120 Hz Monitors

S

Shrimpanzee

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
244
EDIT: Discuss.

^ seeing as this thread is still active, my original post is "off-topic" I suppose.
:p
 
If you can attain higher than 60fps and miss the higher fps from CRT days, then yes, it will be worthy.
However, a 360 doesnt hit 60+fps often, especially not at 1920 res !
So....
 
120Hz isn't about gaming, but better gaming is a nice side effect; I would imagine 120Hz would reduce tearing when not using Vsync. Might even convert a CRT fanboy or two.

To quote wikipedia, 120Hz "...allows for less distortion when movies filmed at 24 frames per second (fps) are viewed due to the elimination of telecine (3:2 pulldown). The rate of 120 was chosen as the least common multiple of 24 fps (cinema) and 30 fps (TV)."
 
Hmm...

I'm still curious.

I think I'll wait. LG is coming out with a 16:9 monitor soon so I might want to check that out as well.

Thanks though :)
 
I think overall they are gonna be pretty pointless for computer users , unless its true 120hz rendering and not frame copying . It only seems to benefit very fast motion pictures (sports , some video games) and even then it introduces artifacts into the picture that some people cant stand and others dont mind. I would seriously wait for this technology to fully mature before jumping in on the boat for the first gen of these aimed at the PC monitor market.

I know some people heavily disagree and thats fine .. I own a Samsung A650 with 120hz rendering built in and 95 precent of the time I leave it off because I dont like the soap opera effect myself. If however its true 120hz rendering then it will be pretty great , remember though this technology has been around for sometime now and if it was really that amazing I'm pretty sure NEC,Planar, Ezio or one of the other high end LCD producers would have intergrated it into one of there higher end models .. so far we have yet to see one.
 
Yea, I thought these "120hz" LCD's were actually doing 120fps... then found out it was just frame doubling... gah...

It looked a little better, but not much... it looked like 60p because 95% of video/film is 24 or 30p ...
 
Some of the newer tech does take full 120Hz input.
I know its available on HDTVs but not sure about computer monitors.

edit:
The Viewsonics do appear to be true 120Hz
 
Nenu said:
Some of the newer tech does take full 120Hz input.
I know its available on HDTVs but not sure about computer monitors.

edit:
The Viewsonics do appear to be true 120Hz
Click to expand...
None of the HDTV tech I've seen will take a true 120hz input from a PC.

Show me where you saw this about the viewsonic, unless I can set the refresh rate on my pc to 120hz it doesn't count in my book.
 
These LCDs have stereoscopic support.
NVidias stereoscopic driver displays stereo by drawing each frame twice, once for each eye.
A minimum of 50 to 60Hz per eye is required for a smooth image hence the 120Hz.
This method should allow you to set a refresh rate of 120Hz.

Its possible that some form of processing is done inside the TV and it is fed the main frame and a lower b/w difference frame for the other eye tagged onto the same frame at 60Hz.
I havent heard any mention of this though.
 
but still no true 120hz display if you don't use the glasses? no thanks, I think I'll keep my fw900.
 
shiznit said:
but still no true 120hz display if you don't use the glasses? no thanks, I think I'll keep my fw900.
Click to expand...


NO NO NO! This has nothing to do with REQUIRING glasses of any kind.

3D Shutter is very old technology, which works by rapidly drawing the picture from slightly different angle for each Hz frame, and when having 3D shutter glasses your one eye sees the picture from another angle while other is blocked and vice versa, resulting in TRUE 3D depth perception (even stuff seeming to come outside of monitor towards you is possible by adjusting convergence, though its bit eye straining).

This gem has been limited to CRTs so far because it requires very high refresh rate, 120Hz pretty much minimum. (It gets divided to 60Hz per eye afterall) So now Viewsonic advertises an LCD that is finally compatible with 3D shutter technology.

This would be sweet, I did use 3D shutter glasses from time to time when I had CRT and despite its bugs (it afterall works by hacking 3D signal to draw those pictures of different angle for each frame, and sprite stuff like mouse cursors and crosshairs often have placement problems) it looked fantastic when it did work properly. Monitor seemed like a window to another world.
 
The stereoscopic support is a hint that it will be able to take 120Hz.
You dont have to use stereo.
 
ok, I guess we'll have to wait and see. I think I would much rather have regular 120hz over 60hz to each eye but I haven't tried glasses yet, still 60hz is pretty crappy for FPS. but 240hz FED + glasses, now we're talkin :).
 
I'm looking forward to trying out the 120hz Viewsonic. The original Viewsonic press release said the monitors would be available in "select retailers later this year." I haven't seen them crop up anywhere yet, but I guess they have another 29 days left in the year. Of course I won't be surprised if they don't show up until sometime in '09.
 
dz.Doze said:
I'm looking forward to trying out the 120hz Viewsonic. The original Viewsonic press release said the monitors would be available in "select retailers later this year." I haven't seen them crop up anywhere yet, but I guess they have another 29 days left in the year. Of course I won't be surprised if they don't show up until sometime in '09.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I read that we're looking at January hopefully.
 
If you wait you can find out if this thing is good for you or not. The other screens will still be there unless you need it now.

I found this one from a "review" site:

http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-6211-view-ViewSonic-120--Hz-monitor.html

This one:

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/0...es-120hz-display-technology-at-nvision-2008/1

The first listing says it is dual-link DVI. If it uses dual-link DVI to its fullest bandwidth it should allow 120hz input from the PC at 1680x1050. This is good because then I'd assume it doesn't need frame interpolation technology inside. The less frame buffering and stuff, the less likely it is to have input lag.

It might not help the Xbox 360 specifically, but it would be great for PC, and nowadays with the Experience upgrade you get 1680x1050 as a fully supported resolution so it should still look pretty good with 360 too.



Shrimpanzee said:
I can't seem to find the article I remembered but here's one that says something similar...
Click to expand...
 
10e said:
It might not help the Xbox 360 specifically, but it would be great for PC, and nowadays with the Experience upgrade you get 1680x1050 as a fully supported resolution so it should still look pretty good with 360 too.
Click to expand...
IMO it's not "fully supported". Even when setting the Xbox to 1680x1050, you'll get black bars on the top and bottom of the screen because the games don't render at that ratio. It's still a nice update feature because the image doesn't get distorted.

Correct me if I'm wrong but everyone I've heard from with a 1680x1050 monitor gets black bars.
 
Shrimpanzee said:
IMO it's not "fully supported". Even when setting the Xbox to 1680x1050, you'll get black bars on the top and bottom of the screen because the games don't render at that ratio. It's still a nice update feature because the image doesn't get distorted.

Correct me if I'm wrong but everyone I've heard from with a 1680x1050 monitor gets black bars.
Click to expand...
if the aspect ratio is maintained and the 360 outputs a true 1680x1050 resolution to maintain 1:1 pixel ratio (which it does, the 360s scaler is better than most monitors and doesn't add input lag), who cares about the black bars? Watching most movies on 16:9 TVs you still get black bars...
 
I would only be interested if it can do 24hz properly (by showing each frame 5 times). I'm not interested in motion interpolation. I imagine some monitors won't be able to do the former, but most or all would be able to do the latter (as it is with 120hz TVs).
 
shiznit said:
if the aspect ratio is maintained and the 360 outputs a true 1680x1050 resolution to maintain 1:1 pixel ratio (which it does, the 360s scaler is better than most monitors and doesn't add input lag), who cares about the black bars? Watching most movies on 16:9 TVs you still get black bars...
Click to expand...
I understand, I would just prefer gaming sans black bars.
 
So none of the 120hz HDTVs out there will actually accept a 120hz input from a PC?

I know Nvidia is supposed to show off their new 3D glasses later on today, so hopefully some more information will come out as to which TVs will accept a true 120hz input.
 
Samsung shows 240Hz LCD TV

The problem with LCDs is that they get blurry when the on-screen action hots up. Samsung has solved this by upping the refresh rate of the display to 240Hz, or four times faster than the standard 60Hz rate. This is coupled with what Samsung calls Auto Motion Plus, an interpolation trick which guesses where a pixel would be if the source refreshed fast enough to send it and uses the excess of cycles to put it in its place.
Click to expand...

Not exactly long on detail here. I'm guessing from the phrase "if the source refreshed fast enough" that this isn't real 240Hz, but just showing the same 60Hz frame 4 times in a row, and then using Auto Motion Plus to morph from one 60Hz frame to the next. I have no idea what this would do if you tried to game on it; this could be either really good or really bad.
 
redman223 said:
So none of the 120hz HDTVs out there will actually accept a 120hz input from a PC?
Click to expand...

No.

I'm not confident that there will ever be a 120hz or above INPUT tv.
1. There are no devices other than the PC that would output such a refresh rate.
2. Companies add features that give impressive marketing blurbs.
3. They've already abused 120hz, which is why they've moved onto 240hz (and it will be just as pointless, but it sounds good).
 
Isnt there a 480hz display out there somewhere? Not for sale though, but I read about it somewhere.

Well I guess if there are no 120hz tv's then we will have to settle for smaller 120hz monitors. I am sure that there will be a 120hz 30'' available sometime, but it will be extremely expensive and I dont really want 2560x1600, as it would probably double the video card cost.
 
Ive always been a fan of high hz refresh rates. I really miss my 100hz CRT. I cant wait for upgraded LCD technology that allows it in true 100hz+ or higher.
 
I suspect true 120Hz monitors won't appear until DisplayPort becomes more widespread. I believe Viewsonic announced a true 120Hz monitor some time back, but it was 1680 x 1050 and require a dual-link DVI hookup (or HDMI v1.3). If 1680 x 1050 @ 120Hz requires dual-link, I can't see it having the bandwidth to support 1920 x 1200 @ 120Hz, let alone 2560 x 1600 @ 120Hz.

According to the Technical Overview on the DisplayPort website:

http://www.displayport.org/white-papers/whitepapers/DP_Tech_Overview_English.pdf

DisplayPort 1.1 can support 1920 x 1080 @ 120Hz using a 4-lane connection (and still maintain 24-bit color depth), and it'll be getting a bandwidth boost when DisplayPort 1.2 arrives. I think it also helps that DP can be upgraded to add bandwidth and features more easily than DVI/HDMI.
 
Too bad it is a 22 inch monitor. But I read that by the middle of the year LG will have a 23.5 inch out that will support 1920x1200, supposedly larger sizes will be out sometime in the second half of the year.
 
10e said:
The first listing says it is dual-link DVI. If it uses dual-link DVI to its fullest bandwidth it should allow 120hz input from the PC at 1680x1050.
Click to expand...

Does dual-link DVI have enough bandwidth to allow 120hz at 1920x1200?
 
natty said:
Does dual-link DVI have enough bandwidth to allow 120hz at 1920x1200?
Click to expand...

Yes, but you'd be limited to 24-bit color. Crank it up to 32-bit color and dual-link runs out of bandwidth.

Though, I suppose its debatable whether you could see a difference between 24 and 32-bit color.
 
King of Heroes said:
Yes, but you'd be limited to 24-bit color. Crank it up to 32-bit color and dual-link runs out of bandwidth.

Though, I suppose its debatable whether you could see a difference between 24 and 32-bit color.
Click to expand...

32 bit color?
Sure there exist 30-bit displays but those are not cheap. For a mortal 24 bit is the most can get (right?).

Usually 32 bit is really 24 bit but with 8 bits for alpha and/or other stuff as well. But since we don't have transparent displays (although OLED makes it possible) 32 bit is mainly used internally and never sent to the monitor.
Thats how I have assumed it to be at least.

Another way of thinking about it.
Single link manages 1920x1200 in 60 Hz, so dual link => twice the bandwidth should therefore theoretically manage 120 Hz.
 
brumwald said:
32 bit color?
Sure there exist 30-bit displays but those are not cheap. For a mortal 24 bit is the most can get (right?).

Usually 32 bit is really 24 bit but with 8 bits for alpha and/or other stuff as well. But since we don't have transparent displays (although OLED makes it possible) 32 bit is mainly used internally and never sent to the monitor.
Thats how I have assumed it to be at least.

Another way of thinking about it.
Single link manages 1920x1200 in 60 Hz, so dual link => twice the bandwidth should therefore theoretically manage 120 Hz.
Click to expand...

Ah, I think you're right about that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth#32-bit_color

In which case its not a problem at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top