this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
121 points (93.5% liked)

Technology

34982 readers
179 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 53 points 6 months ago (5 children)

"Now wait for 1,000 Hz content and capable GPUs."

Forget the content and GPU, you need an input port capable of that.

HDMI 2.1 and Display Port 1.4 cap out at, what? 240?

[–] Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 24 points 6 months ago (3 children)

With DSC DP 1.4 can do 4k 360 but it still ain't close to 1000

[–] Fermion@mander.xyz 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

So you just need 3 4090's with 1 displayport each to the monitor and a whole new version of sli.

[–] WetBeardHairs@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

.. I actually wonder if the graphics cards could multiplex across multiple dp to a single display.

[–] Fermion@mander.xyz 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I vaguely remember that being a thing for early commercial 8k projectors, but I don't know anything about the implementation.

[–] cabb@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 6 months ago

Two ports at once have been used for Samsung's 5120x1440 240hz monitors. Each port refreshes half of the screen and there are two scanlines going from left to right. Using the calc here you might be able to use two DP2.1 UHBR80 cables with DSC and nonstandard timings to run 4k 1000hz 10bit.

[–] Rexios@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Isn’t 4k 360hz equivalent to 1080p 1440hz? I wouldn’t expect 1000hz at 4k any time soon but 1080p in competitive FPS is easy

[–] Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

I think so? Honestly not sure how the math works on that one.

[–] Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you want 1000fps, 4k and DP are the least of your problems

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Not really? Modern hardware gets almost 1000 fps in rocket league. You don't need exactly 1000 to get a benefit, even getting 800 fps will give you a smoother experience

[–] maxprime@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 months ago

Easy, just connect 4 cables!

[–] istanbullu@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

“Now wait for 1,000 Hz content and capable GPUs.”

Now wait for humans who can see the difference

[–] lengau@midwest.social 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Here's a real-world use case where this difference is noticeable to the average person. We don't need to render video games at 1000 Hz, but many things that can be rendered with comparatively low GPU power could be made a better experience with it. The real question is whether/when the technology becomes cheap enough to be practical to use in consumer goods.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Here's a real-world use case where this difference is noticeable to the average person

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure some people will demand it. But for 99.9% of the population you don't need 1000Hz content. The main benefit is that whatever framerate your content is it will not have notable delay from the display refresh rate.

For example if you are watching 60Hz video on a 100Hz monitor you will get bad frame pacing. But on a 1000Hz monitor even though it isn't perfectly divisible. the 1/3ms delay isn't perceptible.

VRR can help a lot here, but can fall apart if you have different content at different frame rates. For example a notification pops up and a frame is rendered but then your game finishes its frame and needs to wait until the next refresh cycle. Ideally the compositor would have waited for the game frame before flushing the notification but it doesn't really know how long the game will take to render the next frame.

So really you just need your GPU to be able to composite at 1000Hz, you probably don't need your game to render at 1000Hz. It isn't really going to make much difference.

Basically at this point faster refresh rates just improve frame pacing when multiple things are on screen. Much like VRR does for single sources.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Here's a big part of why they want 1000Hz. You don't need to fully re-render each frame for most cases where 1ms latency is desirable - make a 100 Hz (or even 50 Hz) background and then render a transparent layer over it.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Here's a big part of why they want 1000Hz

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] 30p87@feddit.de 1 points 5 months ago

RX 7900 XTX + HL 1