The sect witnesses 144 Hz and ultra-wide formats
In the life of a PC user, there are key points that change the attitude to what is under his hood or before his eyes. Someone discovers Windows 10 or Linux, someone realizes that they managed to assemble the coolest gaming machine in the Mini-ITX package, which is still not heard at night. This also includes 4k-monitor (especially with a small diagonal and hellish pixel density) SSD, some SLI or Crossfire, 32-64 gigabytes of RAM ... Something insanely happy and leaves to live with a smile in all 32 gigabytes of tooth, leads to disappointment.
My “Wow, cool!” I regularly update this one way or the other. More than five years ago, my old 27-inch Samsung with a resolution of 2560x1440 seemed something incredible to me, then I met 144-Hz monitors and G-sync, managed to communicate with super widescreen formats 21 to 9, curved displays and other pleasures of life. Today I have a monitor on my desk, which combines a number of such buns. 35 ", 21: 9, a fantastic 160 Hz matrix refresh rate and a curved display. And don't let its resolution make you let out a mean tear and say" yes, you are my dream, "it's still damn good, and here's why.
No, I am absolutely convinced that it is hard to explain in words what the difference between 60 Hz and 160 is. Some stubbornly do not see the difference between the console 30 FPS and PC's 60+, and here it is. Take some bright window for the title, but shake it well with the mouse. Now imagine that you do not see the "tracks" from the window, that it will be almost perfectly clear all the time. No trace, maximum - a light plume, which is caused by the reaction rate of neurons in the eye.
')
Utilitarian use for this update rate is only one thing: computer games. Yes, even at the OS level, it is more comfortable / more pleasant / less tired to use your eyes, but in dynamic and speed-sensitive games, 120 or 144 Hz are already given a lot, and 160 is a kind of "margin of safety" that allows you not to rest on V-Sync and GET MORE SIMILITY.
Fortunately, the monitor supports the FreeSync adaptive synchronization system: it was originally incorporated into the DisplayPort standard and later found its implementation in AMD video cards. Unfortunately, NVIDIA decided to play Apple and leave itscurve proprietary standard, on which it successfully mows the loot, selling special chips to monitor manufacturers. Alas, in the near future a strange situation awaits us: there will be more and more monitors with FreeSync in the world with NVIDIA’s total dominance in the graphics market, while NVIDIA simply does not support this feature. It's a shame.
Both basic algorithms that FreeSync from AMD, that G-Sync or Adaptive fast sync from NVIDIA, when exceeded by a frame rate maximum allowed for a sweep, start to “throw out” extra frames in the same way, which causes attendant problems that really worry only zadrots-sportsmen.
Yes, many toys are not optimized for this resolution at all. In the same Diablo 3, you will see terrible, ragged backgrounds. In some old Need for Speed, the speedometer interface will turn from a circle into an ugly oval. Old school things may crash at all, have to play in the window or order the monitor to pretend to be normal 16 to 9. But everything changes when you start something modern. Something that ... really feels different on a widescreen. Say, DOOM of 2016, The Witcher, the latest NFS or Project Cars. And even EuroTruckSimulator, not sparkling with graphics, arcade platformer, Starbound sandbox or some MOBA is perceived quite differently. You see further than opponents. The vertical scale remains the same, but the review left and right (forward and backward, call it whatever you like) grows. I think the benefits describe too. You see more in races, you notice an opponent in shooters before (especially if you configure FOV).
Anyone who plays auto simulators knows that over time you set an average time on the same track and car that is hard to beat. It seems to brake at ideal points, enter the turn in time, where necessary - let the rear axle into a skid, or fly in millimeters from the chicane fence. So: with this monitor I brought myself 4 seconds from the very first attempt. Of course, here the role is played by an increased frame rate, and an increase in the viewing angle, but fact is a fact.
In everyday use, such a monitor to some extent replaces two normal ones: side-by-side browser windows, a bunch of instant messengers, panels in a graphic or 3D editor that do not obscure the working area, which turns into approximately 16 to 9 - in general , a lot of advantages. Working with several texts at once is generally gorgeous. Open the code listing, help, browser and bug tracker on one screen and keep everything in sight? Well, you understand. Any task with a bunch of windows is racked up into neat columns.
And in the cinema, finally, these $ @!% Lost black stripes on the top and bottom. Now you can watch modern blockbusters in normal size.
Here's a laugh, and you can understand the beauty of a bent Monica after a week of use. You sit down at some "flat" comparable in width, and it seems to be convex, like an old TV. This effect lasts for several hours, but at first you sit with a strange feeling that “something is wrong here.” Immersion in the process in terms of toys is also different, a person’s lateral vision plays an important role in determining movement. Those who have 2-3 monitors on this scheme will understand me.
Picture from the Internet
To fray with three monitors will not work, but the similarity of sensations is present. I had the experience of communicating with “flat” 21 to 9, and the curved version, IMHO, is much more interesting.
The device that I described is a 35-inch AOC with the index C3583FQ. His full specifications are as follows:
Diagonal: 35 inches;
Matrix: AU Optronics, VA-technology, matte finish;
Curvature of the panel: 2000R 1 ;
Resolution: 2560x1080 pixels;
Max. refresh rate: 160 Hz 2 ;
Connection interfaces: DP 1.2, HDMI 1.4, DVI-D, VGA.
1 - 2000R indicates that the curvature corresponds to a section of a circle with a radius of 2 meters;
2 - The maximum update rate is achieved only when connected via DisplayPort.
The monitor has some nice chips that I would like to see for a long time from other manufacturers. All ports are in the stand. No more “beards” of wires hanging from behind the monitor, everything can be neatly removed either at the edge of the table, or into a neat braid and fold / fasten with ties.
The only thing I would add in this situation is a USB hub with ports sticking out facing the user. It would be perfect for any flash drives or peripherals. And certainly much more useful than scanty and squalid speakers, which ... well, let's say, do not give out any decent sound at not the most modest price of the device and quite specific Central Asia, which does not need them.
Horizontal rotation, as well as the ability to make the monitor vertical, for obvious reasons, no, but the lack of height adjustment distresses. The angle of inclination to give give - and then the bread. Although, as for me, the monitor turned out to be low, and it will feel comfortable on some shelf, the width of the entire table, so that you can hide the keyboard and the mouse under it. And it won't hang on the wall. Trouble-trouble, grief. Oh yes. The control buttons are located far enough from the menu and in general it is ... weird. But I saw normal menus only with professional monitors, so this is just a sad norm in the market, writing a curve and the ugly built-in software.
The VA-type matrix does not give the monitor a miraculous response of 1-2 ms, but is a reasonable compromise between acceptable color reproduction, operating speed and provided viewing angles. VA-technology provides good image contrast, refresh rate, like the classic (not super-gaming) TN's at the level of 4-6 ms. The color rendition is far from ideal and will not allow to use the monitor for professional purposes, but it is quite acceptable for a home gaming model. The base white point is at the level of 6250-6300 Kelvin (with a standard value of 6500K), the contrast ratio is at the level of 1700 to 1 at a brightness of 395-400 nit.
Do not rush to blame the model for low resolution and not the strongest bend, everything has a rational explanation. Let's start with the bend. Yes, the “ideal” convergence, for which the conditional monitor to the monitor will look completely flat - two meters, but the peculiarities of the person’s view, as well as the fact that you can sit at the monitor together in the evening (for example, watch a movie) makes the producers take a slightly larger radius for curvature. Yes, and the technology of manufacturing such matrices still have some limitations.
Now to the resolution. 2560x1080 is chosen for two reasons. The first is to ensure an update rate of 160 Hz requires an impressive bandwidth connection. Of all the presented connection standards in the monitor, the maximum is at DisplayPort 1.2. With a resolution of 3840x1440, it is difficult to squeeze more than 100 Hz, and 120, 144, 160 Hz can be provided only for 2560x1440 and 2560x1080. Since the DP 1.3 standard is not widely used, and ports with version 1.4 are available from March of this year, the choice of interface seems quite logical.
The second reason for this resolution is a reasonable compromise on the load on the video card: if your model provides sufficient performance to resolve FullHD, then the additional load and so-so optimization in some toys will not become an unbearable burden for the current generation of hardware: a sureframe in “competitive” titles will provide and the old GTX 970 (and according to STEAM it is the most popular video card in the game world at the moment), and something like the GTX 1060 6GB. Cope even 1050Ti or RX470, if you cut the settings to medium-high.
How much does the increase in resolution on one axis affect some 640 pixels? The resolution of 1920x1080 gives a little more than 2 million points of the resulting image, 2560x1080 - already 2.7 million. That is, according to rough estimates, the performance will drop by about 35%, since the video card will cheat out 1.35 times more pixels for each frame. In reality, the drop in performance can be both smaller (due to the peculiarities of the drivers and the video card building the scene), and significantly larger (profiling and polishing of the game engine has not been canceled, and 21 to 9 are extremely rare cases to bother with optimization) .
For comparison: the average 60 FPS on the GTX 1060 6GB in the third part of The Witcher (all settings to the maximum with the Hairworks turned on) turn into 40-45.
And DOOM with its ultra-modern engine almost doesn't give a damn: 60 FPS turns into 55. Games like Diablo 3 or Overwatch allow you to get 120-140 frames per second with the adaptive synchronization turned on. In other words, if you have last year’s flagship or pre-flagship, or this year’s middleweight (GTX 1060, RX 470 or RX 480), you can play at high settings. In games in which the maximum frame rate is important, you can simply reduce the load on the video card in the post-processing area (the geometric part with such a gain of resolution will cost you almost free of charge): cut the quality of special effects, remove any soft shadows, Nvidia Hairworks and other Ambient Occlusion's
160 Hz + curved display + ultra-wide format really change the feeling of the game, watching movies (especially if you get somewhere 48FPS version of your favorite movie) and work. A week behind such a monitor, and classic FullHD or 2560x1440p-models will seem to you "pot-bellied", slow and angular to scabies in the eyes at the slightest movement of the cursor on the screen.
I will not say that everyone urgently needs to give up everything, break the piggy bank and carry money to the nearest electronics store for a new high hertz monitor, but it’s worth paying attention to such a form factor . Today they are strange, rare devices, but this experience seriously changes the idea of ​​computer entertainment and how high the frame rate is noticeable. Probably, the first digital high definition TV once looked the same: as if I got into another world and I don’t want to go back. Really looking for something inches by 40 and with a resolution of 2160 points in height.
My “Wow, cool!” I regularly update this one way or the other. More than five years ago, my old 27-inch Samsung with a resolution of 2560x1440 seemed something incredible to me, then I met 144-Hz monitors and G-sync, managed to communicate with super widescreen formats 21 to 9, curved displays and other pleasures of life. Today I have a monitor on my desk, which combines a number of such buns. 35 ", 21: 9, a fantastic 160 Hz matrix refresh rate and a curved display. And don't let its resolution make you let out a mean tear and say" yes, you are my dream, "it's still damn good, and here's why.
He is demonically quick.
No, I am absolutely convinced that it is hard to explain in words what the difference between 60 Hz and 160 is. Some stubbornly do not see the difference between the console 30 FPS and PC's 60+, and here it is. Take some bright window for the title, but shake it well with the mouse. Now imagine that you do not see the "tracks" from the window, that it will be almost perfectly clear all the time. No trace, maximum - a light plume, which is caused by the reaction rate of neurons in the eye.
')
Utilitarian use for this update rate is only one thing: computer games. Yes, even at the OS level, it is more comfortable / more pleasant / less tired to use your eyes, but in dynamic and speed-sensitive games, 120 or 144 Hz are already given a lot, and 160 is a kind of "margin of safety" that allows you not to rest on V-Sync and GET MORE SIMILITY.
Fortunately, the monitor supports the FreeSync adaptive synchronization system: it was originally incorporated into the DisplayPort standard and later found its implementation in AMD video cards. Unfortunately, NVIDIA decided to play Apple and leave its
Both basic algorithms that FreeSync from AMD, that G-Sync or Adaptive fast sync from NVIDIA, when exceeded by a frame rate maximum allowed for a sweep, start to “throw out” extra frames in the same way, which causes attendant problems that really worry only zadrots-sportsmen.
21 to 9 drags
Yes, many toys are not optimized for this resolution at all. In the same Diablo 3, you will see terrible, ragged backgrounds. In some old Need for Speed, the speedometer interface will turn from a circle into an ugly oval. Old school things may crash at all, have to play in the window or order the monitor to pretend to be normal 16 to 9. But everything changes when you start something modern. Something that ... really feels different on a widescreen. Say, DOOM of 2016, The Witcher, the latest NFS or Project Cars. And even EuroTruckSimulator, not sparkling with graphics, arcade platformer, Starbound sandbox or some MOBA is perceived quite differently. You see further than opponents. The vertical scale remains the same, but the review left and right (forward and backward, call it whatever you like) grows. I think the benefits describe too. You see more in races, you notice an opponent in shooters before (especially if you configure FOV).
Anyone who plays auto simulators knows that over time you set an average time on the same track and car that is hard to beat. It seems to brake at ideal points, enter the turn in time, where necessary - let the rear axle into a skid, or fly in millimeters from the chicane fence. So: with this monitor I brought myself 4 seconds from the very first attempt. Of course, here the role is played by an increased frame rate, and an increase in the viewing angle, but fact is a fact.
In everyday use, such a monitor to some extent replaces two normal ones: side-by-side browser windows, a bunch of instant messengers, panels in a graphic or 3D editor that do not obscure the working area, which turns into approximately 16 to 9 - in general , a lot of advantages. Working with several texts at once is generally gorgeous. Open the code listing, help, browser and bug tracker on one screen and keep everything in sight? Well, you understand. Any task with a bunch of windows is racked up into neat columns.
And in the cinema, finally, these $ @!% Lost black stripes on the top and bottom. Now you can watch modern blockbusters in normal size.
He's crooked!
Here's a laugh, and you can understand the beauty of a bent Monica after a week of use. You sit down at some "flat" comparable in width, and it seems to be convex, like an old TV. This effect lasts for several hours, but at first you sit with a strange feeling that “something is wrong here.” Immersion in the process in terms of toys is also different, a person’s lateral vision plays an important role in determining movement. Those who have 2-3 monitors on this scheme will understand me.
Picture from the Internet
To fray with three monitors will not work, but the similarity of sensations is present. I had the experience of communicating with “flat” 21 to 9, and the curved version, IMHO, is much more interesting.
What exactly are we talking about
The device that I described is a 35-inch AOC with the index C3583FQ. His full specifications are as follows:
Diagonal: 35 inches;
Matrix: AU Optronics, VA-technology, matte finish;
Curvature of the panel: 2000R 1 ;
Resolution: 2560x1080 pixels;
Max. refresh rate: 160 Hz 2 ;
Connection interfaces: DP 1.2, HDMI 1.4, DVI-D, VGA.
1 - 2000R indicates that the curvature corresponds to a section of a circle with a radius of 2 meters;
2 - The maximum update rate is achieved only when connected via DisplayPort.
The monitor has some nice chips that I would like to see for a long time from other manufacturers. All ports are in the stand. No more “beards” of wires hanging from behind the monitor, everything can be neatly removed either at the edge of the table, or into a neat braid and fold / fasten with ties.
The only thing I would add in this situation is a USB hub with ports sticking out facing the user. It would be perfect for any flash drives or peripherals. And certainly much more useful than scanty and squalid speakers, which ... well, let's say, do not give out any decent sound at not the most modest price of the device and quite specific Central Asia, which does not need them.
Horizontal rotation, as well as the ability to make the monitor vertical, for obvious reasons, no, but the lack of height adjustment distresses. The angle of inclination to give give - and then the bread. Although, as for me, the monitor turned out to be low, and it will feel comfortable on some shelf, the width of the entire table, so that you can hide the keyboard and the mouse under it. And it won't hang on the wall. Trouble-trouble, grief. Oh yes. The control buttons are located far enough from the menu and in general it is ... weird. But I saw normal menus only with professional monitors, so this is just a sad norm in the market, writing a curve and the ugly built-in software.
The VA-type matrix does not give the monitor a miraculous response of 1-2 ms, but is a reasonable compromise between acceptable color reproduction, operating speed and provided viewing angles. VA-technology provides good image contrast, refresh rate, like the classic (not super-gaming) TN's at the level of 4-6 ms. The color rendition is far from ideal and will not allow to use the monitor for professional purposes, but it is quite acceptable for a home gaming model. The base white point is at the level of 6250-6300 Kelvin (with a standard value of 6500K), the contrast ratio is at the level of 1700 to 1 at a brightness of 395-400 nit.
But he is not retina!
Do not rush to blame the model for low resolution and not the strongest bend, everything has a rational explanation. Let's start with the bend. Yes, the “ideal” convergence, for which the conditional monitor to the monitor will look completely flat - two meters, but the peculiarities of the person’s view, as well as the fact that you can sit at the monitor together in the evening (for example, watch a movie) makes the producers take a slightly larger radius for curvature. Yes, and the technology of manufacturing such matrices still have some limitations.
Now to the resolution. 2560x1080 is chosen for two reasons. The first is to ensure an update rate of 160 Hz requires an impressive bandwidth connection. Of all the presented connection standards in the monitor, the maximum is at DisplayPort 1.2. With a resolution of 3840x1440, it is difficult to squeeze more than 100 Hz, and 120, 144, 160 Hz can be provided only for 2560x1440 and 2560x1080. Since the DP 1.3 standard is not widely used, and ports with version 1.4 are available from March of this year, the choice of interface seems quite logical.
The second reason for this resolution is a reasonable compromise on the load on the video card: if your model provides sufficient performance to resolve FullHD, then the additional load and so-so optimization in some toys will not become an unbearable burden for the current generation of hardware: a sureframe in “competitive” titles will provide and the old GTX 970 (and according to STEAM it is the most popular video card in the game world at the moment), and something like the GTX 1060 6GB. Cope even 1050Ti or RX470, if you cut the settings to medium-high.
Do I need an upgrade?
How much does the increase in resolution on one axis affect some 640 pixels? The resolution of 1920x1080 gives a little more than 2 million points of the resulting image, 2560x1080 - already 2.7 million. That is, according to rough estimates, the performance will drop by about 35%, since the video card will cheat out 1.35 times more pixels for each frame. In reality, the drop in performance can be both smaller (due to the peculiarities of the drivers and the video card building the scene), and significantly larger (profiling and polishing of the game engine has not been canceled, and 21 to 9 are extremely rare cases to bother with optimization) .
For comparison: the average 60 FPS on the GTX 1060 6GB in the third part of The Witcher (all settings to the maximum with the Hairworks turned on) turn into 40-45.
And DOOM with its ultra-modern engine almost doesn't give a damn: 60 FPS turns into 55. Games like Diablo 3 or Overwatch allow you to get 120-140 frames per second with the adaptive synchronization turned on. In other words, if you have last year’s flagship or pre-flagship, or this year’s middleweight (GTX 1060, RX 470 or RX 480), you can play at high settings. In games in which the maximum frame rate is important, you can simply reduce the load on the video card in the post-processing area (the geometric part with such a gain of resolution will cost you almost free of charge): cut the quality of special effects, remove any soft shadows, Nvidia Hairworks and other Ambient Occlusion's
In total
160 Hz + curved display + ultra-wide format really change the feeling of the game, watching movies (especially if you get somewhere 48FPS version of your favorite movie) and work. A week behind such a monitor, and classic FullHD or 2560x1440p-models will seem to you "pot-bellied", slow and angular to scabies in the eyes at the slightest movement of the cursor on the screen.
I will not say that everyone urgently needs to give up everything, break the piggy bank and carry money to the nearest electronics store for a new high hertz monitor, but it’s worth paying attention to such a form factor . Today they are strange, rare devices, but this experience seriously changes the idea of ​​computer entertainment and how high the frame rate is noticeable. Probably, the first digital high definition TV once looked the same: as if I got into another world and I don’t want to go back. Really looking for something inches by 40 and with a resolution of 2160 points in height.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/399645/
All Articles