Make sure you also preorder RTX 3090 super and may need 2 to run in SLi on some titles to get to that 240hz refresh rate.
Will see what the RTX 4090 can do when they come out.

matarMake sure you also preorder 2 RTX 3090 super to run in SLi when them come out and you wont even close to that refresh rate with this 8K .
Will see what the RTX 4090 can do when they come out.

8K? it's 4K panel, which 3090 can drive comfortably with DLSS :rolleyes:

nguyen8K? it's 4K panel, which 3090 can drive comfortably with DLSS :rolleyes:

Aka "it can drive it comfortably at 4k when not driving it at 4k"

ZoneDymoAka "it can drive it comfortably at 4k when not driving it at 4k"

I like the higher quality AA that comes with DLSS anyways, so the FPS boost is just a bonus :D

nguyen8K? it's 4K panel, which 3090 can drive comfortably with DLSS :rolleyes:

My 3080 does exceptionally well on a 4k120 HDMI 2.1 TV as it is, sure DLSS can help in supported titles (and like you I prefer the AA+perf boost+supersampled effect on fine detail, so I'd rather use it than not use it) but I've played many non-dlss games too, often over the 100fps mark but almost certainly well in the VRR range.

I think I'd prefer an OLED @ 120hz over an LED @ 240hz though, for a TV at least.

2160p 240Hz is a tall order for any GPU. I don't think there are any other realistic users for this high a refresh rate. Consoles IIRC support up to 2160p 120Hz and any video is fine at 24Hz or 60Hz.

This panel will hertz your GPU. I am happy with my 2160@120 OLEDs.

This isn't a big TV.

au.pcmag.com/tvs/89507/lg-launches-a-325-inch-direct-view-led-8k-tv

I look forward to this panel being in my next TV.

OLED's drawbacks mean that I really can't justify buying one for the way I use my TV (primarily as a giant desktop display) and AUO's VA panels have been on point these last few generations.

I'm going to need a bigger living room though, 65" looks about right, 75" might be about the limit of what makes sense in the room. Plenty of people will have living rooms big enough for this though and 240Hz 4K is perfect for a TV IMO. Ideally it will be VRR with dynamic overdrive but TV manufacturers have generally been abysmal at this since they mostly just use the extra refresh rate for their shitty "smoothmotion" frame interpolation rubbish and don't even include inputs beyond 4K@120Hz, let alone bother with accurate gamma or low input lag....

TardianThis panel will hertz your GPU

I see what you did there.

ZoneDymoAka "it can drive it comfortably at 4k when not driving it at 4k"

Its better than 4K man. This 4K goes to eleven.

Still struggling to find the relevance of 4K for gaming altogether, to be honest. It hasn't made a single game better for me to move up in resolution, if I think about it, and that's considering 480p till today. What did boost immersion... aspect ratio. From 4:3 to wide to UW now is definitely an immersion boost, I reckon a supersized display in 16:9 can do the same thing. Better render tech though is always welcome, as it has been, if its readily usable.

lol, now, many people, including me will wait for this monitor ehhe, now 120hz is not good anymore, this is technology greedy, always want the better the market has to offer and when is released another news saying there will be a better one in 6 months hehe, seems the monkey trying to catch the moon analogy applies here eheh

Metroidlol, now, many people, including me will wait for this monitor ehhe, now 120hz is not good anymore, this is technology greedy, always want the better the market has to offer and when is released another news saying tehre will be a better one in 6 months hehe, seems the monkey trying to catch the moon analogy applies here eheh

Welcome to any business ever. Commerce is about creating demand. The question is how gullible you are.

Cool. This will be nice for the ... let's say 1000 people in the world who a) can fit this thing, b) can afford this thing, c) can also afford a high end gaming PC, d) want a high end gaming PC in their living room (or whereever you put an 85" TV), e) care enough to put all of this together.

Now can we please get more (and preferably good) ~32" 2160p120/144 panels? Please?

85 inch is a no go, waiting for a 4k, 30 - 40 inch oled 120hz, if a 4k led 30 - 40 inch monitor 240hz comes first then so be it. I have been with a 4k 60hz for a long time and dont want to have anything less than 4k.

ValantarCool. This will be nice for the ... let's say 1000 people in the world who a) can fit this thing, b) can afford this thing, c) can also afford a high end gaming PC, d) want a high end gaming PC in their living room (or whereever you put an 85" TV), e) care enough to put all of this together.

Now can we please get more (and preferably good) ~32" 2160p120/144 panels? Please?

www.auselectronicsdirect.com.au/8k-60hz-ultra-slim-fibre-optic-hdmi-2.1-cable-10-m

The wife agrees.

Tardianwww.auselectronicsdirect.com.au/8k-60hz-ultra-slim-fibre-optic-hdmi-2.1-cable-10-m

The wife agrees.

Well, sure, you can always put your PC in another room. That makes I/O pretty complicated though. There are solutions for that as well, but ... meh. It just increases the effort and knowledge required to another level again, further reducing the possible customer base.

Vayra86Still struggling to find the relevance of 4K for gaming altogether, to be honest. It hasn't made a single game better for me to move up in resolution, if I think about it, and that's considering 480p till today. What did boost immersion... aspect ratio. From 4:3 to wide to UW now is definitely an immersion boost, I reckon a supersized display in 16:9 can do the same thing. Better render tech though is always welcome, as it has been, if its readily usable.

Most game assets these days are optimised for the "dynamic resolution" shenanigans that consoles end up with when aiming (and failing) to run at 4K native, and just like the consoles, 4K DLSS is just 1440p with some fancy postprocessing. When you run that at 4K native with everything cranked up and TXAA running, you'll see fractionally more detail but oftentimes it's detail you didn't need that highlights texture shimmering or allows you to resolve individual polygons on what is supposed to be a curved surface. Lower resolutions do well in hiding a multitude of sins and 1080p-1440p seems to strike a good balance of providing a crisp enough image for fine details whilst hiding some of the geometry/texture/lighting shortcuts that games still make heavy use of.

Realistically, games look at their best as long as they're 1440p and 90fps or better. Sure, some competitive eSports games that rely on milisecond life-or-death latency need 240Hz but none of those gamers use TVs in the first place because of 25ms+ input lag even from the best TVs. For sightseeing games you might want on a TV, even 60Hz isn't terrible but I think most people can tell the difference between 60 and 90fps; It does however take some experience to distinguish between 90fps and 120fps though.

nguyen8K? it's 4K panel, which 3090 can drive comfortably with DLSS :rolleyes:

thanks I look at 85" i thought 8K, you r right

ValantarWell, sure, you can always put your PC in another room. That makes I/O pretty complicated though. There are solutions for that as well, but ... meh. It just increases the effort and knowledge required to another level again, further reducing the possible customer base.

At the cinema, the projector controller doesn't sit next to you.

Vayra86Its better than 4K man. This 4K goes to eleven.

Sarcasm aside, I'd say don't knock it till you try it. And let's say you do extensively try it and don't like it, that in no way diminishes the enjoyment of others.

I want a 85" 21:9 monitor/TV please.

TardianAt the cinema, the projector controller doesn't sit next to you.

... No, but neither does the projector. It's literally in another room. Now, how many people have that kind of setup at home?

Valantar... No, but neither does the projector. It's literally in another room. Now, how many people have that kind of setup at home?

These guys:

www.avsforum.com/

TardianThese guys:

www.avsforum.com/

Even among that group of extreme enthusiasts, the number of people who have a separate projector room is likely very, very low. And of course most of them are likely die-hard projector users, likely not interested in high framerates, and thus not in the target market for a display like this.

TardianThese guys:

www.avsforum.com/

I think you would be surprised.

www.avsforum.com/threads/official-samsung-4k-hu8550-and-hu9000-thread.1522081/page-108

That thread has 1120 pages.

Tardian
I think you would be surprised.

... Where is the projector room? I've seen crazy home cinema setups before. But the question is: how many people have these? On a forum, even a couple dozen can feel like a lot. I guesstimated 1000 people fitting all the criteria for this TV. Which is of course pulled out of thin air, but it sounds realistic to me. "Some people have crazy home theaters" does nothing to make me think that number is any higher.