Thursday, January 28th 2016

Samsung Readies 144 Hz 3440 x 1440 Ultra-wide Monitors

Samsung is giving finishing touches to a new fleet of high-speed ultra-wide monitors. These monitors will be among the first to leverage DisplayPort 1.3, to serve up blazing fast 144 Hz refresh rates, on resolutions as high as 3440 x 1440 pixels. Samsung has plans of at least two monitors with these specs - a 30-inch, and a 35-inch display. The two will feature VA (vertical-alignment) panels. It's likely that the two could also feature adaptive-sync features, such as AMD FreeSync. The two could come out later this year.

Source: OC3D
Add your own comment

52 Comments on Samsung Readies 144 Hz 3440 x 1440 Ultra-wide Monitors

#1
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
My quad sli pascals are ready
Posted on Reply
#2
Bytales
FreedomEclipse said:
My quad sli pascals are ready
Well, i own a 32" 4k Samsung Freesync display, naturaly with 60 Hz.

The next upgrade will be 4k, 120/144Hz, HDR, and 32". But thats a long way away!
Posted on Reply
#3
RejZoR
Nice. We are almost at 144Hz 4K...
Posted on Reply
#5
Sasqui
Ferrum Master said:
Really would like this one too... :pimp:
Like wow. Me too!
Posted on Reply
#6
Xajel
The problem is with... price, though a guy with the GPU power to drive this @144Hz will not be bothered...
Posted on Reply
#7
webdigo
Is sitting on a 27" considered old school? Is the new trend +30"??
I dont know about you guys, but I sit around 50cm (19.6 inches) away from my monitor. Playing on anything bigger than 27" would just be too much. At least for me.
Posted on Reply
#8
Jack1n
Typo in the topic, its 1440 not 1400.
Posted on Reply
#10
trog100
these curved extra wide monitors will not need as much gpu power to drive them as a more normal 35 inch aspect ratio monitor at 4 K..

the 1440 remains the same they just get wider.. maybe half as many pixels again as opposed to twice as many with normal 4K..

todays top end cards should drive them okay.. definitely so in sli or cf mode..

i recon $1300 dollars or £1100 quid in the UK.. chuck in the same again for the graphics cards.. he he

trog



..
Posted on Reply
#11
Ubersonic
trog100 said:
these curved extra wide monitors will not need as much gpu power to drive them as a more normal 35 inch aspect ratio monitor at 4 K..

the 1440 remains the same they just get wider.. maybe half as many pixels again as opposed to twice as many with normal 4K..

todays top end cards should drive them okay.. definitely so in sli or cf mode..
Actually no current cards will be able to do 3440x1440 @ 144Hz because it's not doable over Displayport 1.2, it requires the higher bandwidth 1.3 which no cards have yet.

Another note there is that 4K @ 60Hz is doable over DP 1.2, this means that 3440x1440 @ 144Hz actually requires a lot more GPU grunt than normal 4K.
Posted on Reply
#12
nickbaldwin86
Ubersonic said:
Actually no current cards will be able to do 3440x1440 @ 144Hz because it's not doable over Displayport 1.2, it requires the higher bandwidth 1.3 which no cards have yet.

Another note there is that 4K @ 60Hz is doable over DP 1.2, this means that 3440x1440 @ 144Hz actually requires a lot more GPU grunt than normal 4K.
Yes I was waiting for someone to say this. or else I was going to.

3440x1440 @ 144hz is more bandwidth than 4k@60hz

3440x1440@144 = a Total signal bandwidth of 38.52Gbps

4k@60 =
a Total signal bandwidth of 26.87Gbps


huge difference really.

Nick
Posted on Reply
#13
qubit
Overclocked quantum bit
It would be absolutely awesome for car racing games. When BenQ release one like this it will also have their blur reduction technology which will take smoothness to another level.
Posted on Reply
#14
cracklez
nickbaldwin86 said:
Yes I was waiting for someone to say this. or else I was going to.

3440x1440 @ 144hz is more bandwidth than 4k@60hz

3440x1440@144 = a Total signal bandwidth of 38.52Gbps

4k@60 =
a Total signal bandwidth of 26.87Gbps


huge difference really.

Nick
Most people buy monitors with high hz in hopes of their strong graphics cards passing that 60hz barrier in most games. I don't think people will ever get 120fps in a game like Witcher 3 @ 4k, that's just silly wishful thinking, were talking another generation of cards after Polaris/Pascal!!
Posted on Reply
#15
nickbaldwin86
k yeah just doing a little math.

I am not one of those people, I have 2560x1400 @ 144hz and I make sure it is at 144FPS!

I want 3440x1440@144hz and willing to pay for the setup and monitor!!!!
Posted on Reply
#16
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
I want 144hz to move to the lower end monitors. For the price of one of those I can get 1440p IPS.
Posted on Reply
#17
PP Mguire
cracklez said:
Most people buy monitors with high hz in hopes of their strong graphics cards passing that 60hz barrier in most games. I don't think people will ever get 120fps in a game like Witcher 3 @ 4k, that's just silly wishful thinking, were talking another generation of cards after Polaris/Pascal!!
I can do 100fps with my setup so it's not too far off thinking that.
Posted on Reply
#18
bpgt64
I would really wait for reviews on this one, I had a dual panel display before and I will NEVER use one again. I had so many issues with the config, that Dell wound up replacing it with there new single panel TN model.
Posted on Reply
#19
ZoneDymo
nickbaldwin86 said:
Yes I was waiting for someone to say this. or else I was going to.

3440x1440 @ 144hz is more bandwidth than 4k@60hz

3440x1440@144 = a Total signal bandwidth of 38.52Gbps

4k@60 =
a Total signal bandwidth of 26.87Gbps


huge difference really.

Nick
Yeah and nobody is stopping anyone from using 2 cables to get the end result, some monitors already are doing that.
Posted on Reply
#20
nickbaldwin86
ZoneDymo said:
Yeah and nobody is stopping anyone from using 2 cables to get the end result, some monitors already are doing that.
Ah that is a great point!
Posted on Reply
#21
cracklez
PP Mguire said:
I can do 100fps with my setup so it's not too far off thinking that.
Ok, but you are just 0.0000001% of the population that can actually do that :) so I guess it's possible for people like you who go balls to the wall haha
Posted on Reply
#22
PP Mguire
cracklez said:
Ok, but you are just 0.0000001% of the population that can actually do that :) so I guess it's possible for people like you who go balls to the wall haha
There are tons of people with 980ti SLI. You just can't use Hairworks or a ton of AA.
Posted on Reply
#23
cracklez
PP Mguire said:
There are tons of people with 980ti SLI. You just can't use Hairworks or a ton of AA.
I was talking about your particular setup, which in your specs reveals you have Titan-X tri-SLI. Probably even less of a percentage of people that I mentioned that have that.

I understand why you don't enable Hairworks, but not full AA? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of being able to "max" out a game so to speak? I stand corrected. I'd like to see you bench that game with everything maxed with no Hairworks and see what the average FPS is if you have the time.
Posted on Reply
#24
Fx
webdigo said:
Is sitting on a 27" considered old school? Is the new trend +30"??
I dont know about you guys, but I sit around 50cm (19.6 inches) away from my monitor. Playing on anything bigger than 27" would just be too much. At least for me.
I guess I am perfectly happy being oldschool because I game on a 24" and can't imagine needing anything larger when the screen is less than 2' from my face.
Posted on Reply
#25
agent00skid
I'm just yay! over a 30 inch 3440x1440 monitor. Hopefully there'll be more of those.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment