220VoltsallCore

Just get any OLED panel if you want real HDR great experience.
 
I am not typing reason as you can find from internet why OLED is the best panel for HDR.
 
As for your topic reason "why does every youtubers buy high end camera and still just upload non hdr videos."
My own opinion - they are basically no reason to use HDR videos, 1st many user still have bad HDR monitor and this will impact the viewer, 2nd HDR need more bandwidth, this impact to low internet user and 3rd they are no visual experience really need for those YouTuber video to perform in HDR.

HDR is out is my expertise, all I know about HDR is that there are many forms of HDR and most of them are pretty basic and nothing special. As for contrast ratio, it's also out of my expertise. I just remember there's backlight and dim light gimmicks involved in certain types of contrasting and that native contrasting is more important than those gimmick types of contrasting. I also remember a VA monitor has a higher contrast ratio than an IPS monitor but a VA monitor also has ghosting issues when it comes to high frame rate gaming. I definitely notice things such as washed out colors or blacks not being the deepest blacks on my current TN monitor but these are not things I invest a lot of time noticing so it doesn't bother me when I spot them.

Colors do have an impact, but it's not the most important factor. And typically you don't need to worry about it. Any monitor that delivers good HDR already comes with a good color gamut of at least 90% DCI-P3, most are over 95% nowadays. All current OLED models at least sit around 97%. So what I'm trying to say: If you're looking at a decent HDR monitor, all of them have good enough color coverage.

Just released. 
 
https://youtu.be/XdLt3LegOKU?si=jtHg42KZReRlMOXz

Firefox doesn't support HDR at all, which is the main reason why I don't use it.
 
I don't know why you're so fixated on PCI-P3 color space coverage as your indicator of HDR quality. A monitor with 85% coverage and a good local dimming backlight will have better HDR than a monitor with 99% coverage and no local dimming.
 
Decent HDR monitors can be had for $280 nowadays, but it's only one specific model from AOC so far. All the other monitors that market HDR in this price range don't offer any real HDR capabilities.

I’ve explained above that yes, that is just starting. I also gave two examples. 
 
Yes, poor contrast ratio provides a terrible experience. A good ability to distinguish between light and dark is a core attribute to proper HDR reproduction. 

Nothing similiar to what you are seeing in Firefox. will try Chrome, thanks for information :). HDR is enabled in widnows and works in games and movies.


EDIT: shows HDR in chrome.

This Acer has some problems but gives a really good HDR experience. Its also more expensive than the AOC at $400 USD. 
 
Acer Nitro XV275U P3biipx
 
 

Yeah, that LG is edge lit and lacks a wide color gamut. Trust me, when you see HDR on a display really capable of displaying it, its game changing. Squinting at on screen highlights that would make you squint in real life is a pretty surreal feeling. 

Maybe they buy high end cameras for other reasons, like maybe the higher resolution (so you could crop a 4k image out of a bigger one or zoom in if needed), or  better low light sensitivity, bigger sensors, better video formats or options for dumping the recordings directly to a hard drive or through SDI or some other outputs , options for external microphones, better image stabilization, support for color corrections etc etc 
 
It's a bit of a shame that steam hardware survey doesn't include if the monitor is capable of 10bit , or HDR, if it's cheap laptop 6bit+FRC panel ,8 bit, 8 bit+FRC for 10 bit, native 10 bit etc etc 

1000% does, just needs to be uploaded as such. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7126552?hl=en 
 

 
Regardless, its not really going to catch on until monitors most people buy can actually play it back properly. The $200 stuff most are looking at simply can't do it, even it supports turning HDR on in Windows. 
 
Within the last couple of months though real progress has been made bringing truly HDR capable displays down in price, notably the AOC Q27G3XMN @ $280. 
 
 

YouTube absolutely supports HDR. Here's why very few use it:
 
The situation has improved somewhat since then, but there is a long road ahead still.

probably just turn it off when your not gaming

But text looks bad to read over saturated in chrome browsing. any option to change it

RDR2 is understandable to wanna share but Left 4 Dead 2 hits literally $1 all the time and Warhammer Vermintide commonly sits at $2. I say have them spend $1 to $2 to play those two games with you and in the mean time I just found out that this new Family Sharing feature is still in Beta so many people are getting an error when trying to use it and this is because a lot of the BIG developers have opted OUT of this new Family Sharing feature. Which means RDR2 is most likely not on board with this new feature. I also found out that you must be in the same country as your friend for this feature to work.

I'm not familiar with this new Family Sharing feature but what I can easily recommend you make sure to do is never give out any passwords to anybody, keep your passwords to yourself. I'd also think this new feature would not require anyone to give any passwords to anybody.
 
What exactly are you trying to do?

but why would a family member need your password?  well technically they don't you could just type it while they aren't looking lol.
 
but then a family member cant live anywhere else but near you...?
 
idk most my family members don't live nearby, so I'll never be able to share my weeb games with them... shame! 
 
but why is it called "family" sharing then?  false advertising? 
 
 
ps: on playstation it works like this: you add their account,  they can play your games, they will *never* need your password and afaik it works on several systems too.  So basically what you're saying is that Steam is inherently worse/unsafe?

it will work for the games he downloaded while he was logged on acc

family sharing works kinda differently, let me try to explain:
pc 1 is main pc that owns the account
pc 2 is the friend's pc who logged onto ur acc
pc 2 can download game from certain account and the log out
the game will still be on their pc but they will have to ask permission to use game which they downloaded from main account
but then they have no access to other games from your library except that one

That sounds normal, my 12400 doesn't reach it's mark either, 675 vs 701.
Did you stop every stoppable process in the background before starting the bench ?
Is your cpu cooled enough ?
The psu has nothing to do with that.

what clock speeds are you getting while running cinebench?
 
and what temps while running cinebench?
 
Use HWInfo64 to monitor those

AMD and Intel cores are no longer the same. If we do compare the cores that are at least similar from the same processors, AMD has them perform better so performance in games will be better.

13400 is not a traditional 10 core. Its basically 6 core+ 4 slow cores that wont be utilized by most games.
 
So what you should be asking are the 6 cores of the 13400 faster or slower then the 7600x 6 cores (Not really they should perform roughly the same).
 
Games are not Optimized for lower cores persay, its moreso that  its a usage and utilization thing. It varies Game dev to game dev, some use 2-4 cores, some use 4-6, some use as many as you can throw at them.  There is no one method to the game devs.
 
Most games benefit from more cache (hence why the 7800x3D is so strong), the speed of the cores, and the IPC (instructions per clock) with a few other factors.
 
 

Games are not explicitly optimized for fewer cores. But for the most part they are not coded to take advantage of more than a certain number of cores.
 
In most cases per-core speed is more important than core count.
 
 

It depends on  the game you are talking about. Heck in most cases it is GPU bound any way. But comparing CPU core counts between different architectures is much like comparing gigahertz between different architectures(and that before factoring in P and E cores). You are better off just cutting straight to the benchmarks to see what is better for your needs.