Meh

Big F#%$ing Gaming Format.
Doom changed my brain forever

This is a bit ridiculous.

At the same time I'm waiting for 27" 4k HDR G-Sync 144+Hz monitor for my table. Hopefully 2018 will end my wait.

4k on 27inches makes no sense imo. you can barely spot the differences, too small. I personally can´t, unless I´m on the desktop environment.

They need to show it in a living room with good distance from the display.

Basically is a big ass monitor right ?

Well there is many games for PC that is better play with a joypad. Some arcade racing games or platforms also hack n slash.

The price will be the biggest issue for sure.

A 65" panel with a thick housing, and it needs an external power brick? Wow, that's weak. Pretty pathetic, actually. At least it has a VESA mount, but the power brick kills it in my eyes. No thanks.

A shame really, 'cause these things make far more sense than a traditional TV these days. Smart TVs are almost universally crap (besides, they don't receive software updates for long enough to be useful unless you're a big fan of planned obsolescence), but the Shield TV is reportedly pretty good. Also, TV tuners are useless these days (at least here in Norway), so TVs are essentially monitors with plenty of inputs anyhow.

Give me a version with Freesync 2 (no integrated Shield TV needed, thanks) and plenty of inputs (at least 4 HDMI, and preferably a couple of DP too) and it would take the top spot for whenever I decide to replace my TV.

I don't see the point in a 65" monitor TBH

My friend has a 40" 4K screen and even that is too big for me, I hate having to move my head when gaming, the whole screen should be in my peripheral and if you're going to buy a LFD and then move it back so it's inside your peripheral you may as just buy a smaller screen and have it closer (obviously I'm not advocating sitting a foot from a 19" 720p but you know what I mean).

You can tell the quality of the screen by this picture:


Just check out the blur :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:.

This picture reminds of the times my grandmother told me to not sit so close to the TV.

ValantarA 65" panel with a thick housing, and it needs an external power brick? Wow, that's weak. Pretty pathetic, actually. At least it has a VESA mount, but the power brick kills it in my eyes. No thanks.

A shame really, 'cause these things make far more sense than a traditional TV these days. Smart TVs are almost universally crap (besides, they don't receive software updates for long enough to be useful unless you're a big fan of planned obsolescence), but the Shield TV is reportedly pretty good. Also, TV tuners are useless these days (at least here in Norway), so TVs are essentially monitors with plenty of inputs anyhow.

Give me a version with Freesync 2 (no integrated Shield TV needed, thanks) and plenty of inputs (at least 4 HDMI, and preferably a couple of DP too) and it would take the top spot for whenever I decide to replace my TV.

That's no power brick, it's an ATX power supply. Hopefully they integrate that between prototype and final product.

I like the idea of shield integration, but I suspect I won't like how much it adds to the price tag. It would be nice to see a thinner version without it.

Seems like this guy would be constantly moving his head around to see what's happening on the edges or he might miss something important coming at him. 27 inch monitor is best for me for gaming but to each his own I guess.

Prima.VeraYou can tell the quality of the screen by this picture:


Just check out the blur :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:.

Yeah, sure. Unless you're being sarcastic (which is of course possible), here's a simple explainer: what you can see there is the display outputting 3-4 frames (at least) during the time the camera has its shutter is open, exposing the sensor to light. The clearly defined edges in the "blur" make this clear. If the shutter speed is in the normal hand-held range (<1/25s unless the camera has really serious stabilization), that means it has some serious refresh rate going for it. 4 frames during 1/25s would mean a frame time of ~10ms. 120fps roughly equates to 8.3ms frame times, so that's in the ballpark for sure. Without knowing the shutter speed this is of course speculation, but a slower shutter speed than 1/25s is nigh on impossible to do handheld, and would result in people looking blurry unless they're extremely still.

Black HaruThat's no power brick, it's an ATX power supply. Hopefully they integrate that between prototype and final product.

I like the idea of shield integration, but I suspect I won't like how much it adds to the price tag. It would be nice to see a thinner version without it.

You didn't read the news post then, did you?

TechpowerupSomebody forgot to pack its power-brick. Thankfully, any ATX PSU can put out 12 VDC, and the booth staff improvised.

ValantarYeah, sure. Unless you're being sarcastic (which is of course possible), here's a simple explainer: what you can see there is the display outputting 3-4 frames (at least) during the time the camera has its shutter is open, exposing the sensor to light. The clearly defined edges in the "blur" make this clear. If the shutter speed is in the normal hand-held range (<1/25s unless the camera has really serious stabilization), that means it has some serious refresh rate going for it. 4 frames during 1/25s would mean a frame time of ~10ms. 120fps roughly equates to 8.3ms frame times, so that's in the ballpark for sure. Without knowing the shutter speed this is of course speculation, but a slower shutter speed than 1/25s is nigh on impossible to do handheld, and would result in people looking blurry unless they're extremely still.


You didn't read the news post then, did you?

Sure didn't. I still hope they integrate it before release. If they can pack a fully loaded desktop behind a monitor for an all-in-one I feel they can engineer a power supply behind that panel.

Black HaruSure didn't. I still hope they integrate it before release. If they can pack a fully loaded desktop behind a monitor for an all-in-one I feel they can engineer a power supply behind that panel.

They are still very much prototypes. With a panel that thick I am sure they will be integrated, at least I hope.

I am on a 50in 1080p screen. It is nice for controller games but just a bit big for KB&M gaming.
I'd like to see these BFGD's in the 40-48in range also along with the huge 65in screens, that would make a much more comfortable BIG SCREEN experience without making KB&M gaming too difficult.

Black HaruSure didn't. I still hope they integrate it before release. If they can pack a fully loaded desktop behind a monitor for an all-in-one I feel they can engineer a power supply behind that panel.

My thoughts exactly. Given that you get <20" monitors with internal power supplies, I've always found external power bricks for monitors to be a nuisance, and a sign of lazy design or the manufacturer cheaping out. I've never personally come across a monitor with a failed internal power supply, but I've seen plenty with failed power bricks. No wonder, really, given that cheapo garbage power bricks are easy to buy (and cheap to replace under warranty) for any OEM, while an internal PSU requires at least some design effort and heat-tolerant components.

Even if this uses 2-300W (which wouldn't surprise me for a 4k 120Hz panel that large), integrating the PSU (and keeping it fanless) should really not be a challenge at all.

UpgrayeddI am on a 50in 1080p screen. It is nice for controller games but just a bit big for KB&M gaming.
I'd like to see these BFGD's in the 40-48in range also along with the huge 65in screens, that would make a much more comfortable BIG SCREEN experience without making KB&M gaming too difficult.

Do you use that at a "monitor" or "TV" viewing distance? I'm reluctant to go beyond 27", at least for vertical panel size, at regular desk viewing distances. A 21:9 34" would probably be good, but anything beyond that would require me to move my head to see it all, making any PC UI pretty much useless. Of course, this is very subjective. But 65" at a regular desk viewing distance (like in the pictures here)? That's ridiculous.

I had a home theater projection screen that was too big for the room once. It's no fun if you have to move your head around. I would actually like to try a 27" 4K screen for gaming. As long as I can scale the desktop for normal usage as if 1920x1080 or 2560x1440.

I'm sceptical about Shield integration. Can these be used as a "dumb" monitor?

natr0nThis is a bit ridiculous.

Why? TV is "dead", young people already watch much more streamed content. There is no need for tuners any more. Many also want gaming related features, such as G-Sync, low input lag, etc.

I want a 65" OLED "dumb" monitor with G-Sync, which I can hook up to anything I want.
My largest concern with TVs today is the buggy and bloated smart functionality, which also will be the first thing to break the TV…

efikkanI'm sceptical about Shield integration. Can these be used as a "dumb" monitor?


Why? TV is "dead", young people already watch much more streamed content. There is no need for tuners any more. Many also want gaming related features, such as G-Sync, low input lag, etc.

I want a 65" OLED "dumb" monitor with G-Sync, which I can hook up to anything I want.
My largest concern with TVs today is the buggy and bloated smart functionality, which also will be the first thing to break the TV…

I was meaning how that dude is sitting in front of it so close is ridiculous. Need a few feet distance to enjoy that or any huge monitor.

natr0nI was meaning how that dude is sitting in front of it so close is ridiculous. Need a few feet distance to enjoy that monitor.

Probably due to a bad booth for display. Even 4K at that distance would be pointless.

Waaay to big (that's what she said!) for a PC monitor imo but there will definitely be a consumer market for these

Liviu CojocaruWaaay to big (that's what she said!) for a PC monitor imo but there will definitely be a consumer market for these

It's rather obvious that this isn't meant for traditional monitor use, but rather as a TV(ish) primarily for gaming.

efikkanProbably due to a bad booth for display. Even 4K at that distance would be pointless.

More of a poor setup than a bad booth (like they couldn't have planned for that? Yeah right), but you're right. 4k at 65" equals the pixel density of a ~22" 720p monitor. Even with six of those stacked, that's not pleasant to say the least. Horrendous DPI even for desktop usage. The jaggies would be very prominent.

Black HaruThat's no power brick, it's an ATX power supply. Hopefully they integrate that between prototype and final product.

I like the idea of shield integration, but I suspect I won't like how much it adds to the price tag. It would be nice to see a thinner version without it.

The article states they forgot to pack the power brick.

Prima.VeraYou can tell the quality of the screen by this picture:


Just check out the blur :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:.

Was thinking the same thing! Obviously no G-Sync!

I have to wonder how well HP is selling this Omen stuff. I know they're trying to corner the same market as Dell/Alienware, but the more the better the better imo. That means more PC gamers and longevity of the platform. Of course, most gamers would start building their own after the initial purchase from one of these companies.