Nvidia presents 65" 4K 120Hz, HDR, G-Sync gaming monitor

[DLex]

3 hours ago, dizmo said:

I don't think they really mean for it to sit on your desk

I could see $4k, if we're talking about USD pricing. Which really wouldn't be that unreasonable. I don't think they'll price it up that high since it'd put them a little out of their market.

 

I could see something in the $4000 - 6000 range. The pricing of similar OEM flagship 65" models is in this range (Including OLED).

[robinkle]

I think these would be around $1500 - 2000 range at launch.

[Orangeator]

Why not OLED?

(Lol)

[DarkBlade2117]

5 hours ago, SolarNova said:

-.-

 

Seriosly, how have these manufactuers not learned yet.

 

People can already buy TV's at that size that are good for gaming, only without G/F Sync.

The reason most dont buy them is they are to damn big.

 

The sweet spot for large VDU gaming is right where there is nothing good atm. 37"-42". Your only choice in this size range are crappy LCD tech VDU's.

 

Now if they brought out a OLED 40" 120hz Gysnc 4k/8k HDR 16:9 or 21:9 screen for sub £1500, i would bet vital parts of my anatomy that it would sell like hot cakes.

Ehh, not true. PLENTY have Latency issues, the gimmicky refresh rate technology they use is terrible and 4k HDR TV's aren't cheap.

[DarkBlade2117]

25 minutes ago, robinkle said:

I think these would be around $1500 - 2000 range at launch.

65", 4k, HDR. Those 3 things already justify a $1,500 Price tag.

Make it $1,800 for Nvidia.

Add $400 onto it easily because of Gsync.

Proper 120Hz at 4k? Another few hundred.

If the video has anything to say about looks, it will likely be quite thing and have small bezels plus Shield is built in, easily another $200.

We're talking $4,000 minimum.

[dizmo]

58 minutes ago, DLex said:

I could see something in the $4000 - 6000 range. The pricing of similar OEM flagship 65" models is in this range (Including OLED).

Yeah. I see the lower end, since it doesn't have a tuner and likely some other complexities that a regular TV would have. I'm also hoping they don't bother putting speakers into it, or if they do, they'll be higher end, but that will probably come down to each OEM. Can't wait to try it out at a friends house.

48 minutes ago, robinkle said:

I think these would be around $1500 - 2000 range at launch.

I think that's waaaay too low. The 27" 144hz 4k monitor is likely going to approach the upper range of that estimate.

41 minutes ago, Orangeator said:

Why not OLED?

(Lol)

Burn in.

[Inkz]

5 hours ago, dizmo said:

Moreover, we have to see if it ever actually sees the light of day. They still haven't managed to get a 27" 4k 144hz monitor out the door yet.

I am looking at you Asus, you teased us with 4k 144Hz Gsync IPS at CES LAST YEAR without so much as an update on more information

[dizmo]

6 minutes ago, Inkz said:

I am looking at you Asus, you teased us with 4k 144Hz Gsync IPS at CES LAST YEAR without so much as an update on more information

They updated their release to sometime in spring. They just started producing the panels in late December.

I think the issue was more with AU Optronics than Asus.

[robinkle]

52 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

65", 4k, HDR. Those 3 things already justify a $1,500 Price tag.

Make it $1,800 for Nvidia.

Add $400 onto it easily because of Gsync.

Proper 120Hz at 4k? Another few hundred.

If the video has anything to say about looks, it will likely be quite thing and have small bezels plus Shield is built in, easily another $200.

We're talking $4,000 minimum.

The reason I think it will be as low as $1500 - 2000 is because of time before release and how quickly display tech develops over 6 months time, you can get a 4K QLED TV now for 1100$.
Your calculations doesn't add up to $4k anyways

and - $100 for the TV tuner.
in addition
Three companies pushing the same tech will also lower the price.

[Inkz]

11 minutes ago, dizmo said:

They updated their release to sometime in spring. They just started producing the panels in late December.

I think the issue was more with AU Optronics than Asus.

They did? I posted a topic some months ago asking about it and no one knew anything.Hopefully at this CES they can at least give us a release date.

[dizmo]

2 minutes ago, Inkz said:

They did? I posted a topic some months ago asking about it and no one knew anything.Hopefully at this CES they can at least give us a release date.

I remember a thread about that, but I also remember saying the same thing

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11701/acer-and-asus-delay-their-4k-144-hz-gsync-hdr-displays-to-2018

There's an article from August.

[Inkz]

13 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I remember a thread about that, but I also remember saying the same thing

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11701/acer-and-asus-delay-their-4k-144-hz-gsync-hdr-displays-to-2018

There's an article from August.

I don't remember if that was my thread lol. However it is so important that these come out because they are the first and will cause more competition. Depending on the price I might buy them, but if they are super high, then at least they will pave the way for cheaper ones down the road.

[The Benjamins]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

You say "lacks" I say has a "Smart" one to "tune" the interwebs.

 

If you're hyper-technical about it yes you are correct but the amount of consumers that would get a 65" 4k HDR Screen that don't have a cable box or internet connection and intend to use it with over-the-air TV signal should be small enough that it might as well be 0.

they are not allowed to advertise it as a TV

[Tech_Dreamer]

I am liking where this concept is headed. would definitely love to see this going on in 2018. a very major change in gaming environment & it's stepping up properly.

[Notional]

Considering a standard g-sync monitor is 1-300$ price premium, I suspect this will be 1-3000$ price premium. And Nvidia exclusive. Why would anyone buy this to get vendor locked in to Nvidia, when they can get an HDMI 2.1 based tv with freesync for no added cost?

[Cookybiscuit]

Hope you can remove the Amazon/Google "smart" botnet shit, not that I have $10K for this anyway.

[Bouzoo]

Also @dizmo. Seems we're not all on the same page. 

 

 

[Kompira]

Have i heard correctly? 5 grand? For what? 4K 120hz - Sony 65x900e already has 4k 120hz panel except it does not accept 4K@120hz signal, so they added HDMI 2.1 or DP 1.4. We'll probably see other HDMI 2.1 TVs this year. So 3300 dollars more for new HDMI, low input lag(like what $200 monitors have already)and G-sync. I can understand if it was MicroLED, or at least an OLED, but it's just VA TV/Monitor.

[SolarNova]

1 hour ago, Kompira said:

Have i heard correctly? 5 grand? For what? 4K 120hz - Sony 65x900e already has 4k 120hz panel except it does not accept 4K@120hz signal, so they added HDMI 2.1 or DP 1.4. We'll probably see other HDMI 2.1 TVs this year. So 3300 dollars more for new HDMI, low input lag(like what $200 monitors have already)and G-sync. I can understand if it was MicroLED, or at least an OLED, but it's just VA TV/Monitor.

VA , great . Seriosly thats the least bad choice out of the bad choices of LCD tech.

Local Dimming is also great, alass from the vid it seems the number of local diming zones is to low, very obviouse.

 

I still hate that its 65", industry seems to think bigger is better.

 

Cant beleve people dont undertsand that Pixel Density drops when u stretch a resolution to a bigger display, thus resulting in poorer image quality,65" 4k is an abysmal 67.8.

For comparison, my 42" 1080p Plasma is 52.5, a 32" 1440p display is 92, a 34" 21:9 1440p ultrawide is 110, and a 28" 4k is 157. Even a 28" 1080p monitor is 79.

 

Honestly at that size, it would have to be 8k to be any good (8k at 65" is 135.5).

 

Yes yes, viewing distance matters, but tbh how many of you are or would like to , or are even able to, sit 8 foot from your screen for a 65" 4k display.  I sit roughly 4 to 4.5 foot from my 42" display and that puts my chair more or less in the center of my room.

 

RTings has a good page on viewing distance if any1 is interested.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship

 

Anyhoo its good to see a Big monitor with al lthese features, but .. its to big, and its STILL LCD.

[mynameisjuan]

4 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

VA , great . Seriosly thats the least bad choice out of the bad choices of LCD tech.

Local Dimming is also great, alass from the vid it seems the number of local diming zones is to low, very obviouse.

 

I still hate that its 65", industry seems to think bigger is better.

 

Cant beleve people dont undertsand that Pixel Density drops when u stretch a resolution to a bigger display, thus resulting in poorer image quality,65" 4k is an abysmal 67.8.

For comparison, my 42" 1080p Plasma is 52.5, a 32" 1440p display is 92, a 34" 21:9 1440p ultrawide is 110, and a 28" 4k is 157. Even a 28" 1080p monitor is 79.

 

Honestly at that size, it would have to be 8k to be any good (8k at 65" is 135.5).

 

Yes yes, viewing distance matters, but tbh how many of you are or would like to , or are even able to, sit 8 foot from your screen for a 65" 4k display.  I sit roughly 4 to 4.5 foot from my 42" display and that puts my chair more or less in the center of my room.

 

RTings has a good page on viewing distance if any1 is interested.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship

 

Anyhoo its good to see a Big monitor with al lthese features, but .. its to big, and its STILL LCD.

Im guessing you never ever viewed a 65" 4k in person.

 

You make it sound like the end of the world. My 65" OLED is amazing to play on only a few feet away. 

[SolarNova]

13 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Im guessing you never ever viewed a 65" 4k in person.

 

You make it sound like the end of the world. My 65" OLED is amazing to play on only a few feet away. 

I've seen them, they are nice. But the greyness of LCD and their sheer size ..i cant stand. In a show room they look great, but iv seen them in a more natural darker home room, and that inherant LCD greyness sticks out like a sore thumb when ur used to CRT and Plasma level blackness. Not to mention they usualy come with a plethora of other problems, input lag, slow pixel response, poor viewing angles, uniformity issues etc. LCD is just a bad technology.

 

OLED's on the other hand..even though they also are too big atm, look awesome, i have been very very tempted on multiple occasions to grab a 55"....but its just to big. If they droped down into the low 40's in size, i would pick one up in a heartbeat. People always point out burn in as the one and only issue OLED's have that stop them being any good for PC use. For those people heres a News flash, they are no worse than Plasma, and i've been using a Plasma for 7 years heavily as a PC screen, no burn in.

 

Its not the end of the world , its just aggrivating that for years OLED has been there either ready to come into produciton, or actualy being in production and yet we are STILL being fed LCD. Manufactuers have milked the ever loving crap out of LCD and they are STILL at it. Its time to move on.

 

 

[mynameisjuan]

8 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

OLED's on the other hand..even though they also are too big atm, look awesome, i have been very very tempted on multiple occasions to grab a 55"....but its just to big. If they droped down into the low 40's in size, i would pick one up in a heartbeat. People always point out burn in as the one and only issue OLED's have that stop them being any good for PC use. For those people heres a News flash, they are no worse than Plasma, and i've been using a Plasma for 7 years heavily as a PC screen, no burn in.

First I am still lost on the too big. These are obviously meant for living rooms, 65" is not too big let a lone 55". 

 

I am sorry but OLED do experience burn in. My OLED has is after a year. LG's youtube app has a small yellow dot in the lower right that even when only on for 5-10 sec every hour or so, after a year has burned into my screen. 

[SolarNova]

5 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

First I am still lost on the too big. These are obviously meant for living rooms, 65" is not too big let a lone 55". 

 

I am sorry but OLED do experience burn in. My OLED has is after a year. LG's youtube app has a small yellow dot in the lower right that even when only on for 5-10 sec every hour or so, after a year has burned into my screen. 

Im curious then, what model  do you have specificaly ? its odd that it would burn in after such a short duration. I could undertsand a static image like that burning in after being on for hours, but seconds, no.

 

As for the too big bit.

55, 65 ..bigger ..for a front room TV, yes ok thats fine if you front room is big enough for what ever size you get.

But screens that size for PC gaming, i dont beleve many people have a gaming PC in their front room, especialy if they have a family. A console, yes, but this new VDU we're looking at isnt designed for Consoles that can barely manage 30 FPS in many titles.

[MadyTehWolfie]

I'll be buying one of these, not as a monitor but a TV with Gsync 120hz native and 4k. Yups seems like a perfect gamers tv.

[mynameisjuan]

1 minute ago, SolarNova said:

Im curious then, what model  do you have specificaly ? its odd that it would burn in after such a short duration. I could undertsand a static image like that burning in after being on for hours, but seconds, no.

 

As for the too big bit.

55, 65 ..bigger ..for a front room TV, yes ok thats fine if you front room is big enough for what ever size you get.

But screens that size for PC gaming, i dont beleve many people have a gaming PC in their front room, especialy if they have a family. A console, yes, but this new VDU we're looking at isnt designed for Consoles that can barely manage 30 FPS in many titles.

Its an LG 65C6. Lets say its on the screen about for 1 min total everyday for the past ~400 days which is equivalent to being on the screen for 6 hours. Burn in in OLED is not about leaving a static image up. Its about an image killing the pixels faster than the surrounding one. So over the past years the blue and green pixels wore out faster leaving a small burn in. Not the same as plasma at all. 

 

What does size or the screen have to do with gaming when it comes to TV size monitors? On a desk, yeah size can be too big after a point, but when it comes to TV...there is really no too big.