Nvidia Pushes G-Sync To TVs With 'Big Format Gaming Display' Initiative

Status
Not open for further replies.

hannibal

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
2,372
60
19,890
14
Would be even better with Freesync and g-sync both... it is too expensive to be closed system device.
But the merits Are sure good. Better film output, option to play games in highress and allow low enough framerates to run 4K...
 

ibjeepr

Distinguished
Oct 11, 2012
632
0
19,010
14
Sounds like it's aimed at streaming, gaming via Shield and using the PC more as an HTPC, not using the TV as a wired monitor for the PC. I was hoping for 40"-42" TV's with G-sync/Freesync meant to be used as an actual monitor such as I'm doing with my 40" 4k Samsung now.
 

grimfox

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2009
1,015
44
19,690
157
I wish they would give up on Gsync. They are going to take a display that costs 1500 and make it $250 more expensive for Gsync and $750 more expensive for the integrated shield. So to get these features you're going to have to shell out 2500. And you know they aren't going to take a lower end $700 screen to do this. It'll only be the highest of highend. Great theory hopefully LG and Samsung aren't on the list because they are integrating Freesync into their next gen (2018-2019) displays.
 

AC____

Prominent
Mar 22, 2017
6
0
510
0
I know a few Nvidia fans will embrace this, and it's ok. But in the big picture, I think is a bad move. The market for devices like this is small and will remain small due to its proprietary nature. A bigger move would have been for Nvidia to adopt HDMI 2.1 VRR so you at not limited in terms of TVs you have to purchase. It would also give the TV owner (TV is a bigger investment on average, in terms of length and cost), to decide whether they want AMD or NVIDIA. For example, I like to game on my home theater, but I have used Nvidia for the last 4 years, but I don't want to be locked up, hence I would not buy a TV just to have G-Sync.
 

mlee 2500

Honorable
Oct 20, 2014
298
6
10,785
0
Should be great if all you do is play games (or watch video) while sitting MORE than 3' or 4' feet from you screen. I predict it would be awful for anything else, unless you like repetitive-motion neck injuries or enjoy awful pixel density.
 

kinggremlin

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
574
41
19,010
0


As someone who uses a 65" 4k TV for their main pc monitor, you are wrong about neck issues. Sony recommends a viewing distance of 1.5x the VERTICAL height of a 4k TV, not the diagonal that is typically used for 1080p. That comes out to 3.92 ft for a 65" TV.

https://us.en.kb.sony.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/30964/c/65,66/p/61659,95543,96663,96664/

I have my TV on a stand against the wall with the bottom of the TV level with the top of my desk which is a couple ft away from the wall which places the TV just under 4ft from my seated position and I could not be happier with the setup. Text is razor sharp with no windows scaling necessary. Obviously having a 65" TV on your desk 2ft from your face would be impractical. Moving the screen 5 or 6 ft or more away would require most people to need windows scaling to read text which defeats the purpose of getting a 4k screen and often looks terrible.
 

Ninjawithagun

Distinguished
Aug 28, 2007
739
16
19,165
74
"...Acer Predator X27 and Asus PG27UQ--both of which we’re still waiting for because both were delayed--we don’t expect to see these products hit the shelf for a while."

WHY? There is no excuse for these delays. In fact, OLED gaming monitors should have been released by Summer 2017. It's truly saddening that Asus and Acer can't get their acts together to produce the next-generation monitors on schedule.
 

mlee 2500

Honorable
Oct 20, 2014
298
6
10,785
0


I think you have a bigger problem with your Monitor not displaying text correctly, becuase I specified 3'or 4' and you replied that it's not a problem for you at just under 4'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS