MULTI Need Suggestions

venom

Lado-K-Lashkary
Mar 15, 2007
2,293
11
43
Karachi
Hello fellow PGers

Apologies in advance if this is not the right category to be posting in.

So i have been gaming on my Entry level Samsung KU7000 TV which is both 4K and HDR compatible. My consoles and the TV are basically set up in my bedroom but since I have a new born now I am planning to set up the consoles in a separate room on a computer table-esque setup.

What I'm actually confused is whether to get another LED or a gaming monitor. I have both the PS4 PRO and the XBOX ONE X. I was actually looking for a gaming monitor but found out that 4k HDR monitors are stupendously expensive. There is this one monitor that I am getting thats within my budget i.e. Philips 40 Inch 4K Monitor [BDM4065UC] but its not HDR compatible.

Need your suggestions whether I should go with this monitor or just get another LED thats HDR / 4K compatible. My primary use would be to play XBOX ONE X and the Ps4 PRO only.

Thank You.
 

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp

This is the one I'm looking to get with the PS5. The advertised input lag is based on tests conducted at 120Hz. Its higher at 60Hz (around 15ms according to Rtings).

Alternatively, you could get an LG C9 OLED TV. Excellent blacks and panel uniformity, though it comes with potential burn-in issues if you're planning on doing regular TV viewing. Full array LED back-lighting (featured in the Sony X900H) is the next best alternative imo. QLED TVs such as the Samsung Q80T are also an alternative worth checking out.
 
Last edited:

venom

Lado-K-Lashkary
Mar 15, 2007
2,293
11
43
Karachi
So NO to a Non HDR gaming monitor in favor of an HDR LED then? Since I'll be sitting pretty close to the screen I thought a 32 incher screen would be enough but it's virtually impossible to get a good HDR LED in that screen size.
 

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
Since I'll be sitting pretty close to the screen I thought a 32 incher screen would be enough but it's virtually impossible to get a good HDR LED in that screen size.
Pretty much. You aren't going to find TVs with the latest features in that screen size. If you're looking to get something a little future proof, hdmi 2.1 support is a must for the next-gen consoles, with features like ALLM and VRR that can improve the experience.

In the 32 inch range, you're better off looking for a monitor that supports HDR.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: venom

Necrokiller

Senior
Apr 16, 2009
7,430
310
89

Same choices rtings already covered :ROFLMAO:

As it is, HDMI 2.1 and VRR is only supported by a select few TVs atm to begin with. Factor in the recent Sony X900 announcement of supporting VRR, and you end up with these 3 displays with next-gen feature set compatibility lol

Also worth mentioning that next-gen games running at 30fps will exhibit higher input lag readings than the ones typically found in review tests measured at 60hz.
 
Last edited:

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
Same choices rtings already covered :ROFLMAO:
CTRL+F Sony X900H. Nope lol.

As it is, HDMI 2.1 and VRR is only supported by a select few TVs atm to begin with.
Where "select few" = ~50 TVs? Right :ROFLMAO:

Also worth mentioning that next-gen games running at 30fps will exhibit higher input lag readings than the ones typically found in review tests measured at 60hz.
No, it's the opposite. A game running at 30fps but outputting at 120Hz will transmit a frame to the display at 1/120 sec, reducing latency associated with scan-out. If you force output at 60Hz, only then will it exhibit higher input lag on a 120Hz display. Both PS5 and XSX should support up to 4k @ 120Hz output regardless of what resolution and frame rate the game is internally running at.

With the exception of Xbox One X, a 120Hz display was of no benefit to current and previous console generations, as they couldn't output at anything above 60Hz. For example, running the Switch on a 120Hz display will result in higher latency than it would on a 60Hz display. A Switch Pro or whatever will likely come with an hdmi 2.1 port, hence resolving this issue.
 
Last edited:

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
CTRL+F Sony X900H. Yup :ROFLMAO:
That's 6 recommended TVs, half of which don't even support hdmi 2.1. The list I narrowed down is based on the currently available hdmi 2.1 supported TVs. Therefore, the criteria is different. If I were to list down 6 TVs, none of them would be without hdmi 2.1 support.

lol @ "~50"
My bad, I forgot to check the hdmi 2.1 option from the table tool customization window. There are 16 hdmi 2.1 supported TVs (and therefore VRR and 4k @ 120Hz supported for compliant devices) listed on Rtings, which is still not "a select few".
 
Last edited:

Necrokiller

Senior
Apr 16, 2009
7,430
310
89
We're already down to 16 from "~50".

3 of those 16 are 8K TVs. Safe to say no one is in the market for those for PS5 or Series X. The list will keep on decreasing.

X900H, and several others, have yet to receive the updates for VRR.

Most importantly, simply supporting VRR is not enough. LG CX is the only display that actually supports VRR upto 120HZ at 4K (which still has a lower barrier at 40Hz so not the best implementation of VRR possible). Others are limited to 40-60Hz at 4K (which is not good enough for TVs - or even monitors imo - that will cost around $1000, or up to $3000 for larger screen sizes).

So yeah, not a lot of options right now if you want to buy a future proof TV that is expected to last a full console generation.
 
Last edited:

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
The list will keep on decreasing.
The point is that they're all hdmi 2.1 TVs that support 4k @ 120fps. Even if you take those 3 native 8k TVs out, it's still not "a select few".

X900H, and several others, have yet to receive the updates for VRR.
They'll receive updates in due time when there are hdmi 2.1 compliant mainstream devices in the market. There's no technical hurdle in this regard. It'll happen in due time.

Most importantly, simply supporting VRR is not enough. LG CX is the only display that actually supports VRR upto 120HZ at 4K (which still has a lower barrier at 40Hz so not the best implementation of VRR possible). Others are limited to 40-60Hz at 4K (which is not good enough for TVs - or even monitors imo - that will cost around $1000, or up to $3000 for larger screen sizes).
A VRR minimum at 30Hz is ideal, but 40Hz isn't bad by any means. A software update should be able to improve this. Besides, we have yet to see how VRR is implemented on the Sony X900H and several other TVs, which will also support it at up to 120Hz, so your claim isn't future proof to begin with lol. 30Hz may well be the VRR minimum there. There's no reason why the LG C9 can't do VRR @ 120Hz either, but it ultimately depends if LG will support it on the software side.
 
Last edited:

Necrokiller

Senior
Apr 16, 2009
7,430
310
89
They'll receive updates in due time when there are hdmi 2.1 compliant mainstream devices in the market. There's no technical hurdle in this regard. It'll happen in due time.
But there is a major hurdle. Dedicated hardware module does have its advantages over FreeSync/Adaptive Sync. Even the certified "G-Sync Compatible" TVs do not have the feature set of displays with a dedicated module in them, limited range being one of them.

it ultimately depends if LG will support it on the software side.
And that's the biggest problem with VRR on TVs. Wildly inconsistent implementation, except in cases that have a dedicated G-Sync module.

A VRR minimum at 30Hz is ideal, but 40Hz isn't bad by any means.
Console games do not operate at a minimum 40fps, so its pretty useless.

The only PS5 game to support 120Hz mode currently, Dirt 5, will not be able to utilize VRR on anything other than the LG CX. Not a "select few" I guess, but the "chosen one" then lol

A software update should be able to improve this.
You'd think but there doesn't exist any FreeSync TV that covers the full range of the display's refresh rate. HDMI 2.1 can improve this perhaps, who knows, but there is no sign of that happening at the moment. More power to the people willing to gamble and spend a $1000 on the hope that it "should" be possible.
 
Last edited:

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
Dedicated hardware module does have its advantages over FreeSync/Adaptive Sync.
While dedicated hardware is undoubtedly better, FreeSync enabled as an hdmi 2.1 protocol extension isn't a deal breaker for anyone looking to get a new TV with the PS5 or XSX. The possibility of these consoles supporting hardware-based G-sync is slim. On the other hand, a PC gamer looking to invest a $1000+ towards a new TV should probably wait.

Console games do not operate at a minimum 40fps, so its pretty useless.
More next-gen console games are likely to have optional performance modes that target 60fps, but may or may not hold that target well. That's where this is useful.

The only PS5 game to support 120Hz mode currently, Dirt 5, will not be able to utilize VRR on anything other than the LG CX. Not a "select few" I guess, but the "chosen one" then lol
The Sony X900H, along with some Samsung TVs, will undoubtedly add support for VRR @ 120fps. I see no reason why they wouldn't. Rtings will update its reviews for all TVs that are pending updates to support certain hdmi 2.1 features.

Moreover, a game doesn't need to target 120fps for the console to output at 120Hz. The PS5/XSX should be able to do that at the OS level, just as all current/previous consoles were able to output at 60Hz despite most games targeting 30fps. The Xbox One X also has a low latency 120Hz mode (reduced scan-out time) for supported displays, regardless of what internal frame rate games run at. Therefore, VRR will be useful for games that target 60fps but often drop into the 40s.
 
Last edited:

Necrokiller

Senior
Apr 16, 2009
7,430
310
89
More next-gen console games are likely to have optional performance modes that target 60fps, but may or may not hold that target well. That's where this is useful.
Only if it never drops below 40fps or 48fps (the two most common lower limits). Then it will be useless.

The Sony X900H, along with some Samsung TVs, will undoubtedly add support for VRR @ 120fps
So, a select few then lol
 

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
Only if it never drops below 40fps or 48fps (the two most common lower limits). Then it will be useless.
Games that target 60fps on consoles don't readily drop below 40 (unless it's Sekiro lol).

So, a select few then lol
Even if most of the listed TVs continue to support 4k VVR max at 60Hz and min at 40-48Hz, there are likely to be very few games that run above 60fps on the next consoles anyway. Outputting at 4k @120Hz reduces latency, while VRR takes care of tearing due to frame rate variations between 40-60fps.
 
Last edited:

Necrokiller

Senior
Apr 16, 2009
7,430
310
89
Games that target 60fps on consoles don't readily drop below 40 (unless it's Sekiro lol).
This is not something the user can control which makes these TV a better fit for PCs where you can adjust to keep the minimums high enough. But Display Port 2 will almost double HDMI 2.1's bandwidth so there are still more options for PC gamers.

Even if most of the listed TVs continue to support 4k VVR max at 60Hz and min at 40-48Hz, there are likely to be very few games that run above 60fps on the next consoles anyway. Outputting at 4k @120Hz reduces latency, while VRR takes care of tearing due to frame rate variations between 40-60fps.
You're focusing on a smaller subset of cases to pitch these TVs. The primary target for most games pushing visuals will still be 30fps and no one knows which games will get a performance mode. Outputting at 4K/120Hz will not eliminate the stutter/judder associated with frame drops in a 30fps game which consoles readily do. Even reducing the lower limit of VRR to 30hz does not fix this problem because its the dips below 30fps that the display's refresh rate cannot mitigate.

An ideal scenario for VRR is running games at an unlocked frame rate and keeping 60fps as the baseline. Not possible as a standard on consoles so the next best thing is supporting VRR on the full range of display's refresh rate.
 
Last edited:

CerebralTiger

Expert
Apr 12, 2007
14,779
54
54
Isb/Rwp
You're focusing on a smaller subset of cases to pitch these TVs. The primary target for most games pushing visuals will still be 30fps and no one knows which games will get a performance mode.
At the very least, I'm expecting pretty much all multiplayer games/modes to target 60fps. As for single-player games, of the PS4's year 1 titles, Miles Morales and Demon's Souls Remake are already confirmed to feature a performance mode. I'd expect a similar situation with Insomniac's other PS5 game i.e. Ratchet & Clank, as well as Housemarque's Returnal. Most cross-gen titles, such as Deathloop will also run at 60fps. The PS5 will likely have many more 60fps games in its first year than the PS4 did in its launch year.
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
Pakgamers intro videos on our youtube channel
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    Plus being an RPG with many key bindings, im sure the huge amount of customization on the Steam Controller will make the control scheme way more intuitive than on these regular controllers
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    It requires shooting so its mouse or Steam Controller for me
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    Cyberpunk will probably play pretty well on a DS4 :p
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    Thats where I use Steam Controller when i want to. Or anything heavily reliant on right stick movement
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    Shooters continue to feel awful on a controller to me.
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    its just more comfortable playing games with a controller
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    anyway, I'm a controller stan through and through, exception only for RTS games.
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    surprised goldie hasn't shown up yet offering to finance a controller for me yet :p
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    its not a theory when its something you've said repeatedly :p
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    so all this talk was based on that theory? lol
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    Necrokiller said:
    even though the only use of them is decorative pieces i guess
    yeah, but if i had said in the past that game cases can eat shit and they are bad etc etc, then you would have ;p
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    even though the only use of them is decorative pieces i guess
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    Chandoo said:
    eh, some might say the steelbook collection i have is more frivolous, but i like neatly stacked steelbooks with high quality art,
    sure, good for you. but i didn't say its flawed or hypocritical to own them lol
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    Necrokiller said:
    it seems strange to you because you don't wana spend your money like that and thats totally fine lol
    eh, some might say the steelbook collection i have is more frivolous, but i like neatly stacked steelbooks with high quality art,
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    i will never tell anyone not to buy something they dont want
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    it seems strange to you because you don't wana spend your money like that and thats totally fine lol
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    again, its your purchase, you have the right to buy anything you want
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    Necrokiller said:
    im sorry I was able to buy multiple pieces of hardware man lol
    no don't be sorry, but don't get upset if others point out the flaws/hypocrisy in them as much as you love pointing out how much of a 360 fan I was :p
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    im sorry I was able to buy multiple pieces of hardware man lol
    Link
  • CerebralTiger CerebralTiger:
    Yup, CDPR kept MS out of the loop. I'm sure they'd much rather have had a Cyberpunk themed Series X instead
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    Chandoo said:
    sure, so now your steam controller is collecting dust, one of the 3 is getting a short end of the stick one way or the other :p
    Its not though... see, all your oddities are you own assumptions lol
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    Necrokiller said:
    Its an amazing looking controller with the best plug and play compatibility on PC and i already play games on it which aren't reliant on analogs stick so why not 🤷‍♂️
    sure, so now your steam controller is collecting dust, one of the 3 is getting a short end of the stick one way or the other :p
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    CerebralTiger said:
    That was a complete marketing failure lol. CDPR didn't communicate the delay to MS, and it put the latter in an awkward situation with that Special edition console lol
    weird to make a One X, instead of waiting for the Series X or S, considering the game itself is coming out *after* the new consoles, would have made a lot more sense.
    Link
  • Necrokiller Necrokiller:
    Its an amazing looking controller with the best plug and play compatibility on PC and i already play games on it which aren't reliant on analogs stick so why not 🤷‍♂️
    Link
  • Chandoo Chandoo:
    a/ you don't like analog sticks, b/ the game its themed after is a shooter which requires the analog sticks extensively c/ you're not even gonna use that controller to play said game it's branded for, but save it for some future use maybe (?)
    Link
    Necrokiller Necrokiller: Plus being an RPG with many key bindings, im sure the huge amount of customization on the Steam...