind you i can still only manage 75 fps in witcher.. :)

is somebody saying that these new extra wide high refresh rate monitors are not going to work with current hardware because if so i think they are talking bollocks.. why make the things if this is the case..

trog

DisplayPort 1.3

btarunrSamsung is giving finishing touches to a new fleet of high-speed ultra-wide monitors. These monitors will be among the first to leverage DisplayPort 1.3, to serve up blazing fast 144 Hz refresh rates, on resolutions as high as 3440 x 1440 pixels.

You could plug in your two 980 Ti in SLI but you'll be limited to DisplayPort 1.2 capabilities.

PP Mguire980ti is basically a Titan X, and adding a 3rd card doesn't grant much benefit in games. So that being said what I said is relevant to 4k performance discussion. What you're saying is nobody will get high FPS in TW3 at 4k which is wrong. I don't need AA with 4k, only simple edge smoothing like FXAA which almost does nothing in terms of performance. If it's ok with the folding guys I'll bring home my second Titan X to show you this performance (I leave 2 at work to fold).

The fact that AA doesn't help much at 4K is not what I am arguing against. What you "need" is irrelevant when it comes to benching a game at maxed settings to see how high your FPS can possibly be. I understand your point of view though, however what I'm saying is that based on TPU's review here: www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_Waterforce/ posted on Nov 26, 2015, even if you achieve 100% scaling with 2, heck with even 3 Titan X's in SLI, you cannot and will not get 79.2 FPS with all settings maxed (no Hairworks of course). Hence the point I'm making in that getting a 4K 120hz or 144hz monitor is debatable for games like TW3, or Crysis 3 for that matter even if said person has the money to build such a beastly PC. I know my point is a bit moot and I'm addressing my argument to a miniscule audience, but this is in the name of benching!!!!! :D

edit: You don't have to interrupt the folding action you have going with your Titans to entertain me :)

cracklezThe fact that AA doesn't help much at 4K is not what I am arguing against. What you "need" is irrelevant when it comes to benching a game at maxed settings to see how high your FPS can possibly be. I understand your point of view though, however what I'm saying is that based on TPU's review here: www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_Waterforce/ posted on Nov 26, 2015, even if you achieve 100% scaling with 2, heck with even 3 Titan X's in SLI, you cannot and will not get 79.2 FPS with all settings maxed (no Hairworks of course). Hence the point I'm making in that getting a 4K 120hz or 144hz monitor is debatable for games like TW3, or Crysis 3 for that matter even if said person has the money to build such a beastly PC. I know my point is a bit moot and I'm addressing my argument to a miniscule audience, but this is in the name of benching!!!!! :D

edit: You don't have to interrupt the folding action you have going with your Titans to entertain me :)

Yes, and I'm not talking about benching (don't think anybody was actually), I'm talking about playing. If you turn AA on with a 4k screen you're just looking to lower FPS for nothing. The argument from you was that I can't because I said I can, and now you're trying to say that I can't because you need to "max" settings to bench. Lucky for me, I can play the game just fine at higher resolution without AA at higher frames. If I wanted to stick around a 60fps target I could even leave hairworks on.

Just for shits and giggles I'm installing the game now to compare what I get vs the above.

Edit: We'll take this to a PM to not clutter the thread up.

webdigoIs sitting on a 27" considered old school? Is the new trend +30"??
I dont know about you guys, but I sit around 50cm (19.6 inches) away from my monitor. Playing on anything bigger than 27" would just be too much. At least for me.

Remember that these are 21:9 , a 30" version would be the equivalent of a 22" or 23" monitor with a wider aspect ratio than 16:9 , just to make it simpler!

webdigoIs sitting on a 27" considered old school? Is the new trend +30"??
I dont know about you guys, but I sit around 50cm (19.6 inches) away from my monitor. Playing on anything bigger than 27" would just be too much. At least for me.

Everybody has a preference. I couldn't game on more than 24" until I was forced to use a 40" TV for a while as a monitor. Now all I want is big screen 2ft from my face.

I'd love one of these, but really 24" on my monitors is my happy spot on the sizing. Other than I did love my younger Brother's Asus ProArt 27", kinda tempted me to up to a single 27" if I can find a decent 2k or 4k for a steal of a price (got my 2 24's for a steal, the Dell was only $40 thanks to someone offloading equipment due to their offices upgrading lol)

ZoneDymoYeah and nobody is stopping anyone from using 2 cables to get the end result, some monitors already are doing that.

That't the normal fix. It's what dell does for their 5k monitors.

SammyHayabuzaRemember that these are 21:9 , a 30" version would be the equivalent of a 22" or 23" monitor with a wider aspect ratio than 16:9 , just to make it simpler!

It is basically the same height as 24". Not 22 or 23".
www.displaywars.com/30-inch-21x9-vs-24-inch-16x9

trog100these curved extra wide monitors will not need as much gpu power to drive them as a more normal 35 inch aspect ratio monitor at 4 K..

the 1440 remains the same they just get wider.. maybe half as many pixels again as opposed to twice as many with normal 4K..

[...]

trog

3.440 x 1.440 pixels is 34% more load than 2.560 x 1.440 pixels.
&
3.820 x 2.160 pixels is 66,6% more load than 3.440 x 1.440 pixels which is a huge difference!


→ That said I'd choose 1.440 Ultrawide over 4k any day.

Edit: Needless to say I'm hyped about 144hz 1.440 Ultrawide (HDR?) and pairing it with Pascal/Polaris.

The next big Thing for Monitors is HDR. However, youll Need new Cards that Support that.
If you at the same time want lots fo herz, thats gonna cost extra bandwith.
Take a look here, this post was from a AMD presentation


This is what Display port 1.3 will be able to attain.
What i wanted, 4k,120Hz, HDR, is a Display-Port-Generation away.

It seems the sweet spot is 3440x1440@144Hz with HDR.

Because when Display port 1.3 finally allows 4k@120Hz, there is a new gangsta in Town, named HDR.
Then the next complain would be, after youll get 4k@120Hz, that it doesnt have HDR.
3440x1440@144Hz with HDR has all the ingredient, High Res, High Hz, HDR.



More info videocardz.com/57911/amd-displayport-1-3-and-hdmi-2-0-in-2016-radeon-gpus-first-freesync-over-hdmi-monitors

Bytales.

It seems the sweet spot is 3440x1440@144Hz with HDR.
[...]
3440x1440@144Hz with HDR has all the ingredient, High Res, High Hz, HDR.

... and the much better aspect ratio!
3.440 x 1.440 all the way. Hail to the king!

Now the question is... Will these Samsung monitors support HDR (native 10-bit)?

why not curved :banghead:

hellrazorI don't have enough first-born sons to get one of these.

I know. I need a girlfriend just so I can get her pregnant and sell the baby for this monitor. It makes my 1080p Viewsonic VA-panel cry.

Hayder_Masterwhy not curved :banghead:

That's actually the best part about it :rockout:

BytalesThe next big Thing for Monitors is HDR. However, youll Need new Cards that Support that.
If you at the same time want lots fo herz, thats gonna cost extra bandwith.
Take a look here, this post was from a AMD presentation


This is what Display port 1.3 will be able to attain.
What i wanted, 4k,120Hz, HDR, is a Display-Port-Generation away.

It seems the sweet spot is 3440x1440@144Hz with HDR.

Because when Display port 1.3 finally allows 4k@120Hz, there is a new gangsta in Town, named HDR.
Then the next complain would be, after youll get 4k@120Hz, that it doesnt have HDR.
3440x1440@144Hz with HDR has all the ingredient, High Res, High Hz, HDR.



More info videocardz.com/57911/amd-displayport-1-3-and-hdmi-2-0-in-2016-radeon-gpus-first-freesync-over-hdmi-monitors

I don't really give a rat's ass about HDR. 4:4:4 4k @ 120hz is going to be the dog's bollocks.

You wont give a damn about HDR, that is untill you see one. Then you will want nothing else.

People kept saying the same thing about IPS panels and color. I have IPS at work for color accuracy, it's only coincidence that my TV currently is PLS. I'd still be happy with my TN Swift if Gsync wasn't a bugger.

Even if the minitor is native 10 bits, the games, movies and pictures are still 8 bit so whats the big deal anyways??

Prima.VeraEven if the minitor is native 10 bits, the games, movies and pictures are still 8 bit so whats the big deal anyways??

Most of the movie studios have promised HDR10 or higher through 4k Blu-Ray & streaming content.

DethroyThat's actually the best part about it :rockout:

you can't see the corners well with flat 34"

next upgrade will be 21:9, HDR, 120+Hz, 34/35".

XzibitMost of the movie studios have promised HDR10 or higher through 4k Blu-Ray & streaming content.

Indeed. However I have yet to see a 4K BluRay with 40bit encoding on a 40bit TV/monitor. I wonder if the quality is bigger than standard 32bit...