AUO is developing a 540Hz display for eSports

Published by

Click here to post a comment for AUO is developing a 540Hz display for eSports on our message forum
#6026731
data/avatar/default/avatar22.webp
Can't wait to see that same reused video comparing 60-120-240hz renamed to 120-240-480 renamed again to 240-480-540hz
#6026734
data/avatar/default/avatar15.webp
This time the 144hz will be the blurried version of the picture. Also eSport is actually a bit vague, they could name it after the 5-10 games relevant in esports where you can actually do 540 fps with existing cpus 540fps, the mouse 1000hz polling is holding you back.
#6026772
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/214/214099.jpg
It's about time, monitor tech and rubbish refresh rates have really been holding me back in the esports world. Now I can finally make a name for myself.
#6026800
data/avatar/default/avatar32.webp
". .....Some individuals have previously tested 500Hz high-speed displays with Core i9-12900K and 32GB DDR5. The game PC, which includes memory and an RTX 3090 graphics card, has been tested. Even with the lowest picture quality enabled, the frame rate at FHD resolution is just 343 frames per second. In short, even with a 540Hz high-brush gaming display, achieving this performance is quite tough........" Strange I'm getting 400+ fps in BFV, 700+ easy in Fortnite. 12900k and 7000c30 ddr5. Fast memory/low latency is the way 🙂
#6026874
data/avatar/default/avatar30.webp
Isn't OLED refresh rate per pixel at less than 1 ms anyways?! I mean... just run OLED on 1080P should get near that with the new TV screens running 120 Hz @ 4K already right?
#6026886
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/245/245459.jpg
The refresh rate race of monitors is not really about reducing total lag from input through to change appearing on the monitor, it's mostly about reducing motion blur and increasing the amount of information displayed to the gamer "per second" (as in more snapshots/frames delivered per second) means you have more information on which to judge the movement and future position of players in close quarter combat in fps gaming when quickly panning the camera onto the target. So high Hz is mostly about increasing information to the gamer, so increasing awareness, thereby aiding gameplay & skill level....so this does in a roundabout way reduce your reaction time as you can more quickly work out the details of the current fast moving situation, buts it's certainly not mainly about the reduced input lag, because 240 fps means a frametime of 4ms whereas 500Hz is 2ms, so there's only a 2ms advantage on that level, so it's not about that as a direct advantage.
#6026915
data/avatar/default/avatar09.webp
Robbo9999:

The refresh rate race of monitors is not really about reducing total lag from input through to change appearing on the monitor, it's mostly about reducing motion blur and increasing the amount of information displayed to the gamer "per second" (as in more snapshots/frames delivered per second) means you have more information on which to judge the movement and future position of players in close quarter combat in fps gaming when quickly panning the camera onto the target. So high Hz is mostly about increasing information to the gamer, so increasing awareness, thereby aiding gameplay & skill level....so this does in a roundabout way reduce your reaction time as you can more quickly work out the details of the current fast moving situation, buts it's certainly not mainly about the reduced input lag, because 240 fps means a frametime of 4ms whereas 500Hz is 2ms, so there's only a 2ms advantage on that level, so it's not about that as a direct advantage.
True, I upgraded from a 75Hz screen, and even if I was already really fast with my 75Hz smol monitor, the 240Hz is a blessing. Tbh I would buy one of this monitor, if it would have a normal price on some years!
#6026922
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/258/258688.jpg
Hang on for some massive frame interpolation...;) That is the only way you'll see 540 fps at native res, unless it's a really old game, of course.
#6026954
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/123/123760.jpg
Games still feel smoother on a higher refresh rate even when not running at the right framerate tbh (in case you're not using any vsync variation). I welcome more Hz, but I won't be buying these monitors at release obviously as they'll require us to sell one of our kidneys. I look at it this way: if the next best thing is out, it usually means the previous generation becomes more widely available at better price points (in this case 360Hz monitors would eventually become as affordable as 240Hz monitors). There's obviously diminishing returns, but still a welcome improvement (switching from 75Hz to 120Hz was a huge change imo, 120Hz to 240Hz also still noticeable, but much more subtle).
#6026975
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/277/277878.jpg
nizzen:

". .....Some individuals have previously tested 500Hz high-speed displays with Core i9-12900K and 32GB DDR5. The game PC, which includes memory and an RTX 3090 graphics card, has been tested. Even with the lowest picture quality enabled, the frame rate at FHD resolution is just 343 frames per second. In short, even with a 540Hz high-brush gaming display, achieving this performance is quite tough........" Strange I'm getting 400+ fps in BFV, 700+ easy in Fortnite. 12900k and 7000c30 ddr5. Fast memory/low latency is the way 🙂
Those "inividuals" probably just plug all the hardware together and play the games, no tweak at all. Heck they probably just look at ram sticks based on their size and rgb.
#6027087
data/avatar/default/avatar03.webp
auo are piece of shit, my old monitor are one asus vg279q, AUO panel, when i buyed received the model with alot dead pixels, used the warranty and the new model worked by 2 years and give dead pixels in centre of screen, so i used the warranty again and the new model again received by factory with dead pixels
#6027150
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/245/245459.jpg
D1stRU3T0R:

True, I upgraded from a 75Hz screen, and even if I was already really fast with my 75Hz smol monitor, the 240Hz is a blessing. Tbh I would buy one of this monitor, if it would have a normal price on some years!
Yes, 240Hz is nice, I recently bought a fast IPS panel monitor (240Hz) after coming from a TN panel 144Hz, the increase in image quality associated with IPS vs TN whilst gaining a few more frames was a good boost to enjoyment and possibly how well I do. After now owning an IPS panel I'm not sure I'd want to go back to TN, which is of course this 540Hz TN panel that this thread is about. I'd possibly go back to TN if they could compete on image quality with IPS.
#6027205
data/avatar/default/avatar19.webp
There is so much about monitor tech that people don't understand. 360hz is great but most have BFI to 240hz. BFI is incredibly important when it comes to visual clarity at high frame rate. Its not that 360hz is a blury mess but a 240hz zowie with Dyac+ is actually a bit faster due to the BFI. Both are incredibly comparable and comes down to preference. TN vs IPS. Anyone who thinks there isnt a gap between 240hz and 144hz is actually lacking in eye sight. Some actually cannot see the difference but the gap is night and day. I can even tell between my 240hz and 360hz now in almost any scenario. The big question is does this monitor have BFI or does it dim the monitor to 10% brightness if it is supported. Until we get 360hz with BFI at 300 nits the gap won't widen.
#6027219
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/245/245459.jpg
Kiriakos-GR:

Theory it is good, but at some point this is FAKE NEWS, there is no networking game out there capable to do more than 35 ping per second with 250kbits of data. Its all about math, and any FPS rate over 120 this is useless as benefit, when networking packets exchange this has it own limits.
Well, it's true that there are limitations associated with ping and how often the game server updates (like the server updating 30 times a second or 60 times, etc)......but the points I was making are independent of that, not related to it - the reduced motion blur and increased information displayed to the gamer by higher refresh rate screens is independent of what you're mentioning.
#6027373
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/245/245459.jpg
Kiriakos-GR:

Since 2010 an IPS screen was capable to go down to 8ms = zero motion blur at the range of 60 FPS , and latency was compared to CRT monitor (the fastest technology). Human eye cannot see more than 25FPS. IPS screen capable to go down to 8ms = actual = 10ms lowest - 30 ms highest. Therefore Hz alone does not translate to anything, when actual ms response this is variable according to displayed content and operating screen resolution. TFT panel alone has two timings, All-pixel On --- All-pixel Off ( 15ms / 14 ms) (sum of described specification 15ms panel). Technical challenges of 4K screens does not bother any one using 1080P = all problems are solved there all ready.
You lost me when you said the human eye can't see more than 25fps, lol! (to be clear, that is nonsense!) Also IPS screens produced around 2020 are faster than the 8ms - 30ms in response time you mention, it's more like 6ms: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/viewsonic/elite-xg270 The points I made in my prior posts that higher refresh rates screens reduce motion blur and increase information displayed to the gamer still stands. I will agree that the non-perfect response time of LCD screens, ie not 0ms GTG means that as you increase the Hz/fps you don't garner all of the decreased motion blur you would have if your screen was a theoretical 0ms GTG, but it certainly still does help in this regard to have the higher Hz & fps.
#6027399
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/245/245459.jpg
Kiriakos-GR:

Now its your turn to lost me. Most demanding application for fastest TFT panel, this is for use over a digital oscilloscope. It is not technically possible on-off pixel timing to be less than 15ms. TFT Panel controller it might become one day as fast as 1ms, BUT THERE IS NO PANEL able to work that fast.
I think we're talking at cross purposes, eventhough some of the points you mentioned were obviously wrong for example you saying the human eye can only see 25fps. I'm totally confident in the points I made in my original posts in terms of the benefit of high Hz panels: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/auo-is-developing-a-540hz-display-for-esports.443501/#post-6026886 and there's some good stuff in another thread from the guy who heads up the Blurbusters website where he encapsulates the benefits of High Hz Monitors, basically from the following link and onwards to the last page in that thread he lists some important stuff re High Hz panels & their benefits: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/a-500hz-refresh-rate-nvidia-g-sync-compatible-gaming-lcd-is-in-the-works.443155/page-2#post-6020040
#6027536
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/245/245459.jpg
Kiriakos-GR:

Well if human eyes was that high speed objects, we would have also less dead from car accidents. But in human anatomy, response time this is not relative to a single factor.
I think we should stop now.
#6027537
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/282/282473.jpg
fix the damn shimmer and flicker at 1080p first, then talk about 360hz and higher.
cpy2:

Can't wait to see that same reused video comparing 60-120-240hz renamed to 120-240-480 renamed again to 240-480-540hz
pixel response times is the most important thing to consider, along with artifacts it produces it takes a lot of comparing pictures and videos before you find a monitor you like not as simple as picking a "144hz" or "300hz"