Thursday, July 29th 2021

LG Display & AU Optronics Working on 480 Hz Gaming Panels

We have seen the maximum refresh rate available on gaming monitors steadily increase over the years with recent models from ASUS, Alienware, and Acer offering 360 Hz support. The race for higher refresh rates shows no sign of slowing down with LG Display and AU Optronics both recently announcing that they are developing 480 Hz panels. AU Optronics is developing multiple high-refresh rate panels at a variety of resolutions including 1080p 480 Hz, 1440p 360 Hz, and 4K 240 Hz while LG Display is preparing a 24.5" 1080p 480 Hz panel with HDR 400 support. These new panels are slated to enter production in mid-late 2022 so we should start to see new monitors released featuring the panels in early 2023.
Sources: TFT Central (AU Optronics), TFT Central (LG Display)
Add your own comment

52 Comments on LG Display & AU Optronics Working on 480 Hz Gaming Panels

#1
lynx29
1440p 360hz lol... wow...

honestly i'd rather they just stick with 240hz but improve backlighting issues, gamma, colors out of box, etc.
Posted on Reply
#2
Jack1n
So a monitor just for CSGO and maybe a couple other shooters in which you can get that kind of FPS?
Posted on Reply
#3
GreiverBlade
anything above 100Hz is not really ... useful (well 144 is fine ... ) specially at 2.5/3/4K ... the new trend will be dowclocking instead of overclocking? :laugh:

claiming to see a difference between 30 and 60/75 i can understand (when the game go in those range) between 75 and 144 i do see it but with less benefit/amplitude (even in fast paced fps) above 144 i guess only Pro :laugh: Gamers can claim that (well they probably would have the hardware for it )
Posted on Reply
#4
dj-electric
So when can we start pressuring those companies to develop affordable true 10 bit panels with accurate colors and 0 delta luminosity
Posted on Reply
#5
dorsetknob
"YOUR RMA REQUEST IS CON-REFUSED"
"An Exercise in Futility" when you cannot reasonably get cards that are capable of driving said panels (Both on price and availability) .

And don't give me the "Rocking horse droppings" that they will be available when these panels hit the market.
Posted on Reply
#6
Vayra86
More distraction for gullible youngsters who know nothing better than LCD.

I get it. Im staying miles away. 120-144hz is a fine line to draw, and even that is hard to achieve in steady FPS.
Posted on Reply
#7
Flanker
Still using 60Hz here...
Posted on Reply
#8
bug
lynx291440p 360hz lol... wow...

honestly i'd rather they just stick with 240hz but improve backlighting issues, gamma, colors out of box, etc.
Those aren't really the panel manufacturer's job. All the aspects you mentioned are only handled properly by professional display manufacturers (NEC, Eizo...). For a price.

And while the advantage of 240Hz over 144 may be debatable, I believe 480Hz is downright wasteful. Not only your video card will need its own PSU to output that many frames, the monitor itself will burn through a lot more power as well.
Posted on Reply
#9
swirl09
Bad poll.
Would I buy a 480Hz monitor? Yes.
Would I buy a 480Hz monitor that had to make any compromise on a list of other things I find far more important than getting such a refresh rate? No.
Posted on Reply
#10
Vayra86
The only uoside I see here is trickle down of technologies that improve pixel response. I think VA has benefitted a lot from this. But its a very minor improvement really and a big part is finding the right balance/calibration. But also in other ways, such as wider gamut. There is money going into monitor land and the market seems to work right.
Posted on Reply
#11
ZoneDymo
as a technological evolution I welcome it but there is deminishing returns but that is fine.
Same with resolution, at some point a human being wont be able to tell the difference anymore and we are close to that already.

Once 8k is the standard and @500hz or so, we are done as humanity on both those fronts, more does not help anything.
So the only thing we can then try to push further is energy consumption reduction and colour reproductions/light intensity.
Posted on Reply
#12
zlobby
Give me 12bit color and color me interested.
Posted on Reply
#13
Mussels
Moderprator
I dont think even my PC could benefit from these
Posted on Reply
#14
Mysteoa
So the only market for this would be Game tournaments and blinded consumers.
Posted on Reply
#15
bug
Vayra86The only uoside I see here is trickle down of technologies that improve pixel response. I think VA has benefitted a lot from this. But its a very minor improvement really and a big part is finding the right balance/calibration. But also in other ways, such as wider gamut. There is money going into monitor land and the market seems to work right.
Hear, hear.

Considering for how long "1ms" monitors have been marketed, you'd think by now we'd have 1,000Hz monitors left and right.
Posted on Reply
#16
ixi
FlankerStill using 60Hz here...
Me too, have never owned 120, 140,160 Hz :D. Small chance is I'll get 140 or 160Hz. When GPU prices are gonna be okey, but this will happen after 2, 3 years?....
Posted on Reply
#17
BorisDG
News for event which is 2 years ahead. :D
Posted on Reply
#18
watzupken
I feel panel makers are trying to find the cheapest way to make their products sound attractive so that they can offer it for a premium price. 480Hz? How many people actually buys monitor with refresh rate between 120 to 165 Hz?
Posted on Reply
#19
Pan
All I want is an affordable 4k OLED monitor that is not the size of a TV, extra bonus if its 120+ Hz.
Posted on Reply
#20
windwhirl
MusselsI dont think even my PC could benefit from these
I doubt any PC could benefit from this. Unless you're using a RTX 3090 and playing old Source engine games or the like.
Posted on Reply
#21
BigMack70
I'd much rather have a 120-240 Hz panel that actually has good contrast and HDR performance... monitors are 5+ years behind TVs on image quality
Posted on Reply
#22
PapaTaipei
What is obvious is that if they are making 4K 240Hz, the same MCU can do 1080p @960Hz. The only reason they don't sell that right now is because you gotta milk those customers and go step by step. Exactly like Moore's predictions.
ZoneDymoas a technological evolution I welcome it but there is deminishing returns but that is fine.
Same with resolution, at some point a human being wont be able to tell the difference anymore and we are close to that already.

Once 8k is the standard and @500hz or so, we are done as humanity on both those fronts, more does not help anything.
So the only thing we can then try to push further is energy consumption reduction and colour reproductions/light intensity.
480hz is far from human limitations. Few years ago nvidia said it was around 17KHz. Btw the faster you move your camera the more you need a high refresh cycle.
Posted on Reply
#23
bug
watzupkenI feel panel makers are trying to find the cheapest way to make their products sound attractive so that they can offer it for a premium price. 480Hz? How many people actually buys monitor with refresh rate between 120 to 165 Hz?
Makers only work with whatever the technology will allow them. It's the marketing's job to convince you what they're working on is what you wanted since you were a kid (you just didn't know it).
Posted on Reply
#24
PapaTaipei
Ppl claiming this is waste are not experienced enough in highly competitive fps games. Even if you have only 60 fps you want the refresh rate as high as possible. Unless your monitor is showing trails.
Posted on Reply
#25
windwhirl
PapaTaipeiPpl claiming this is waste are not experienced enough in highly competitive fps games. Even if you have only 60 fps you want the refresh rate as high as possible. Unless your monitor is showing trails.
I don't think many people in the world can see a difference between 240 and 360 hz, never mind 480. Plus, as mentioned before, the usefulness of this kind of refresh rate is limited to a handful of games and only when running on the most powerful GPU in the world.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment