Read more.4K is so yesterday.
Read more.4K is so yesterday.
So if you would like to buy this and run it at 60Hz - 5,120 X 2,880 you would also have to buy a new graphics card if your present one has only one Displayport. Makes it kind of market limited.
But, pushing the tech along...there always has to be someone first!
Surely, with the amount of time that HDMI has been available now, we can run a 5120 x 2880 resolution on one cable?
How much bandwidth is actually needed to display a resolution like that?
Ah but that HDMI standard must be supported by thousand pound graphics cards and £5 DVD players, so it's a bit tricky to get everyone on board.
Anyway let's get some numbers flying. If Displayport 1.2 (released in 2009) with 17Gbit/s and HDMI 2.0 (released 2013) with 14.4Gbit/s of bandwidth can just about handle 60Hz UHD (which is 8.3 megapixels), and this new panel is 14.75 megapixels, we're going to need... well, a huge amount of bandwidth. Apparently Displayport 1.3 supports this resolution and it was released in 2014. HDMI 3.0 isn't even announced yet so we're going to have to wait another few years for that to come about.
TL;DR Single cable for driving this? Wait for Displayport 1.3 in... 2015 probably.
TheAnimus (20-11-2014)
My piggy bank can't keep up with these K upgrades!
I'm still really baffled by how much bandwidth is needed for 4K...if the average bluray is around lets say 30Mbps(Video) + 1.5Mbps(DTS) = 31.5Mbps now times that number by 7 (4 for the image area plus 1 for audio, 1 for ARC, 1 for internet features which would be 220.5Mbps now lets double that for 60Hz, 441Mbps. Why do we need 17Gbps of bandwidth for 4K/5K? Am I doing the math wrong?
So what youre saying is all 4K is going to be raw and not compressed? My ISP better get me a 100G NIC for my pc to stream 4K netflix.
Hmmm let me just grab the 4 way sli Titan blacks to game!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)