Gigabyte's AORUS FO32U2P Sports DisplayPort 2.1 and a 4K 240 Hz QD-OLED Panel

[maxe1]

Do you guys even know if the gigabyte monitor will have a Option in the Menu to turn off DSC?
As far as i know only the Asus has this Option. MSI not.

 

[Bobaganoosh]

Do you guys even know if the gigabyte monitor will have a Option in the Menu to turn off DSC?
As far as i know only the Asus has this Option. MSI not.

Looking at the manual posted by trsttte, yes. page 15: "DP DSC: Enable/Disable DP DSC function."

For those that are interested, the DP 2.1 solution is from Realtek, but I don't have any further details on what it is.

Any update on release date?

 

[TheLostSwede]

Any update on release date?

No, sorry, but it should be soon-ish.

 

[Bobaganoosh]

No, sorry, but it should be soon-ish.

Thanks for the response! I've not bought much from gigabyte, but I'm really hoping this is a winner...and that it shows up soon.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Thanks for the response! I've not bought much from gigabyte, but I'm really hoping this is a winner...and that it shows up soon.

Let me see if I can get some more details.

 

[Dr. Dro]

All AMD 7000 client cards support DP 2.1 at 54 Gbps and PRO W7900 and W7800 support 80 Gbps. You want DP 2.1? Go AMD now or wait for next gen GPUs.

Now why exactly is AMD gating UHBR20 behind Radeon Pro then? Isn't the display controller the same?

 

[Tek-Check]

Now why exactly is AMD gating UHBR20 behind Radeon Pro then? Isn't the display controller the same?

It's either segmentation or better data traces on PCB of Pro cards. We do not know until we see the analysis of PCBs.

 

[Dr. Dro]

It's either segmentation or better data traces on PCB of Pro cards. We do not know until we see the analysis of PCBs.

Which amount to segmentation regardless just thought it's a weird limitation to impose on a GPU

 

[TheLostSwede]

Thanks for the response! I've not bought much from gigabyte, but I'm really hoping this is a winner...and that it shows up soon.

The monitors are apparently being shipped as of right now and should arrive in retail over the next couple of weeks in major markets.

 

[Sodalitas]

New pricing update was shared by Gigabyte Angela on Reddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OLED_Gaming/comments/1bhzcx0

FO32U2P costs USD 1200. https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16824012082
FO32U2 costs USD 1100. https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16824012081

 

[Bobaganoosh]

Pre-orders on Newegg just went live. It says:

• Release Date: 4/30/2024

Edit less than an hour later:

 

[Tek-Check]

Which amount to segmentation regardless just thought it's a weird limitation to impose on a GPU

Let's see it in a wider perspective. AMD is the first company in the world to have introduced DP 2.1 on all graphics engines - in 2022 on APUs from Rembrandt onwards, in 2022 on Raphael CPUs and in 2022 on client and professional GPUs.

- UHBR10 40 Gbps was enabled for CPUs/APUs
- Result? No single motherboard, mini-PC or laptop vendor has exposed this port so far. It's them to blame for not using what CPU/APU can offer.

- UHBR13.5 54 Gbps was enabled for client GPUs
- Result? Only Samsung made an annoucement in 2022 to bring support for DP 2.1 on Neo G9 57-inch. Others? You can see how sluggish it is...

- UHBR20 80 Gbps was enabled for Pro GPUs
- Result? No professional monitor vendor has made any announcement whatsoever to support this speed, not even Asus with ProArt monitor line

The immediate question is why should AMD be wasting their time and money supporting new, modern video standard at any bandwidth if others are so lazy to follow through on this, enable it on their devices and bring benefit to us consumers?

Still, AMD enabled DP 2.1 on all new silicon despite few monitor vendors making any commitments. Nvidia will not have any DP 2.1 until Blackwell and Intel has only enabled it recently on Meteor Lake CPUs and via Barlow Ridge TB5 chip. There is one single laptop announced with TB5 - Blade 18.

The real problem here is not bandwidth segmentation, but other companies lacking ambition to move the industry towards DP 2.1 where necessary. AMD has done their job. Others have not. 54 Gbps port on RDNA3 is fine in vast majority of cases, as it supports uncompressed signal up to:
- 4K/230Hz 8-bit or 4K/240Hz RGB with custom timings
- 4K/187Hz 10-bit RGB
- 5K/136Hz 8-bit RGB
- 5K/110Hz 10-bit RGB

HDMI 2.1 FRL cannot do any of the above without DSC compression.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Let's see in a wider perspective. AMD is the first company in the world to have introduced DP 2.1 on all graphics engines - in 2022 on APUs from Rembrandt onwards, in 2022 on Raphael CPUs and in 2022 on client and professional GPUs.

- UHBR10 40 Gbps was enabled for CPUs/APUs
- Result? No single motherboard, mini-PC or laptop vendor has exposed this port so far. It's them to blame for not using what CPU/APU can offer.

- UHBR13.5 54 Gbps was enabled for client GPUs
- Result? Only Samsung made an annoucement in 2022 to bring support for DP 2.1 on Neo G9 57-inch. Others? You can see how sluggish it is...

- UHBR20 80 Gbps was enabled fpr Pro GPUs
- Result? No professional monitor vendor has made any announcement whatsoever to support this speed, even not Asus with ProArt monitor line

The immediate question is why should AMD be wasting their time and money supporting new, modern video standard at any bandwidth if others are so lazy to follow through on this, enable it on their devices and bring benefit to us consumers?

Still, AMD enabled DP 2.1 on all new silicon despite few monitor vendors making any commitments. Nvidia will not have any DP 2.1 until Blackwell and Intel has only enabled it recently on Meteor Lake CPUs and via Barlow Ridge TB5 chip. There is one single laptop announced with TB5 - Blade 18.

The real problem here is not bandwidth segmentation, but other companies lacking ambition to move the industry towards DP 2.1 where necessary. AMD has done their job. Others have not. 54 Gbps port on RDNA3 is fine in vast majority of cases, as it supports uncompressed signal up to:
- 4K/230Hz 8-bit or 4K/240Hz RGB with custom timings
- 4K/187Hz 10-bit RGB
- 5K/136Hz 8-bit RGB
- 5K/110Hz 10-bit RGB

HDMI 2.1 FRL cannot do any of the above without DSC compression.

Fair enough. I mean even HBR3 is plenty enough for all but some edge cases nowadays.

 

[trsttte]

Which amount to segmentation regardless just thought it's a weird limitation to impose on a GPU

Not necessarily, different design goals are involved, consumer segmented is geared towards highest memory speeds and highest power envelope, professional segment goes for stability for example with ECC memory and more conservative power and memory clocks.

Intel has only enabled it recently on Meteor Lake CPUs and via Barlow Ridge TB5 chip. There is one single laptop announced with TB5 - Blade 18.

There's also Intel ARC gpus but it's fair to forget about them

Fair enough. I mean even HBR3 is plenty enough for all but some edge cases nowadays.

It's not enough for more than 4k120hz at 8 bits which is a pretty common scenario. A simple jump UHBR10 (DP2.1 40gbits) gets you to 4k 144hz at 10 bits, discounting overclocked monitors and the new oled stuff that's the general target.

DSC is fine but it got such a bad rep that they should release a new version that is truly lossless and make it the default transmission mode.

 

[Tek-Check]

DSC is fine but it got such a bad rep that they should release a new version that is truly lossless and make it the default transmission mode.

No deafault DSC, please. The primary role of DSC is to deal with situations where there is not enough bandwidth for uncompressed signal offered by current video technologies over HDMI and DP.

DSC should only be used when necessary. For example, 5K/2K 180-240Hz 10-bit monitor will need more than 80 Gbps of data. DSC is fine here.

DSC should never be used as a cheap way to offer low bandwidth port when higher bandwidth port is clearly available. For example, new Asus ROG Swift PG32UQXR offers only DP40 port for 4K/160Hz 10-bit image, forcing the monitor to use DSC to deliver this image. This is not necessary and Asus contributes here to bad reputation of DSC. It is vendors being cheap on ports and still selling for premium prices. Nonsense. I'd never buy such monitor.

 

[trsttte]

No deafault DSC, please. The primary role of DSC is to deal with situations where there is not enough bandwidth for uncompressed signal offered by current video technologies over HDMI and DP.

DSC should only be used when necessary. For example, 5K/2K 180-240Hz 10-bit monitor will need more than 80 Gbps of data. DSC is fine here.

DSC should never be used as a cheap way to offer low bandwidth port when higher bandwidth port is clearly available. For example, new Asus ROG Swift PG32UQXR offers only DP40 port for 4K/160Hz 10-bit image, forcing the monitor to use DSC to deliver this image. This is not necessary and Asus contributes here to bad reputation of DSC. It is vendors being cheap on ports and still selling for premium prices. Nonsense. I'd never buy such monitor.

Sending 80gbps of data (and more as we continue to push for higher res and refresh rates) with no compression whatsoever is not very smart and there are easy things that can bring those numbers down. I'm not talking about the "visually lossless" non sense, I'm talking about truly lossless, you could easily save a fair percentage of bandwidth simply tweaking how data is encoded. Only after that bring in stuff like DSC for bandwidth constrained setups like multimonitor and so on.

 

[Tek-Check]

Sending 80gbps of data (and more as we continue to push for higher res and refresh rates) with no compression whatsoever is not very smart and there are easy things that can bring those numbers down.

Many public displays will have video wall mode, whereby 80 Gbps connection uses DSC over MST to distribute signal to many displays. This is another case where DSC is very useful.

I'm talking about truly lossless, you could easily save a fair percentage of bandwidth simply tweaking how data is encoded.

New compression codec development cycle will take several years, but I am sure research is being done on this.

 

[AleXXX666]

gotta got SLI-ed 4090s (is it possible) lol

 

[Asni]

Monitor Unboxed tested this monitor provided with a ~1 meter long DP80 cable since there isn't any >1.2m certified cable.
It's a miniDP to DP cable since both Radeon Pro W7800 and W7900 happen to support DP 2.1 UHB20 only through miniDP ports.

It's pretty funny, we have the tech but not the cables.