Wow but reaching 60 fps seems to be a struggle nowadays on high resolutions unless it's Quake 3 arena running at 1700fps :P. Monitor technology is great but we need more gpu power first over crazy refresh rates.

Amount of mechanical engineering put into display demo is impressive. But my question would not be about latency, but about having bandwidth able to deliver 1080p at 1700Hz. Or is trick in having next generation Quad-DisplayPort G-Sync board connected to 4DP edition GPU made specially for this?

PR stunt to distract from the fact that Pascal's launch isn't going to be as smooth / early as the last generations due to various factors (dx12, HBM / GDDR5X, rumored missing chips themselves etc.)

Amount of mechanical engineering put into display demo is impressive. But my question would not be about latency, but about having bandwidth able to deliver 1080p at 1700Hz. Or is trick in having next generation Quad-DisplayPort G-Sync board connected to 4DP edition GPU made specially for this?

I don't think this tech is about actually outputting 1700hz, but, rather the refresh is that high that even when outputting only "60fps" for example to it; the image is stable and lower-latency than current tech.

PR stunt to distract from the fact that Pascal's launch isn't going to be as smooth / early as the last generations due to various factors (dx12, HBM / GDDR5X, rumored missing chips themselves etc.)

Totally disagree. There's nothing substantial pointing to troubles for Pascal launch.

Totally disagree. There's nothing substantial pointing to troubles for Pascal launch.

There's also nothing substantial pointing towards a soon to come launch with HBM2 and increadible dx12 performance. That argument works both ways.

There's also nothing substantial pointing towards a soon to come launch with HBM2 and increadible dx12 performance. That argument works both ways.

Idk, I don't see how the two can be related. Nvidia dumps money into a number of different projects. Their R&D funding is over $120M more than AMD's at the moment and they don't have a big CPU division like AMD does. There is nothing to indicate that Pascal has a troubled launch, they are already selling Pascal units to customers and have a giant 600mm2 card in volume production. I keep seeing people talk about how Nvidia isn't showing off working Silicon, but I can't recall a time they ever have. In fact I think AMD showing off Polaris 6 months early is the first time that's ever happened. I'm not even sure that's a good thing. There were posts all the time on /r/amd with people saying "nah don't buy Fiji now, Polaris coming Q1" after that demonstration in January. On the flipside over at /r/nvidia people are telling others to buy 980Ti's because Pascal isn't launching until 2057. With the exception of Fermi (480) Nvidia usually announces a chip and has sales ~1-2 months later. With AMD having end of June/July launch. I could see Nvidia doing an announcement at Computex in June and launching cards in July. Which makes sense anyway, because the smaller ~150w chip that's on the PX2 is launching at the same time (with the PX2).

PR stunt to distract from the fact that Pascal's launch isn't going to be as smooth / early as the last generations due to various factors (dx12, HBM / GDDR5X, rumored missing chips themselves etc.)

Ouch! :P

awesome future tech any fps up to 1700 nice and smooth

I don't think this tech is about actually outputting 1700hz, but, rather the refresh is that high that even when outputting only "60fps" for example to it; the image is stable and lower-latency than current tech.

It is really hard to tell, because screen is object which is moving. If it was high speed object moving on screen, 60Hz screen would have it skip like 20 pixels between refreshes. So 1200Hz would be required to get pixel by pixel smooth movement. But here is screen moving, what we see is no ghosting at all. But as you stated it does not mean refresh rate. Because all that screen needs to do is to be in sync with camera and display image in moments camera is taking frames. Tho, if it is not really high refresh rate screen. Image would stay same between refreshes and as screen moves around, it would be blurred to eye as we are not taking series of snapshots (since our processing is analog). - basically image would move for brief moment between refreshes in direction monitor is moving, but if it had those 1700Hz, even for naked eye logo would stay in place But question is, why would they introduce it as 1700Hz screen instead of just Zero Latency screen? Any respectable engineer working on it would feel as part of sham if it was not 1700Hz. Maybe they have that kind of super fast screen and for testing they use special resolution like 1920x50 pixels with centralized timing. If controller takes it, you can display it and considering it is driven by nVidia's GPU and G-Sync...

True, if the gpu could actually output that refresh-rate, then, actual 1700hz would be possible. Considering the purpose of G-sync, though, which is to output non-vsync without tearing it makes more sense that this is like those Panasonic TV's that say they output 600hz to stabilize image quality.

Wow but reaching 60 fps seems to be a struggle nowadays on high resolutions unless it's Quake 3 arena running at 1700fps :P. Monitor technology is great but we need more gpu power first over crazy refresh rates.

I can already imagine that coil whine on gpus :P

I can already imagine that coil whine on gpus :P

Mine is not that bad, I know it well from CS benchmark and API overhead test. But for prolonged use I would just insulated them with plastic glue (that thing which comes as tubes which you heat up with gun and inject on target).

The 1700hz is the max right? This thing is doing something like Gsync I guess.

"Handy for VR..." and there goes my interest.

This is not just zero latency (0.58ms) between frame ready to be displayed and nearest refresh. This display is also practically zero latency between frame sent and being fully displayed. Which is something entirely different than just 1700Hz display. And which is demonstrated by image staying fixed to our eyes - a feat that high refresh alone would not be able to achieve, because it also also needs infinitesimal input latency. Elimination of all kinds Vsync worries is just a nice bonus. And no you don't need 1700 fps to experience benefits of 1700Hz display 🙄 Perfect display, too bad I don't see this coming in the near future. And certainty not at popular prices 🙁

True, if the gpu could actually output that refresh-rate, then, actual 1700hz would be possible. Considering the purpose of G-sync, though, which is to output non-vsync without tearing it makes more sense that this is like those Panasonic TV's that say they output 600hz to stabilize image quality.

my Panasonic TV says Smooth motion by 1200Hz Backlight Scanning https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/viera-televisions/led/tx-40as640.html

This is not just zero latency (0.58ms) between frame ready to be displayed and nearest refresh. This display is also practically zero latency between frame sent and being fully displayed. Which is something entirely different than just 1700Hz display. And which is demonstrated by image staying fixed to our eyes - a feat that high refresh alone would not be able to achieve, because it also also needs infinitesimal input latency. Elimination of all kinds Vsync worries is just a nice bonus. And no you don't need 1700 fps to experience benefits of 1700Hz display 🙄 Perfect display, too bad I don't see this coming in the near future. And certainty not at popular prices 🙁

Sadly not many people realize this. I remember also seeing low fps image captures some time ago that showed that 1000 Hz polling on a mouse also decreases tearing (albeit marginally) due to a slightly smoother camera motion updates ingame. There's so many latencies going on in tech that it's always good news when they succeed at reducing them.

my Panasonic TV says Smooth motion by 1200Hz Backlight Scanning https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/viera-televisions/led/tx-40as640.html

What's it like for gaming? fps?

will this be like infamous OLED tech ?? which was announce almost decade ago and still isnt widely available, not sure I want to know what the price might be seeing what is charged for gsync