HDMI 2.1 Specification Brings 4K@120Hz / 8K@60Hz

[carewolf]

Maybe, finally we can get proper HiDPI screens for PCs. 2*96DPI ~= 6K on 27"

[leipero]

No, you aren't talking about crappy CRTs. Since they're all old and obsolete only the good ones have survived long enough to still be around. Crappy CRTs only did 60Hz and definitely had ghosting because of high phosphor persistence. They'd also claim to support higher resolutions that they didn't really have the dot pitch for and would look fuzzy.

Also just to be pedantic, response time is never 0. A CRT has to wait for the beam to scan so response time ranged from 0 to 16 ms (or lower at higher refresh rates) assuming no VSync. With VSync it averages out to 16 ms always.

Also, using a CRT for long periods of time would give me a headache and eye strain from all of the flickering. LCDs (good ones without backlight flicker) don't do that to me.

I yet have to see CRT that ghosts..., that's imposibility by the nature of how screen function. You got response time completely wrong, the concept of "latency/response time" is introduced by LCD displays and it measures how long it takes for one pixel to be updated from black to white and other way around..., CRT updates pixels at every refresh, and after refresh it goes dark (when it is not light by tube ray), so whole concept can't be applied to CRT's to begin with, it is literaly 0 + computer time that is usually under 1ms.

Actually CRT's do not have individual pixels, they have as double/tripple (for RGB) "mesh" and resolution is pretty much irrelevant as long as "mesh" is compressed enough that you can't see it with naked eye (almost? all CRT's), picture is as clear on any resolution excluding limitation of the resolution itself (eg. 640x480 can't look as good as 1600x1200). Fuzzy picture is probably a sign of bad display or malfunction. V-Sync have absolutely nothing to do with response time, it is completely different concept and it's related to the GPU as much as display.

So, for example, I yet have to see LCD (in resonable price range) that can produce picture quality close to the crappy Samsung SyncMaster 795mb, with only limitation is poor refresh rate at high resolution. As for headache and eye strain, it might happen to some people, but it is largely a myth propagated when LCD's got introduced..., no one sane ever used CRT's under 75Hz (ideally above 85Hz).

[MagicMyth]

My big reason for hatting HDMI is the tax! Every time you buy a device with HDMI on it you give a little more money to Hollywood and its friendly licensor groups. Where as DisplayPort is a royalty free standard. Also DP is just plain better

[Delgarde]

Well, me too. But the amount of old LCD monitors still relying on DVI is a amazing testimony for the dependability of those old hardware. I never have a LCD monitor to die on me and only one of my close friends who had a defective LCD. CRT monitors on the other hand...

Yep... my Dell 24" from about 2005 is still going strong. The USB2 ports and the card reader aren't much use anymore, but the screen is as good as any new hardware. Better, in fact, because I've seen a much higher failure rate in equivalent newer models on machines at work.

Mind you, my old Dell also cost about four times what the modern equivalents sell for, so I'm kind of happy to have had 12 years use out of it...

[plonoma]

HDMI 2.1 also supports VRR as Variable Refresh Rate for reducing lag/stuttering, similar to FreeSync / Adaptive-Sync

Good they finally added it. HDMI was lacking and seriously falling behind DisplayPort. This is a really great feature. It's about time HDMI supports variable refresh rates and video source synchronization.

HDMI 2.1 devices will likely be out by the end of 2018.

Still a long time. Can't wait for monitors and televisions supporting variable refresh rates and video source synchronization on all modern display interfaces. For all DisplayPort and HDMI connections.

[schmidtbag]

Actually, wrong ...
PS/2 mouse movements are streamed at a constant rate, per default 100 samples/s, at most 200. As a movement packet is 3 bytes, sent as 33 bits at at most 16.7 kBit/s, the latency for each movement is 2 ms (transfer) + 5/2 ms (average reporting interval) = 4.5 ms.

USB interrupt packets are polled at a fixed interval of at least 1 ms. Even at 1.5 MBps, the transfer time is almost neglegible. Latency thus is 1/2 ms + ~0.1 ms = 0.6 ms.

I'm not entirely wrong. Sure, PS/2 mice stream a constant rate, but PS/2 keyboards do have direct IRQ access. Whether or not all modern motherboards permit that behavior, I'm not sure, but they are supposed to have it anyway. Regardless, no human would ever detect the difference and anyone who goes out of their way for this crap because they think it improves their experience is wrong.

There is also microLED which apparently is even better than OLED and without it's shortcomings like burn ins. There are some rumors that it might finally come to the market (Samsung to unveil Micro-Led TV Technology at CES 2018).

Interesting... I haven't heard about this.

[devius]

...no one sane ever used CRT's under 75Hz (ideally above 85Hz).

Well, I've seen my fair share of CRT's running at 60Hz. Probably because it's the default.

I had a 21" Eizo CRT for many years and it had great image quality, but I don't miss its 34Kg one bit. It was so heavy that it would bend weaker desks.

[leipero]

Well, I've seen my fair share of CRT's running at 60Hz. Probably because it's the default.

I had a 21" Eizo CRT for many years and it had great image quality, but I don't miss its 34Kg one bit. It was so heavy that it would bend weaker desks.

That was bad idea, for eyes and for working. Don't get me wrong, I'm waiting if I find some good one in next few weeks, if not, I will have to use TN LCD probably, that's why I'm waiting since it's clearly better solution for very low price.

[M@GOid]

As for headache and eye strain, it might happen to some people, but it is largely a myth propagated when LCD's got introduced..., no one sane ever used CRT's under 75Hz (ideally above 85Hz).

Well, having being late to the LCD party (got one only about 10 yeas ago), I remember vividly the eye strain from CRT monitors and TV.

As for the CRT refresh rate, some people know squat about configuring video modes on a PC. At work, I have seen a lot of people using misconfigured screens, to the point it piss me off so much that I grab the mouse/touchpad of their hands and configure it myself.

[M@GOid]

But the best part of LCD screens in general, to me, is the matte finish. I have never seeing a CRT TV/monitor without that hateful glare. If you are in a place without natural light (like a store or some office), you wont probably notice any glare, but with a window nearby... And the glossy finish is one of the to reasons I will never buy Apple stuff.