• jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    6 months ago

    “Now wait for 1,000 Hz content and capable GPUs.”

    Forget the content and GPU, you need an input port capable of that.

    HDMI 2.1 and Display Port 1.4 cap out at, what? 240?

    • Vendetta9076
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 months ago

      With DSC DP 1.4 can do 4k 360 but it still ain’t close to 1000

      • Fermion@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        So you just need 3 4090’s with 1 displayport each to the monitor and a whole new version of sli.

          • Fermion@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            6 months ago

            I vaguely remember that being a thing for early commercial 8k projectors, but I don’t know anything about the implementation.

            • cabb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              6 months ago

              Two ports at once have been used for Samsung’s 5120x1440 240hz monitors. Each port refreshes half of the screen and there are two scanlines going from left to right. Using the calc here you might be able to use two DP2.1 UHBR80 cables with DSC and nonstandard timings to run 4k 1000hz 10bit.

      • Rexios@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Isn’t 4k 360hz equivalent to 1080p 1440hz? I wouldn’t expect 1000hz at 4k any time soon but 1080p in competitive FPS is easy

        • Vendetta9076
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think so? Honestly not sure how the math works on that one.

        • iopq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not really? Modern hardware gets almost 1000 fps in rocket league. You don’t need exactly 1000 to get a benefit, even getting 800 fps will give you a smoother experience

    • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      “Now wait for 1,000 Hz content and capable GPUs.”

      Now wait for humans who can see the difference

    • kevincox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m sure some people will demand it. But for 99.9% of the population you don’t need 1000Hz content. The main benefit is that whatever framerate your content is it will not have notable delay from the display refresh rate.

      For example if you are watching 60Hz video on a 100Hz monitor you will get bad frame pacing. But on a 1000Hz monitor even though it isn’t perfectly divisible. the 1/3ms delay isn’t perceptible.

      VRR can help a lot here, but can fall apart if you have different content at different frame rates. For example a notification pops up and a frame is rendered but then your game finishes its frame and needs to wait until the next refresh cycle. Ideally the compositor would have waited for the game frame before flushing the notification but it doesn’t really know how long the game will take to render the next frame.

      So really you just need your GPU to be able to composite at 1000Hz, you probably don’t need your game to render at 1000Hz. It isn’t really going to make much difference.

      Basically at this point faster refresh rates just improve frame pacing when multiple things are on screen. Much like VRR does for single sources.