Why no 24 inch IPS/pva 2560x1200 @ 120hz+?

[dragantoe]

did anyone forget you can overclock some of those korean panels?

 

[blackened23]

Putting "p" after any number (other than the few that are officially defined that way) does not define a resolution. Gah.

How do you figure? "P" refers to progressive scan (non interlaced, 30 frames per second capability minimum), and the number represents horizontal resolution. 1440p is progressively scanned with 1440 horizontal scan lines of resolution.

Why would you not consider 1440p a valid terminology? 1440 horizontal resolution with "p" progressive scan. Sounds right to me.

 

[blackened23]

Displayport is the culpit. It fractured the standards and sofar havent been able to get momentum itself.

HDMI and DVI is the defacto standards on PCs today. So not sure how you can say that most PCs dont have DVI anymore. Unless its laptops, but they never really had to begin with.

Huh? Displayport is superior to both HDMI and DVI, and was created by the VESA standards committee. DVI is the most common, but it is not the best - displayport has more bandwidth, more features than either DVI or HDMI, and also supports cool features such as multiple displays on a single cable and wireless displays. It also supports audio, while DVI output does not - it supports everything that HDMI and DVI do and more. Like I said, it is the superior standard and is hardly "fractured", it was created by VESA.

Legacy video cards more often than not have DVI. Sure, it is more common - you are not incorrect. As far as HDMI, whatever - I consider that for HDTVs but would never use that crap on a PC. Anyway, mini displayport/DP will be more common in coming years especially with mobility picking up so much steam. You will not find DVI on an ultrabook - mini displayport is by far the best. And on top of that, it supports more features/bandwidth than both DVI or HDMI. Lastly, its the only standard that currently allows 4k displays on 1 cable - 4k on DVI requires 2 DVI/D ports/cables - hardly eloquent.

 

[ShintaiDK]

LOL, is this a joke? Displayport is superior to both HDMI and DVI, and was created by the VESA standards committee. DVI is the most common, but it is not the best - displayport has more bandwidth, more features than either DVI or HDMI, and also supports cool features such as multiple displays on a single cable and wireless displays. It also supports audio, while DVI output does not - it supports everything that HDMI and DVI do and more. Like I said, it is the superior standard and is hardly "fractured", it was created by VESA.

Legacy video cards more often than not have DVI. Sure, it is more common - you are not incorrect. As far as HDMI, whatever - I consider that for HDTVs but would never use that crap on a PC. Anyway, mini displayport/DP will be more common in coming years especially with mobility picking up so much steam. You will not find DVI on an ultrabook - mini displayport is by far the best. And on top of that, it supports more features/bandwidth than both DVI or HDMI. Lastly, its the only standard that currently allows 4k displays on 1 cable - 4k on DVI requires 2 DVI/D ports/cables - hardly eloquent.

So thats why my GTX680 contains 2 DVI, 1 HDMi and 1 Displayport? While my TV only contains HDMI for example?

We can all agree Displayport is better specs. But it still (Atleast sofar) didnt do what it was created for. It simply fractured the display standards even further. All we got was more different ports. And Displayport got very little momentum right now. So its not something that will change anytime soon.

The "joke" seems to be that you completely misunderstood post and wandered off to tell about how good Displayport is instead of staying to the context.

DVI and HDMI is the key standards today. Displayport might be in the future. The useability for Displayport today is very limited, 4 years after its introduction. And 4K displays aint exactly around the corner.

A good example to show this might also be my U2713HM screen. While it got Displayport, no Displayport cable is shipped with it. Only DVI and VGA cables.

Current prices are also against Displayport. A DVI->HDMI cable cost around 1/3rd of a Displayport to HDMI or DVI here. And Mini Displayport is closer to 4x the cost. Same applies for sametech to sametech cables. Displayport is still 3x more expensive.

Price is one of the big issues of Displayports lack of momentum. Displayport currently only offers something that _might_ be useful in some distant future. Kinda ironic, considering that there are no royalties on Displayport. The active/passive disaster with Displayport didnt help either. Passive mode only supports 3 meters. The absolute shortest of the 3 standards.

 

[MrStryker]

Loving my Yamakasi 27" S-IPS LED 2560x1440 at 110Hz.

 

[ElFenix]

Still standing by my previous comment,2560x1440 in a 24'' size will be to small,enabled that custom resolution to my u2412m and god was it awful as far as text in game goes and i sit about 2-3 feet away from my monitor the majority of the time.

Can see it working for 27+ and honestly think 24'' in 2560x1440 or 1600p would be a niche product for those who wanna sit a foot away from their monitor.

The u2412m has a max resolution of 1920x1200. It would have been interpolating 2560x1440 so of course it looked terrible.


The point of higher resolutions is to make the pixels disappear. People aren't sitting inches from their retina mbps.

The main culprit is window's inability to scale properly.

 

[blackened23]

Current prices are also against Displayport. A DVI->HDMI cable cost around 1/3rd of a Displayport to HDMI or DVI here. And Mini Displayport is closer to 4x the cost. Same applies for sametech to sametech cables. Displayport is still 3x more expensive.

Price is one of the big issues of Displayports lack of momentum. Displayport currently only offers something that _might_ be useful in some distant future. Kinda ironic, considering that there are no royalties on Displayport. The active/passive disaster with Displayport didnt help either.

Well I definitely concede this point. DVI is definitely popular right now for desktops, although that may change in the future since mobile ultrabooks are better suited to mHDMI or displayport (with the latter being better featured). I feel like the momentum may shift to DP if ultra HD (4k) takes off, but that may be a while yet - and the cost associated with DP is high like you mentioned. For now DVI is definitely the de facto standard for traditional PCs. It's kind of annoying that DP has a lot of neat features yet the adapters and cables for it are so cost prohibitive right now.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Well I definitely concede this point. DVI is definitely popular right now for desktops, although that may change in the future since mobile ultrabooks are better suited to mHDMI or displayport (with the latter being better featured). I feel like the momentum may shift to DP if ultra HD (4k) takes off, but that may be a while yet - and the cost associated with DP is high like you mentioned. For now DVI is definitely the de facto standard for traditional PCs. It's kind of annoying that DP has a lot of neat features yet the adapters and cables for it are so cost prohibitive right now.

I fully agree. I would like to see Displayport used for everything. But the blame can only be put on the creators of Displayport. It looks to be a standard thats made by geeks. But forgot practical use to put it bluntly. Price, distance, features etc. Even at size, the regular displayport connector is horrible. Not to mention its locking mechcanism.

Its just sad :/

I wonder if all these issues can be resolved. Else I wouldnt be surprised if we got an entire new standard.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Honestly at the 24" size I'd still settle for 1080p if someone would produce a 120Hz one with an IPS panel and had it engineered with a focus around backlight strobing to reduce/eliminate blur

my order of priority:

1. low input response
2. high motion clarity
3. favorable pixel density
4. color accuracy

1 and 2 generally go together, although there are ways to generate clear motion while destroying input response, and that's the opposite of what I'd want

and as far as 3 and 4, color accuracy could be more important if a particular panel is especially terrible, but for the most part I've found my recent TNs to be good enough to where I might consider a 1440p TN panel over a IPS if a manufacturer simply did not desire to produce such a fantasy monitor with IPS.

That being said, I tend to think 1080p might actually be the best choice overall for resolution if only because we barely have the hardware power to properly push 1080p120 let alone 1440p120. Although if someone produced an absolute "must have" 1440p120 monitor it might help kick GPU and CPU makers in the pants a bit to get back on track with pushing more pixels as well as encourage the software developers to be more efficient with their code and overall game design.

 

[Bateluer]

It's sad those Catleap 1440p that could overclock to 120hz are gone. I would have got one when I got my 27" 1440p monitor if they were still available.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-ACHIEVA...6200?pt=Computer_Monitors&hash=item19ce366ec8

 

[Black Octagon]

2560x 1440@120Hz IS possible, but requires hacks, in particular because you need to unlock the 330Mhz pixel clock limit built into both AMD and NVIDIA's GPU drivers. Presumably the same is technically possible at 1600p, though I don't believe it's ever been done. Dual link DVI or DisplayPort would be the necessary interface for driving the requisite bandwidth in any case.

Oh and I fully agree that 1600p on a 24" monitor would be way overkill. MIGHT work if you never have to read any text, ever...but otherwise it would be silly

 

[Dice144]

2560x 1440@120Hz IS possible, but requires hacks, in particular because you need to unlock the 330Mhz pixel clock limit built into both AMD and NVIDIA's GPU drivers. Presumably the same is technically possible at 1600p, though I don't believe it's ever been done. Dual link DVI or DisplayPort would be the necessary interface for driving the requisite bandwidth in any case.

Saying something will never been done is like saying 1 mb of ram is enough. Tech will keep advancing until we hit a Physics wall.

Now that being said I wish more company's would follow Apples recent trend and push resolution more. Not saying I like Apples price tax but I do love the ideal of higher res in more tech gadgets.

Currently own a Catleap 2560x1440 and love it. Got unlucky and it will only go to 65 Hz but for $310 cannot complain!

 

[Black Octagon]

I never said that "something will never been done"...

 

[BrightCandle]

Saying something will never been done is like saying 1 mb of ram is enough. Tech will keep advancing until we hit a Physics wall.

Now that being said I wish more company's would follow Apples recent trend and push resolution more. Not saying I like Apples price tax but I do love the ideal of higher res in more tech gadgets.

Currently own a Catleap 2560x1440 and love it. Got unlucky and it will only go to 65 Hz but for $310 cannot complain!

Just bare in mind all Apple are really doing is fixing the DPD for laptops and tablets not desktops. Desktops already achieve high DPD, often to "retina" level of quality and don't need additional resolution to match these devices. Its just that laptops and tablets before these screens had much lower dots per degree than desktop equivalents and this higher density was necessary for screens used so close. So while it is a decent evolution of displays its not a necessary change on the desktop, because we have had retina density for decades.