You probably don’t need a 1,000 Hz gaming monitor

Went looking for other detailed specs. Besides it being an IPS, I couldn't find anything else. As others have implied, what kind of GPU could possible drive this thing, even at 1080? I'm guessing that a lot of those 1000 frames you'll get in one second will be artificial, yes?

Rolling scan is going to be awesome when the refresh rate matches the vertical resolution. It could theoretically scan out one line at a time while simulating stuff like phosphor bloom and decay.

I bet it still has tearing. VSync, running at 240fps, GSync… it seems like nothing works for me. Monitors today are so sophisticated they have more processing power than some of my old PCs - to they point that mine even crashes occasionally but I still can’t find one that solves a problem that ancient CRTs never had.

Of course a CRT the size of my current monitor would snap my desk like a twig, but it wouldn’t nag me to do ‘pixel cleaning’ at least once a day.

Incidentally, can anyone tell me why my SDR content has all the colour banding of an 8-bit GIF when I have HDR mode on but looks fine when it’s turned off?

Tactical Finesse said:

Too bad no one can afford GPUs or RAM to drive it

Click to expand...

Tell me about it -- Still running my high end custom water loop computer -- from 2017

My mom's laptop finally bit the dust and I had to order her a new one, 32gB ram was a requirement -- it felt like I was signing her up for a timeshare or a Ponzi scheme or something

First one to 1001 Hz will get my money.

Wallachia said:

Tell me about it -- Still running my high end custom water loop computer -- from 2017

My mom's laptop finally bit the dust and I had to order her a new one, 32gB ram was a requirement -- it felt like I was signing her up for a timeshare or a Ponzi scheme or something

Click to expand...

I'm kicking myself for not BUY NOWing on ServerPartsDeals and nabbing some 30TB drives for my NAS, a year ago. They went from $300 to $600 for used drives.

Gotta hide that trump tax in SOME feature.

Don't count on there being any PS5 games on PC for these new monitors any time soon.

Tactical Finesse said:

I have a 240Hz 4K OLED...and presently I'm enjoying Everything is Crab. The irony isn't lost on me.

Click to expand...

I dropped a grand on an ASUS monitor late last year. Naturally the first thing I did was fire up TF2. To be fair the colours were so vivid when I was on the red team it felt like that time I tried salvia.

(The second thing I did was watch the parade scene from GiTS 2. Beautiful; I just wish HDR films/shows weren’t so damn dark.)

Maybe I skimmed over it, but I didn't see the panel type. I'm assuming this is TN?

If so, I'm going to insinuate that the fps specsmanship is about dressing up a bad technology as best they can, because it certainly won't be by color precision and consistency.

jonbob_newcastle said:

I dropped a grand on an ASUS monitor late last year. Naturally the first thing I did was fire up TF2. To be fair the colours were so vivid when I was on the red team it felt like that time I tried salvia.

(The second thing I did was watch the parade scene from GiTS 2. Beautiful; I just wish HDR films/shows weren’t so damn dark.)

Click to expand...

I got several dozen hours into Crimson Desert...which is a legit beautiful game, and gigantic open-world Skyrim on steroids. Then I put it down, because closed engine, plus frequent publisher updates, means regular breakage of mods to fix annoying decisions by the publisher...I think I'm on like chapter 9 of 11 of the MQ, but I'm kind of done fighting it for a while.

Meanwhile indie games that are simple but fun are just that good graphics or no.

Wallachia said:

Tell me about it -- Still running my high end custom water loop computer -- from 2017

Click to expand...

Same, from 2019 era (2080 Ti, 10y EVGA warranty). It does the 4K, but man does it suck the watts; a heavy gaming session pulls 650W from the wall for my whole rig, and without central AC I can only play for ~1 hour.
But to think of trying to push 1000fps out of this setup; it's bonkers.

We all talk about how much AI datacenters use. I actually like to compare these monitors to 'Rig Rockets' (re: lifted diesel trucks, tricked out). Do you really need that lift kit and power for 85% of your drive? No? Quite a waste... (sorry, being judgy).
Now make this same comparison to AI datacenters, and running varried LLMs - token usage for newer/improved models can be significantly higher, meaning more runtime or resources to complete. You can, almost quite literally, compare the loads of an AI chip to that of a Graphics Processor running a heavy game engine (ex.: Unreal 5+ @ 4K@75Hz) - while the AI chip can have a significantly higher headroom, if you compare an apples to apples benchmark/wattage usage per clock, you'll see similarities in power draw. Gaming can be just as power demanding as AI; without the 'always on datacenters' because people aren't (typically) playing 24/7.

P.S. - As someone who's a tiny bit of a control freak, I've done some analysis to see how much more wattage gaming from 1080p to 2160p takes.

World of Warcraft - 4K@75Hz: 550W average, 1080p@75Hz 350W average.
Whiskerwood - 4K@75Hz: 600W sustained 675W peak, 1080p@75Hz 475W average.
You can also force your graphics cards to use less power (ex.: TDP limiting on Nvidia) to squeeze more efficiency out of these chips. For example, I set my 2080 Ti to run at 60% limit when I'm 1080p gaming, then disable any frame generation techniques because it'll keep the video card at the framerate cap - I don't want this because it increases the power usage of both the GPU & CPU; not desirable on the hot days.

P.P.S. - Beware of the dreaded 'active signal resolution' in Windows 10/11 when trying to force a lower resolution on a 4K screen. Check the 'Advanced' display options to check the active signal resolution, because when windows resolution is set to 1080p, active signal typically defaults to 4K, causing your games to render at that resolution most of the time. "Custom Resolution Utility" worked for me to clear this up; just make sure you understand your monitor's capabilities before tuning.

Also - beware of using frame generation techniques in non-FPS games (ex.: factory games). The more you lean on frame generation, the less CPU cycles there will be for game engine logic (re: your factory). This is apparent in Whiskerwood (but it's early access), and in Satisfactory as well I believe.

ChronoReverse said:

Whatever you're seeing isn't tearing and thus vsync (and similar) could not have helped in the first place.

Click to expand...

Whatever it is, it doesn’t seem like too much to ask to show one frame at a time. At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if it was nvidia’s drivers. Maybe I’ll see if the non-gamer ones are any better.

And I'm sitting here on my 60 Hz monitor still. If I were to splurge on a monitor I don't think the one I'd want exists. I'd like to keep my 32 inch size as it gives me lots of usable space but I don't think any bigger would work. I'd like a 5k dual mode since my monitor gets used for two use cases. It's my work monitor since I work from home and 5k is nice there but doesn't need to be high refresh rate. For gaming 1440p gives a better then 1080p resolution for the larger monitor size but is still manageable for high refresh rate gaming on something less than a 5090.

I do think the Frame Gen will be a big part of getting a 1000fps output for the game but in this use case it's fine. Taking a 250fps game output and doing 4x to 1k fps for a display like this is going to be a pretty reasonable solution. Native 1k fps would be better but I doubt there's any GPUs or CPUs that can support that in any configuration. Maybe you only do 2x for this competitive e-sports gamers but I'm sure you are going to need some to get to that 1k fps mark.

Tactical Finesse said:

I got several dozen hours into Crimson Desert...which is a legit beautiful game, and gigantic open-world Skyrim on steroids. Then I put it down, because closed engine, plus frequent publisher updates, means regular breakage of mods to fix annoying decisions by the publisher...I think I'm on like chapter 9 of 11 of the MQ, but I'm kind of done fighting it for a while.

Meanwhile indie games that are simple but fun are just that good graphics or no.

Click to expand...

I put 80 hours (i had a week off work, no one judge me) in to it at launch and then stopped to wait for the dev's to fix a few things.
They haven't stopped fixing things for months now and don't seem like they're slowing down any time soon.
Their work ethic is impressive.

I'm giving it a few more months for the big changes to stop coming before jumping back in.

Now if it only came with 3D and smell-o-vision...

This is one of the stupider marketing ploys come to life. Sure, some specialized test can show you how much or little your screen blurs an object vs screen refresh rate.. Now add actual game play with all of the various static, slow moving and fast moving parts and how quickly your brain can recognize the difference between two sequential frames. The question remains: what's the effective frame rate where you can perceive a difference let alone act on it?

We know the fastest reaction times are on the order of 100ms.

Having seen neither of them in person I'd choose the Pulsar technology that imitates the rolling CRT scan vs just increasing the refresh rate forever. Mix that with OLED and you get basically all the positives from a CRT. Retro games would still have issues with being too sharp and pixelated though.

Missing_Linc said:

As someone still playing choppy old isometric rpg's I definitely don't need it. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't like it...

Click to expand...

Yes, but think of how awesome Imoen will look as she strides across the screen.

J.King said:

Yes, I want my 1kHz display to accurately represent the motion blur my games add without any blurring!

Click to expand...

Just add the absurd premiums people will pay for the displays, cards, etc and this nicely sums up the times we're living in.

So much of what we now spend time thinking about or pursuing "because we can" (and no other reason) makes so little sense... the mere existence of these displays says something about us as a society and I'm pretty sure none of it is good.

My Gillette has 28 blades!

ca_steve said:

The question remains: what's the effective frame rate where you can perceive a difference let alone act on it?

Click to expand...

I used to think 60Hz was enough for anyone, but when I switched to 120 there was a difference. It’s slight, and I don’t understand it, but it’s there. It’s more noticeable on shooters, perhaps because they’re faster paced. 1000Hz though? I think @ubercurmudgeon hit the nail on the head.

instead of marketing improvements i wish they fixed the distortion problems. lcds flicker with certain patterns

Tactical Finesse said:

Too bad no one can afford GPUs or RAM to drive it

Click to expand...

If the price hikes due to LLM craze continue, I bet that around this time next year I could pay for my mortgage selling my old Nvidia 7300 GT AGP, Pentium III and 4GB DDR‑1 sticks! And psst, for the special lowly price of if you have to ask you can't afford it, I might even sell my Radeon R9 280X!!! /s

Tactical Finesse said:

Too bad no one can afford GPUs or RAM to drive it

Click to expand...

I remember 320x200 racing at 12 fps actually being enjoyable gaming. So if you compromise on resolution...

I'm not sure why there is such a negative reaction to 1000hz monitors? Yes, you cannot hit the max refresh rate of these things with most hardware, but it still helps in reducing blur. Blur busters did a huge write up on how we need these higher refresh rates to eliminate blur such as we had back with CRT monitors.

JoHBE said:

I remember 320x200 racing at 12 fps actually being enjoyable gaming. So if you compromise on resolution...

Click to expand...

I did get sad when Microsoft broke legacy compatibility with 8bit executables and Chips Challenge could no longer be run

My first thought was — how would it be possible to get that much data to the monitor, but TIL via Wikipedia for 8 bpc full HD, DisplayPort 2.1 can go up to 884 Hz without compression, so achieveable with DSC.
Wow.

jonbob_newcastle said:

I dropped a grand on an ASUS monitor late last year. Naturally the first thing I did was fire up TF2. To be fair the colours were so vivid when I was on the red team it felt like that time I tried salvia.

(The second thing I did was watch the parade scene from GiTS 2. Beautiful; I just wish HDR films/shows weren’t so damn dark.)

Click to expand...

I can add that red alert 2 plays great on a 4k 240hz OLED. I think it was the first game I played on a 50xx Nvidia card.

I play the occasional FPS and still have no idea why anyone needs more than 240hz for casual gaming.

Get the Blur Busters guy in here to explain why a 1000Hz monitor will reduce the "motion sickness" and migraines I sometimes get from blur and stutter. I'm all fucking in for this future.

Also for you retro-games, very high refresh rates allow you to simulate phosphor glow from CRTs. It looks pretty slick.