• HDMI 2.0 announced
    112 replies, posted
I bought a very expensive, very nice tv a year ago after saving up for a long time. It's got a 220hz refresh rate. If you think you can't notice that, you're literally stupid. I turned on my tv, side by side with an older TV that did either 59hz or 60hz, and watched the same movie on both of them(just duplicated my monitor onto both of them). The difference is staggering and severe. 220hz makes the whole thing look floaty, surreal, and lacking weight. It's frankly distracting at first. The 60hz is a lot different than 220hz, and there is no argument whatsoever that the human eye "can't see that". Anything above 60hz takes a good deal of eye adjustment to deal with. But you have a biological eye, and brain behind your vision, and you can adapt, filter, and change how you see things over time by subjecting yourself to it a lot.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42077559]I bought a very expensive, very nice tv a year ago after saving up for a long time. It's got a 220hz refresh rate. If you think you can't notice that, you're literally stupid. I turned on my tv, side by side with an older TV that did either 59hz or 60hz, and watched the same movie on both of them(just duplicated my monitor onto both of them). The difference is staggering and severe. 220hz makes the whole thing look floaty, surreal, and lacking weight. It's frankly distracting at first. The 60hz is a lot different than 220hz, and there is no argument whatsoever that the human eye "can't see that". Anything above 60hz takes a good deal of eye adjustment to deal with. But you have a biological eye, and brain behind your vision, and you can adapt, filter, and change how you see things over time by subjecting yourself to it a lot.[/QUOTE] Again, frame interpolation =/= video captured at high framerate.
So now do these beat DVA for PC gamin?
[QUOTE=BenJammin';42077640]So now do these beat DVA for PC gamin?[/QUOTE] Nothing beats DVI for gaming. DisplayPort gets close, but it ain't DVI. [editline]9413[/editline] What? DVI doesn't deal with signal encryption shit that HDMI does, it's (for gaming) a superior format.
[QUOTE=alien_guy;42077600]Again, frame interpolation =/= video captured at high framerate.[/QUOTE] Recording a 60 fps video, and recording a 120 fps video shows a big difference visually and to your eye.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42077692]Recording a 60 fps video, and recording a 120 fps video shows a big difference visually and to your eye.[/QUOTE] Obviously, I didn't say they were the same. You were talking about watching a movie with frame interpolation though.
[QUOTE=alien_guy;42077741]Obviously, I didn't say they were the same. You were talking about watching a movie with frame interpolation though.[/QUOTE] Yes, but it's still a question of how your eyes see it. Your eyes see 220hz much differently. Yes, it's interpolation but it's still changing what you see until your eyes adjust to it.
Problem with lots of those stupid 120/240/9000 hz TVs is that they don't actually support those kind if sources. They do this thing called frame interpolation as it's already been pointed out. The TV makes up frames by mixing shit from other frames. Which is why it can loo awful. Although I'm sure if we had real 120 hz sources and tvs. It would be great.
Does this mean it comes with HDCP 2.0?
[QUOTE=gjsdeath;42077768]Problem with lots of those stupid 120/240/9000 hz TVs is that they don't actually support those kind if sources. They do this thing called frame interpolation as it's already been pointed out. The TV makes up frames by mixing shit from other frames. Which is why it can loo awful. Although I'm sure if we had real 120 hz sources and tvs. It would be great.[/QUOTE] Most new TV's have the option to change the Hz rate. Any games that I have that can run in 120 look really great on the 120hz option for this TV.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42077815]Most new TV's have the option to change the Hz rate. Any games that I have that can run in 120 look really great on the 120hz option for this TV.[/QUOTE] I haven't seen any, but that would be really cool. Sadly there are few sources that go above 60 currently. PC games probably work well if it can run said games that well. (I'm lucky to get most modern games to run at30-40 on my 5770)
I dont even use HDMI 1.0 because its so fucking expensive to get a cord. Still on that DVI grind.
[QUOTE=areolop;42078792]I dont even use HDMI 1.0 because its so fucking expensive to get a cord. Still on that DVI grind.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.monoprice.com/[/url] enjoy.
tvs don't even take 120fps signals tho they interpolate the ones inbetween that's how motionflow etc works or is this different technology altogether?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42078804]monoprice.net enjoy.[/QUOTE] oh. my. god.
[QUOTE=areolop;42078858]oh. my. god.[/QUOTE] it's okay, you can cry it's all over now
[QUOTE=Eric95;42076860]That has to do with shutter speed, they don't add motion blur in post except if it's cgi you silly willy[/QUOTE] actually they do add motion blur to shots without cgi sometimes
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42078941]it's okay, you can cry it's all over now[/QUOTE] But actually. I just bought a 15' cable for cheaper than a 6' at the local store. DVI can finally die in my house now.
[QUOTE=meppers;42075914]only 60fps? so does that make 120hz tvs worthless?[/QUOTE] good god the last version didn't even support the same resolution at 24hz so please just think before you open your mouth holy shit
[QUOTE=Swilly;42076120]A++ on the fact that doesn't compare 120 to 60. Also the elitism of "Bro, you don't understand unless you it 120, YOU CAN SEE FOREVER" is stupid. There isn't a difference unless you apply motion blurring which actually helps lower framerates look fluid.[/QUOTE] Use a fucking 120hz monitor the difference is night and day [editline]4th September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=areolop;42079010]But actually. I just bought a 15' cable for cheaper than a 6' at the local store. DVI can finally die in my house now.[/QUOTE] DVI and HDMI carry the exact same video signal though Unless you need audio on the same cable, there's no reason to go out of your way to switch to HDMI
[QUOTE=gjsdeath;42077768]Problem with lots of those stupid 120/240/9000 hz TVs is that they don't actually support those kind if sources. They do this thing called frame interpolation as it's already been pointed out. The TV makes up frames by mixing shit from other frames. Which is why it can loo awful. Although I'm sure if we had real 120 hz sources and tvs. It would be great.[/QUOTE] They're now selling 4K TVs over here, while our broadcast standards barely support 1080p video (There's like 1 HD channel and it's 1080i), so every single ad for a 4K TV has "Doesn't work in Australia, Blu-Ray only" down the bottom basically. We're in this strange situation where our DTV transition started early (So we're on MPEG2), but took so long that by the time it finished everybody else was using H.264. Hopefully by the time we start adopting 4K broadcasting the H.264 successor would be around, so we could skip it. Our current TV is 120Hz and it's awesome, but the frame interpolation stuff gets tripped up on repetitive content (Like a brick wall) and will mix blocks up while interpolating, makes the effect very obvious (But it's awesome for other things, like moving logos around)
I don't see the big deal in HDMI cables. All I know is you use them to embiggen you computer's display on a TV. Or if you want, use them to record footage off the TV.
perfect post/title/avatar combo right there
Will there be any visible difference on anything that isn't designed for 2.0, e.g. a PS3?
[QUOTE=Sharker;42080888]Will there be any visible difference on anything that isn't designed for 2.0, e.g. a PS3?[/QUOTE] It's a lossless standard, so none whatsoever.
HDMI sucks. I wish displayport would've got popular instead.
[QUOTE=Joeyl10;42081093]HDMI sucks. I wish displayport would've got popular instead.[/QUOTE] hdmi and displayport are the same thing from a consumer point of view, so if you think hdmi sucks then so does displayport
[QUOTE=Odellus;42081152]hdmi and displayport are the same thing from a consumer point of view, so if you think hdmi sucks then so does displayport[/QUOTE] HDMI is a closed standard that has to be licensed, displayport is not iirc.
[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;42081200]HDMI is a closed standard that has to be licensed, displayport is not iirc.[/QUOTE] consumers dont care
I'd prefer HDMI personally. It's easy as all hell to use, it carries audio, and in the case of Redmere cables, are really thin and affordable.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.