- Nov 11, 2004
- 9,351 (1.51/day)
|System Name||Overlord Mk MXVI|
|Processor||AMD Ryzen 7 3800X|
|Motherboard||Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master|
|Cooling||Corsair H115i Pro|
|Memory||32GB Viper Steel 3600 DDR4 @ 3800MHz 16-19-16-19-36|
|Video Card(s)||Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G|
|Storage||1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND|
|Case||Corsair Carbide 275Q|
|Audio Device(s)||Corsair Virtuoso SE|
|Power Supply||Corsair RM750|
|Mouse||Logitech G502 Lightspeed|
|Software||Windows 10 Pro|
But DP 2.0 requires a captive cable, so that's not even in the same ballpark.Theoretically - yes, practically - no. Low demand on these things doesn't drive semiconductor manufacturers to deliver powerful-enough SoCs to handle 120Hz. So, in order to do so, a monitor manufacturer still needs "messing around" with custom solutions, like having two scalers on one board which will drive half the screen each or alternate frames, or rolling-out an even more expensive FPGA-based solution. DP2.0 was announced too soon, so no one really bothered to develop new ICs for soon-to-be-outdated standard, so they most likely kept their focus on DP2.0.
I'm sick and tired of all these IC vendors that do half assed implementations of standards in their chips, as time and time again this means that we end up with several revisions of crap that doesn't work as claimed. Can we go back to a time when quality stood for something and products were tested properly before being pushed into the market?