news or rumors on 240Hz+@1080p, DP 1.4/HDMI 2.1 , OLED ?

[mello]

What i realized is that i need to have at least 2 separate monitors, one strictly for gaming and other one for everything else. So i want to buy 240Hz monitor with G-SYNC as this is currently the best thing for fast twitch games. But maybe i should wait a little bit for something new to come out in the next few months ? I know that i can always buy something now and resell it later when new tech comes out, so my questions are, are there any news or rumors regarding:

- 240Hz+ monitors @ 1080p ? (any ETA or prediction when they will come out and at what Hz ? I assume it will be at least 300Hz)
- are monitor manufacturers planning to add additional features or support for something like 720p@300Hz / 540p@480Hz (similar to what zisworks did in his 4k120Hz monitor) ?
- is it worth to wait for DP 1.4/HDMI 2.1 (Auto Low Latency Mode) ? Any possible lag improvements ? Or is it something that i should not care about at all ?
- OLED... will it finally reach monitor/gaming market or is it just wishful thinking ?
- any other tech, features or improvements on the horizon that i haven't mentioned ?

Thanks

[lexlazootin]

Obviously 240hz+ requires a lot of bandwidth and Zisworks only got away with it by running two of his chips. The only mainstream option would be the new G-Sync chip nvidia is developing to run in the new 4k 144hz monitor that are not even released yet (some time April) for a new AUO 4k 144hz panel. To my knowledge there isn't any known news about panels that can support higher then 240hz, overclocking 240hz can cause issues with gamma, colour, overdrive and whatnot.

'Auto Low Latency Mode' probably will do very little since the full latency of my system with a 240hz monitor can be as low as 9ms, if it will make a difference it will probably be in the ballpark of <1ms. On the HDMI site they really don't say what the feature actually is.

I really doubt there is anything coming out soon.

[mello]

Obviously 240hz+ requires a lot of bandwidth and Zisworks only got away with it by running two of his chips.

Yes i saw that, every chip is responsible for half of the screen. But as long as it is working properly (perfectly synced without artifacts), it shouldn't really matter. But at the same time it automatically increases the monitor cost, at least for the chips/connectors/cables.

The only mainstream option would be the new G-Sync chip nvidia is developing to run in the new 4k 144hz monitor that are not even released yet (some time April) for a new AUO 4k 144hz panel.

Not really interested in 144Hz@4k gaming.

To my knowledge there isn't any known news about panels that can support higher then 240hz, overclocking 240hz can cause issues with gamma, colour, overdrive and whatnot.

This is why i asked, there are some people here on forums who might know some news about future or near future tech & things that are in development. And i am not really interested in overclocking the panel either, i just want it to work at the advertised specs out of the box.

'Auto Low Latency Mode' probably will do very little since the full latency of my system with a 240hz monitor can be as low as 9ms, if it will make a difference it will probably be in the ballpark of <1ms. On the HDMI site they really don't say what the feature actually is.

From what i remember, Chief said that HDMI already has lower latency than DP, so i am wondering if with HDMI 2.1 and its "Auto Low Latency Mode" we might see a switch in preference of what gaming monitors will be using as a main input/output connector. And the difference will mostly likely be very small (<1ms), so this is also why i asked if i should wait and care about it at all (because currently there are no monitors with DP 1.4 or HDMI 2.1).

[Chief Blur Buster]

From what i remember, Chief said that HDMI already has lower latency than DP, so i am wondering if with HDMI 2.1 and its "Auto Low Latency Mode" we might see a switch in preference of what gaming monitors will be using as a main input/output connector. And the difference will mostly likely be very small (<1ms), so this is also why i asked if i should wait and care about it at all (because currently there are no monitors with DP 1.4 or HDMI 2.1).

Newer HDMI is also increasingly micropacket based so the assertion may no longer be true. Fortunately, the lag is only sub-milliseconds (hundreds of microseconds or less).

The Low Latency Mode is also being done on DisplayPort too -- it's simply a quick frame delivery mechanism very similar to using variable refresh rate but using a fixed Hz. Basically Large Vertical Totals combined with maximum-dotclock delivery of "60Hz" refresh cycles that scan-out faster. This tech is not exclusive to HDMI but we are already unwittingly doing these tricks (in more roundabout ways) in the GSYNC HOWTO's and such.

The Auto Low Latency Mode contains more than 1 way to reduce lag:
-- Automatically switch display to "Game Mode"
-- Provides a Quick Frame Transport mechanism (if supported), by scanning-out refresh cycles on the cable faster than the refresh rate. (e.g. 60Hz refresh cycles transmitted in 1/120sec or 1/240sec, etc) -- which we already do when we play 60 frames per second material on our 240Hz VRR monitors.

Both of them have much bigger latency savings (for VSYNC ON game material) than the (now fairly negligible) latency difference of newer-spec HDMI versus newer-spec DP.

Eventually we'll need to run some Grand latency tests on all the cable methods (and their signalling protocols & signalling revisions) and a trial of a few passive & active adaptors (for adaptor lag). It'll be a while, since I'm working on several major projects first including those related to monitor tests. (Yes, I know -- taking longer than expected).