Samsung to release 21:9 34" 100hz HDR Freesync monitor *UPDATE*

[sadtaco]

The predator x34 still isn't perfect. I've been hoping for something better to come along.

 

Comparing cost to a Titan XP is a weird analogy.  You're comparing a huge display to a little GPU. Sure there's less pixels that transistors, but creating those pixels is a lot more complicated. Ugh, I'm not even going to try to compare them.

 

There's good reasons why crappy $150 monitors are crappy and $150.

 

I'm holding out for a good HDR10 monitor that supports near/at 100% of Adobe RGB.

[Notional]

44 minutes ago, sadtaco said:

The predator x34 still isn't perfect. I've been hoping for something better to come along.

 

Comparing cost to a Titan XP is a weird analogy.  You're comparing a huge display to a little GPU. Sure there's less pixels that transistors, but creating those pixels is a lot more complicated. Ugh, I'm not even going to try to compare them.

 

There's good reasons why crappy $150 monitors are crappy and $150.

 

I'm holding out for a good HDR10 monitor that supports near/at 100% of Adobe RGB.

Guess you would need to buy an HDR tv at this point. No monitor seems to support that anytime soon.

[ThreePinkApples]

20 minutes ago, Notional said:

Guess you would need to buy an HDR tv at this point. No monitor seems to support that anytime soon.

Which is quite annoying :< 
At CES this year AMD was talking about HDR and Freesync, and they said we would see HDR monitors this year, but doesn't look like that's happening anymore
They might be waiting for Dynamic HDR10 though, which I can accept

[Notional]

Just now, aerandir92 said:

Which is quite annoying :< 
At CES this year AMD was talking about HDR and Freesync, and they said we would see HDR monitors this year, but doesn't look like that's happening anymore
They might be waiting for Dynamic HDR10 though, which I can accept

That would be this monitor. I wonder what went wrong, since it didn't become an HDR monitor? It has the colour gamut for it. Their tv's has the backlighting for it, so they have the tech. This is even 8 bit, which their tv's are not. They cheaped out, and I don't get why.

[sadtaco]

I don't get it... how are people supposed to produce HDR content when they don't have monitors to see it? lol.

 

In the past, monitors had better pictures than TVs. That's really weird.

 

But yeah.. as much as I need something for gaming, I've had this HP ZR24w for a looong time now. I don't want to replace it with something that's just roughly as good.  I want something that gets at least 75% of rec 2020 (actual, not mfc claimed), HDR10, 4ms gtg response or less, no halo backlighting, and ideally local dimming as well.

 

It's especially weird because the cost of manufacturing panels largely comes down to size, less so than resolution and features.  There's no reason why Samsung shouldn't be able to offer a 34" ultrawide that's as good as one of their $2500, 65" tvs, plus 100hz FreeSync, for less than $1200.

 

Maybe monitor sales are just bad now days? They're probably bad because they won't release anything good... a $300 Ultrasharp isn't godly, but it's great for the cost and spending $1000+ on a monitor doesn't get you much better if at all.

[Sniperfox47]

2 hours ago, Notional said:

That would be this monitor. I wonder what went wrong, since it didn't become an HDR monitor? It has the colour gamut for it. Their tv's has the backlighting for it, so they have the tech. This is even 8 bit, which their tv's are not. They cheaped out, and I don't get why.

Part of the problem with HDR on the monitor side is in backlighting. Monitors have less space so cramming more lights in is incredibly difficult. The other is in cost. On the consumer side there's very few individuals who would pay 15-20K on a monitor other than professionals. It's gotten from the point where TVs were bigger monitors to the point where monitors are now smaller TVs. And miniaturizing the display technologies for high color range and bright panels is getting harder and harder.

 

Between the issues with backlighting, the poor yield values for AMOLED panels, the high cost of high quality LCD panels and scalers to handle all this, miniturization and various other cost factors, I don't expect to see any really good HDR monitors until 2018 at the earliest.

 

1 hour ago, sadtaco said:

I don't get it... how are people supposed to produce HDR content when they don't have monitors to see it? lol.

There are HDR monitors. Sony has an AMOLED broadcast monitor, the PVM-X300. It costs $17995.00 US. You can get it for gaming if you want but note that it only supports max of 60hz frame rates and requires you to convert from whatever video output you have to BNC for input.

 

I don't expect we'll see HDR monitors until someone gets QLED production up and running. Quantum Dot LED Displays are not the same as the current "Quantum Dot" Displays that use Quantum Dots as a white filter for the blue led backlights, they function much more like AMOLED where they use individual arrays of Quantum Dots to generate light in various colors. Benefits over AMOLED are 1) potential for MUCH higher yields, 2) Much longer lifespans with slower degradation (should be pretty close to LCD level lifespans) 3) higher per pixel brightness in part due to the increased durability letting you push them harder.

 

Samsung skipped over AMOLED on large Displays specifically to put all their research into QLED which is a better long term solution and has said previously that they expect to have it ready for products by around 2018ish.

[sadtaco]

QLED is likely years off..

 

A Quantum Dot LCD with LED backlighting and local dimming is good enough, though.

[Sniperfox47]

Last I heard, Samsung was pretty confident on QLED in 2018.

 

Are there any monitors with local dimming? I'd imagine it would be incredibly costly and impractical on a display such as this. I'm not even sure if there are any full array backlit monitors, but someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

[sadtaco]

There are none, I don't think.

 

Why would it be impractical? A monitor typically fills more of your view than a larger TV that's further away.

I guess it's not ideal since it's a bit inconsistent, anyway.

 

And yeah QLED phones in 2018, I'm sure.

[goodtofufriday]

I like my dell u3415w. Wont upgrade until there is there 34" UW 144hz" freesync 

[sadtaco]

There is a limit to the data of the inputs and such at the moment that prevent over 100hz at 3440x1440

[Clanscorpia]

Still a sexy ass monitor

[Crosseyed Sniper]

Wonder how well this monitor would be for gaming with an NVIDIA GPU? It does look nice!

[Sniperfox47]

15 hours ago, sadtaco said:

There is a limit to the data of the inputs and such at the moment that prevent over 100hz at 3440x1440

Not true. DisplayPort 1.4 can do 3840x2160 (UHD) at 120Hz with HDR10 if DSC is enabled or 3840x2160 at 120Hz without HDR10 if DSC is disabled.

 

DisplayPort 1.3 and 1.4 can easily support 3440x1440 at up to 200Hz with 8 bit color and no DSC. Additionally DP1.4 can support it at 150Hz with 10 bit color and no DSC, or over 200Hz with 10 bit colour if you enable DSC. (You could probably even hit 240Hz pretty easily with DSC)

 

DSC is VESA's open visually-lossless video compression format for Displays. 

[sadtaco]

3 hours ago, Clanscorpia said:

Still a sexy ass monitor

It is nice looking. I find the x34 very ugly.