21–30 of 282 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't hold my breath. Competing models seem to top out around 120 Hz but at lower resolutions. I don't imagine there's a universal push for higher refresh rates in this segment anyway. My calibrated displays run at 60 Hz, and I'm happy with that. Photos don't really move much, y'know.
> Photos don't really move much, y'know. They do when you move them (scroll)
Can you provide a ROI point for scrolling photos at 120Hz+ ?
realistically what’s the point of all those pixels at 32 inches? 5k at 27 inches seems more than enough.
8K HDR implies that DSC becomes unavoidable...but DSC's "visually lossless" criteria relies on the human eye and is statistically subjective at face value. Any domain experts know how that actually squares in practice against automated colorimeter calibration?
DisplayPort over USB4@4x2/TB5 at 120Gbps would be required for uncompressed 12bpp.
8K HDR implies that DSC becomes unavoidable...but DSC's "visually lossless" criteria relies on the human eye and is statistically subjective at face value. Any domain experts know how that actually squares in practice against automated colorimeter calibration?
I swore a blood oath that I would never buy an Asus product ever again, after three terrible laptops from them in a row, but holy hell do I kind of want this monitor. My main "monitor" right now is an 85" 8K TV, that I absolutely love, but it would be nice to have something smaller for my upstairs desk.
I shudder to think how small the macOS ui text will be on this but I’m willing to find out.
macOS is optimized for PPIs at the sweet spot in which Asus's 5K 27" (PA27JCV) and 6K 32" (PA32QCV) monitors sit. Asus seemed to be one of the few manufacturers that understand a 27" monitor should be 5K (217ppi), not 4K (163ppi). 4K will show you pixels at most common distances. But if you follow that same 217ppi up to 8K, that leads to 40.5" not 32".
My wife has a triple vertical PA27JCV setup and it's amazing. I've been able to borrow it for short stints, and it's nearly everything I've ever wanted from a productivity monitor setup.
8K HDR implies that DSC becomes unavoidable...but DSC's "visually lossless" criteria relies on the human eye and is statistically subjective at face value. Any domain experts know how that actually squares in practice against automated colorimeter calibration?
8K 60fps 4:4:4 8bpp uncompressed requires a 96gbit HDMI cable, which is labeled Ultra96 in HDMI 2.2 afaik: https://www.hdmi.org/download/savefile?filekey=Marketing/HDM... DisplayPort over USB4@4x2/TB5 at 120Gbps would be required for uncompressed 12bpp.
No mention of 120Hz; I'm waiting for a 6k or higher-density display that can do higher refresh rates.
I was going to joke about 8k@120Hz needing like 4 video cables, but it seems we are not too far from it. [8k@120Hz Gaming on HDMI 2.1 with compression]( https://wccftech.com/8k-120hz-gaming-world-first-powered-by-... ) > With the HDMI 2.2 spec announced at CES 2025 and its official release scheduled for later this year, 8K displays will likely become more common thanks to the doubled (96 Gbps) bandwidth.
