Indeed I did! Thanks for the clarification though, Dari.
What do you guys think of the 39 inch 4k VA panel asus displayed at computex? I'm almost more excited by that panel since VA general does have single digit response times and better contrast ratios than IPS - the downside being that VA in the past was limited to 1080p. Apparently not anymore though! Should be VERY interesting - the VA panel is said to be even cheaper than the 32 inch IPS model as well.
I think he confused the Sharp 4K monitor with the Seiki 4K TV. The Seiki doesn't have display port. The Sharp does.
Indeed I did! Thanks for the clarification though, Dari.
What do you guys think of the 39 inch 4k VA panel asus displayed at computex? I'm almost more excited by that panel since VA general does have single digit response times and better contrast ratios than IPS - the downside being that VA in the past was limited to 1080p. Apparently not anymore though! Should be VERY interesting - the VA panel is said to be even cheaper than the 32 inch IPS model as well.
I'm not sure what the specific issue with the Sharp model is, if it exists - yet DP 1.2 has no issues (bandwidth wise) with 60hz at 4k2 resolution, so if there's any such issue with the Sharp model - it's likely related to their implementation or panel electronics.
Furthermore, Asus specifically states that 60hz works via displayport 1.2 and they actually demoed both units at computex running 60hz and powered by nvidia video cards. So the asus is obviously doing a proper displayport implementation with the panel electronics to drive 60hz. Perhaps Sharp isn't - that would be hardly surprising since Sharp does not typically release monitors geared towards PC users.
I'm not sure what the specific issue with the Sharp model is, if it exists - yet DP 1.2 has no issues (bandwidth wise) with 60hz at 4k2 resolution, so if there's any such issue with the Sharp model - it's likely related to their implementation or panel electronics.
Furthermore, Asus specifically states that 60hz works via displayport 1.2 and they actually demoed both units at computex running 60hz and powered by nvidia video cards. So the asus is obviously doing a proper displayport implementation with the panel electronics to drive 60hz. Perhaps Sharp isn't - that would be hardly surprising since Sharp does not typically release monitors geared towards PC users.
30hz = good enough for consoles
60hz = 'good enough' for PC users
120hz+ = ideal
I would like to get to a place where have the choice between a 1080/1200P @ 120hz or a 4k @60hz. That would actually provide some nice options...
I'm not sure what the specific issue with the Sharp model is, if it exists - yet DP 1.2 has no issues (bandwidth wise) with 60hz at 4k2 resolution, so if there's any such issue with the Sharp model - it's likely related to their implementation or panel electronics.
Furthermore, Asus specifically states that 60hz works via displayport 1.2 and they actually demoed both units at computex running 60hz and powered by nvidia video cards. So the asus is obviously doing a proper displayport implementation with the panel electronics to drive 60hz. Perhaps Sharp isn't - that would be hardly surprising since Sharp does not typically release monitors geared towards PC users.
I'm not sure what the specific issue with the Sharp model is, if it exists - yet DP 1.2 has no issues (bandwidth wise) with 60hz at 4k2 resolution, so if there's any such issue with the Sharp model - it's likely related to their implementation or panel electronics.
The GPU power required to get good frame rates is too much right now.
It depends. First off, you don't have to max everything out - when you look at gaming benchmarks, websites typically ONLY do them with the games at maximum quality settings - People say the same thing regarding 2560x1600 panels, because you look at benchmarks of Crysis 3 maxed out and you'll get something silly like 20 fps at 2560x1600. But you do not have to max everything out. In fact, I play at the high setting with FXAA in crysis 3 on a single 780, and my framerate is pretty much always 60. And the game looks the very same as it does at very high - and i've taken screenshots to compare.
I'm certain Titan SLI could be a usable solution at 4k.....you obviously can't max every game out, however. Titan SLI is obviously a lot of GPU power, out of the reach of the average user. But I really don't think you need 4 Titan's to make 4k gaming usable. Again, you never have to max games out - if you maxed every game out in surround, you would quickly find that nearly no games are playable. Yet people make it work but lowering 2-3 settings. The same principle would apply at 4k - lower 2-3 settings and use FXAA instead of MSAA.
where is the preorder?
Yeah, I'll be waiting a bit for one of those... Mostly because I don't trust Asus monitors much. Got 3 duds in a row when I was getting into 120hz. They weren't all broke just had different degrees un unacceptable quality. Maybe, just maybe, if it were a Dell...