Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / A monitor for the serious gamer!

Author
Message
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 11:15 Edited at: 8th Jan 2008 12:28
Alienware have showed of their latest creation, a curved panorama monitor using DLP technology with .02 ms response time and 2880 x 900 resolution, equivalent of 2 side by side 24" monitors but apparently seamless. Me wants but it's probably gonna cost a fortune. Shots and info.

Quote: "We did notice three faint vertical dividing lines that appeared to indicate four sub-panels making up this screen"


[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 12:28
A monitor for the esthetically minded!
I just found another monitor, this one is from Dell and it's very beautiful, but expensive. It's a 22" high quality LCD monitor with a crystal clear glass design around it.

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Manic
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Completely off my face...
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 13:16
have you been searching Digg for monitors by any chance?

I don't have a sig, live with it.
El Goorf
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Sep 2006
Location: Uni: Manchester, Home: Dunstable
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 14:24
i like the idea of a curved monitor, since it will more closely conform to how our eyes see the world, will probably reduce eye strain problems, however, that .02ms response time i could hardly care less about..

http://notmybase.com
All my base are not belong to anyone.
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 14:53
Manic:
Nah, they where both among the news on a Swedish hardware site. CES is happening now (or have already happened).

El Goorf:
Yeah, the human eye probably can't tell the difference between .02 ms and 2 ms response time. I once saw images from an LCD test showing that 4 ms usually is all you really need, I guess 2 ms doesn't hurt though.

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Mr Tank
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Nov 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 16:46
Surely getting the graphics card to render the view projected onto a curved surface is a lot less efficient than a onto a plane.

Glad to hear response times are coming down. Maybe my next monitor will be an LCD one.

SUPER BADASS SPACESHIP X: WEBSITE
FORUM TOPIC
Bizar Guy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Apr 2005
Location: Bostonland
Posted: 8th Jan 2008 16:50
Very cool, but I'll be happy enough when I replace my current laptop with a new one with one of those anti-reflective screens.


Superman wears Chuck Norris PJ's
andrey d
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2007
Location:
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 00:24
Consumerism never fails...
SirFire
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2005
Location: North America
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 02:45
Quote: "... 0.02-millisecond response time ..."


Seriously, why is this important at all considering the human eye can't detect anything faster than 1/30th of a second?

Are there gamers out there who can actually tell the difference between a .0166666 second lag and a .000002 second lag?

_____________________
Windows Vista: Just say no.
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 02:46
Maybe that it helps with aimbots...


A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 02:50
0.02ms? Isn't that a 50th of a millisecond?

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
tha_rami
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 02:56 Edited at: 9th Jan 2008 02:56
No, Benjamin. It's 0.02ms. Don't be stubborn now. Accept it. You were wrong. Completely.




A mod has been erased by your signature because it was larger than 600x120
Osiris
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 05:13
A 50th would be 0.5 wouldn't it?

RIP Max-Tuesday, November 2 2007
You will be dearly missed.
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 05:16
No, that would be half.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
Zaibatsu
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st May 2006
Location: Lost in Thought
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 05:27
Quote: "A 50th would be 0.5 wouldn't it?
"


think about what you just said, and then feel really stupid.

Osiris
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 08:22
Ok i meant .00002 dang it, this keyboard is so spongy, also I hit five...I was playing COD4 at the time. Can you blame me? <= not an actual question.

RIP Max-Tuesday, November 2 2007
You will be dearly missed.
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 08:29
Quote: "Ok i meant .00002 dang it"


A 50th is not .00002 either, it's .02 or 1 / 50 where did you learn maths? . Also I find it slightly hard to believe as almost all monitors these days are either 2-3ms, surely it must be .02 seconds response time.

dab
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2004
Location: Your Temp Folder!
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 09:21
Quote: "Also I find it slightly hard to believe as almost all monitors these days are either 2-3ms, surely it must be .02 seconds response time."


Quote: "Alienware was showcasing a new curved display here at CES, and apparently, the DLP RPTV is a must-have for gamers. Hear this: 0.02-millisecond response time. Need we really say anything more?"
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 09:26
Yes, I can read. However it's possible that it was mistaken for milliseconds, as companies like changing the units things are measured in to make their products sound better.

Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 10:33
Quote: "Surely getting the graphics card to render the view projected onto a curved surface is a lot less efficient than a onto a plane."


Curved has nothing to do with the graphics card, it's just a screen made up of 4 projectors beaming at a curved canvas (from behind).


Quote: "Seriously, why is this important at all considering the human eye can't detect anything faster than 1/30th of a second?"


This has nothing to do with the human eye but how fast the screen can change from 1 picture to another. You won't be able to tell a lag of a few milliseconds (like on a 16 ms LCD) but the image will become blurred when you for example rotate a camera in a game.


Quote: "Also I find it slightly hard to believe as almost all monitors these days are either 2-3ms, surely it must be .02 seconds response time."


That is an LCD monitor you are talking about. The problem with an LCD is that it takes time for the crystals to change shape and permitting different amounts of light. DLP uses tiny mirrors to reflect light and they turn on and off rapidly to produce varying amounts of light. As you can see there's a huge difference in speed here.

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 10:55
If displays ran at 30fps then they'd look pretty jerky, worse even than old fashioned tube televisions. See we need the extra speed to blend between frames and provide the illusion of movement - old TV's did this automatically but with digital displays we need things like anti-aliasing when things run too slow.

If you put a 50fps game beside a 30fps game, there's a destinct difference.


less is more, but if less is more how you keeping score?
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 12:56 Edited at: 9th Jan 2008 12:56
Quote: "like anti-aliasing when things run too slow"

The only thing you use anti-aliasing is to get rid of the jagged edges on rendered 3D objects because each pixel only renders what it "hits" so you need to blend pixels to get a smooth edge. While this can also make textures smoother it's only applied to edges on modern graphics cards. This have nothing to do with FPS (except that the more AA the lower the FPS).



Expert gamers can notice a lag in camera movement (if FPS games) under 60 FPS. A 10 FPS 2D animation looks perfectly fine as long as there's no smooth movements. I have only used 10 FPS animations in my test game for SGT. The smoother movements you want the higher the FPS must be.

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 13:43
My point is that when you have a 30fps game with jagged edges it's a lot more noticeable how slow it is, when there is AA at least when you move the camera the jaggies don't get noticed so much because your not seeing actual raw pixels, the contrast gets smoothed out. I think it's most noticable when things rotate, and 30fps is probably quite a generous frame rate for most 2D things.


less is more, but if less is more how you keeping score?
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 14:05
The biggest difference between 50 and 30 FPS when playing a FPS game is how jerky the camera becomes when you aim. Jagged edges are most noticeable when things move slowly on the screen, and when the contrast between object and background is high.

The best option to combat low FPS is to blend frames together, like you get in a movie, which only have 24-25 frames (depending on format).

In a 2D game where you for example scroll the entire screen (camera movement) it might look jerky at certain speeds in 50 FPS but smooth at higher rates.

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 14:20
I think motion blurring is the next big hurdle in game visuals - like once they can have proper rendering of motion blurring we'll have much more believable graphics in games. Our eyes do their own motion blurring, but as I said, if the game runs at the same rate as your eyes, there's no motion blurring at all, we need the extra frames so our eyes can blend them together.


less is more, but if less is more how you keeping score?
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 14:40
Van:
The thing is that we don't need motion blurring when the frame rate is high enough and that might be the most efficient option anyway. To do motion blurring you need to render two images and then blend them together but that means either a lot of work (render two screens every frame) or requires a lot of extra memory (store two screens). On 360 and PS3 the goal is 60 FPS on all games. The disadvantage of motion blur is a loss in quality, the image becomes blurred. There's no motion blur in life and also no frame rate, all we do i mimic the reality close enough for us to not notice the difference.

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 15:40 Edited at: 9th Jan 2008 15:40
More details on the monitor

Quality:
Quote: "the final version will show a seamless image"


Price:
Quote: "more than a 17-inch flat panel and less than a Kia"


[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
NeX the Fairly Fast Ferret
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2005
Location: The Fifth Plane of Oblivion
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 18:28
My screen's got a 32ms response time. In other words, just under two frames. But hey, it was free and it's pretty darn good with still images.


Since the other one was scaring you guys so much...
Osiris
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 19:13 Edited at: 9th Jan 2008 19:14
Double.

RIP Max-Tuesday, November 2 2007
You will be dearly missed.
Osiris
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posted: 9th Jan 2008 19:14
Quote: "A 50th is not .00002 either, it's .02 or 1 / 50 where did you learn maths?"


Thats what it is in seconds...

(.02 ms I mean.)

RIP Max-Tuesday, November 2 2007
You will be dearly missed.
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 10th Jan 2008 10:19
Quote: "My screen's got a 32ms response time. In other words, just under two frames."


1000 / 32 = 31,25 FPS

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
NeX the Fairly Fast Ferret
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2005
Location: The Fifth Plane of Oblivion
Posted: 10th Jan 2008 17:11
...Which is just under two frames at 60fps!


Since the other one was scaring you guys so much...
Digital Awakening
AGK Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Sweden
Posted: 10th Jan 2008 19:06
Quote: "...Which is just under two frames at 60fps!"


Which doesn't really make any kind of sense...

[center]
CREATE games with ease! NO programming required!
WIP
Insert Name Here
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2007
Location: Worcester, England
Posted: 10th Jan 2008 20:19
Nex has always been random. Just accept it.


Furries are good. Trust me.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-19 20:37:44
Your offset time is: 2024-11-19 20:37:44