WYP
News Guru
A dual 1440p screen with an incredible 240Hz refresh rate.
Read more about Samsung's Odyssey G9 Curved 49-inch 240Hz monitor.
Read more about Samsung's Odyssey G9 Curved 49-inch 240Hz monitor.
Last edited:
Samsung's Odyssey G9 Curved display is a 49-inch 240Hz monster - CES 2020
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
Oooooh I want it ^_^
Darkdayzzz
New member
1 - that looks really sharp
2 - going to be very expensive I wager.
3 - "With a 1000R curvature, this monitor is designed to be 1000mm away from the user's face, which is ideal for most desk or office setups." this is hilarious to me as 1k mm is "roughly" 39 inches. Most people do not sit that far away from monitors and what is even more ironic is the photo they use showing the monitor on a desk with the keyboard and mouse really really close... yeah I want to sit that close to my gigantic monitor...yes
2 - going to be very expensive I wager.
3 - "With a 1000R curvature, this monitor is designed to be 1000mm away from the user's face, which is ideal for most desk or office setups." this is hilarious to me as 1k mm is "roughly" 39 inches. Most people do not sit that far away from monitors and what is even more ironic is the photo they use showing the monitor on a desk with the keyboard and mouse really really close... yeah I want to sit that close to my gigantic monitor...yes
1 - that looks really sharp
2 - going to be very expensive I wager.
3 - "With a 1000R curvature, this monitor is designed to be 1000mm away from the user's face, which is ideal for most desk or office setups." this is hilarious to me as 1k mm is "roughly" 39 inches. Most people do not sit that far away from monitors and what is even more ironic is the photo they use showing the monitor on a desk with the keyboard and mouse really really close... yeah I want to sit that close to my gigantic monitor...yes
1000 mm is a meter, your arms are more or less a meter. If I put them in front of me right now I cannot touch my screen. How close do you sit to your screen
:huh:
WYP
News Guru
1 - that looks really sharp
2 - going to be very expensive I wager.
3 - "With a 1000R curvature, this monitor is designed to be 1000mm away from the user's face, which is ideal for most desk or office setups." this is hilarious to me as 1k mm is "roughly" 39 inches. Most people do not sit that far away from monitors and what is even more ironic is the photo they use showing the monitor on a desk with the keyboard and mouse really really close... yeah I want to sit that close to my gigantic monitor...yes
At 1m away, your eyes are at the center of the circle which the display wraps itself around. As such, the screen is an equal distance from your eyes across its radius. Most curved displays a 1800R, making them
The desk pictured is a lot deeper than the desk I use, and I use an equivalent display config (in terms of size and resolution) that uses two 27-inch 1440p screens. Just measured and with correct posture my eyes are 85cm away. If I used a deeper desk, which I would if I could, I would be 1000mm away. For a screen that wide you need to be far away to see it all.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
This is going to require more than DP 1.3/1.4 or HDMI 2.1. at a total of 53.08 Gbps with an 8bit panel.
WYP
News Guru
I think DP 1.4 can do it with DSC, the same technique which allows 144Hz 4K. ATM Nvidia doesn't support this feature sadly.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
If they introduce DP 2.0 they could do it without any compression. It would be the first DP2.0 I believe?
But I'm not sure how much DSC can add to bandwidth.
But I'm not sure how much DSC can add to bandwidth.
WYP
News Guru
IIRC, it uses a 3:1 compression ratio. Not sure exactly how much that will boost bandwidth though.
In all likelihood, Samsung is using some form of compression for 144Hz. Much like most 144Hz 4K screens.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
You mean 240hz?
I don't doubt they are. But in all honesty I am seriously tired of manufacturers offering these super high end monitors without the latest HDMI/DP standards. It's incredibly annoying. There are tons of $1000+ monitors not using the latest standards. Sure it might not need it but it's not expensive and there are bigger TVs that cost less with newer standards, notably LG's more high end NanoCell TV lineup from last year. That support 4:4:4 chroma sampling and work with PCs natively. Not to mention they offer much better visuals than these upper class of monitors
Last edited:
Darkdayzzz
New member
WYP
News Guru
Yes, I meant 240Hz there for the 5120x1440 monitor.
TBH, DP 2.0 is too new to be used on a screen. It isn't on GPUs and is not quite ready for primetime. We only got a GPU with DP 1.4 with DSC this year with Navi. That's how long these things can take to get onto products.
The same can be said for HDMI 2.1, though it has at least started to come with new TVs.
If I'm honest, I think the whole "monitor OC" marketing angle is bogus. They are just calling sub-sampling by a new name because they don't have the DisplayPort or HDMI bandwidth. It was a genius marketing ploy, but it is fundamentally dishonest IMHO.
It is annoying that Samsung hasn't specified what connectivity options this new screen offers, but at least the bandwidth issue will only be a problem on the crazy 5120x1440 240Hz model. The 2560x1440 240Hz models are fine with DP 1.3 or higher.
In this case, Samsung may have pushed the envelope too far, though HDMI 2.1 is an option here. Unfortunately, no GPUs support HDMI 2.1 ATM, so we are stuck with issues unless Samsung use DP 1.4 with DSC (which only AMD Navi cards support).
While it's most nowadays I don't think every "OC'd" monitor requires changing the transmission, I think I remember when it first started to be a thing we'd see 60Hz monitors overclocked to 90Hz and such, the limit you hit was normally the panels ability to physically refresh the pixels in a given time period rather than bandwidth there, but I guess with modern panels you're likely right that it's essentially just a settings change, I've not seen anyway test 120Hz+ OC'd panels with high speed cameras to verify they're correctly producing all the frames though though(Maybe GN or Wendell has done it if anyone knows?).
But yeah, a big issue now is how long GPU upgrade cycles can be, especially for monitors not explicitly targeted at gaming, lots of people still have more than capable PC's with only HDMI 1.4 or DP 1.2, it's hard to market a monitor that requires a 6 month old max GPU to "get the most out of it"/"use it properly"/however customers may see it.
Using lower sampling isn't a particularly novel concept or going to result in quality loss anyway though, 4:2:0 is used for DVD, Blu-ray, pre-x264 MPEG, and a fair bit more. 4:2:2 is used on many higher quality/professional video standards too. The first value (luminance) value which humans are quite sensitive to, but we can have a half ratio of sampling on the chrominance values even for high quality transmissions because the human visual systems much lower sensitivity to this creates psychovisual spectral redundancy- IE the information is mostly redundant to our eyes.
DSC should be visually lossless, a key aspect of it is another area of psychovisual redundancy, spatial redundancy, which exploits the fact that pixel values can often be accurately inferred from the values of those around them. You can find the algorithm in detail online (found an overview here for anyone interested), but in summary it combines three prediction methods and an on-the-fly method of selection to create a system that can "infer" a full image from a set of calculated residual values to very accurately recreate full images from a third of the data (With standard VESA DSC parameters).
Ultimately "visually lossless" is subjective though(Usually validated with simple ABX testing), there was an excellent whitepaper out from Synposis recently that went into various methods for validating and comparing "visually lossless" algorithms, but any "loss" will be so small as to be no concern or visual change for entertainment media to say the least.
But yeah, a big issue now is how long GPU upgrade cycles can be, especially for monitors not explicitly targeted at gaming, lots of people still have more than capable PC's with only HDMI 1.4 or DP 1.2, it's hard to market a monitor that requires a 6 month old max GPU to "get the most out of it"/"use it properly"/however customers may see it.
Using lower sampling isn't a particularly novel concept or going to result in quality loss anyway though, 4:2:0 is used for DVD, Blu-ray, pre-x264 MPEG, and a fair bit more. 4:2:2 is used on many higher quality/professional video standards too. The first value (luminance) value which humans are quite sensitive to, but we can have a half ratio of sampling on the chrominance values even for high quality transmissions because the human visual systems much lower sensitivity to this creates psychovisual spectral redundancy- IE the information is mostly redundant to our eyes.
DSC should be visually lossless, a key aspect of it is another area of psychovisual redundancy, spatial redundancy, which exploits the fact that pixel values can often be accurately inferred from the values of those around them. You can find the algorithm in detail online (found an overview here for anyone interested), but in summary it combines three prediction methods and an on-the-fly method of selection to create a system that can "infer" a full image from a set of calculated residual values to very accurately recreate full images from a third of the data (With standard VESA DSC parameters).
Ultimately "visually lossless" is subjective though(Usually validated with simple ABX testing), there was an excellent whitepaper out from Synposis recently that went into various methods for validating and comparing "visually lossless" algorithms, but any "loss" will be so small as to be no concern or visual change for entertainment media to say the least.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
While true we don't have GPUs with the newest standards I don't find that a reasonable excuse to not include it on monitors that are on the bleeding edge of tech. They should be taking advantage of that with such high price tags. If everyone waits for everyone to do something, nothing gets done quickly at all. If one side keeps pushing then the other must catch up.
WYP
News Guru
I agree, but I don't see display makers pushing GPU makers in most cases. Usually, GPU support comes first in the PC space.
HDMI is a different kettle of fish, given the wide adoption of HDMI outside of PC, but DisplayPort usually sees GPUs ahead of monitors.
Similar threads
