2020 is just for the first model, popularity will not be till much later in 2020s.
Remember how rare the first 120Hz monitor was in 2009, and how rare 240Hz still is today? Ditto. But the first model has to come somewhere.
And it will very close to 2020 (whether 2019, 2020, 2021 is simply nitpicking relatively speaking) -- but the 2020 prediction should be fairly accurate at least for the first consumer/prosumer 1080p 480Hz monitor.
Two huge reasons.
(1) Framerate amplification technologies for lagless & strobeless ULMB.
This is where new technologies such as Frame Rate Amplification Technologies has to come into play.
You know how Oculus Rift reprojects from 45fps to 90fps? That asynchronous timewarp algorithm? There is research in doing bigger ratios, such as 10:1 frame rate amplification ratios (e.g. 100fps converted to 1000fps) in a relatively lagless way and with less artifacts than today's reprojection / asynchronous timewarping.
A smaller amount of silicon is needed to amplify frame rates (via other methods) than to render completely from scratch, and so research is done in this. This is not your grandfather's Sony Motionflow with all the Soap Opera Effect artifacts, but a higher frame rate that begins to look like native frame rate.
I've written an earlier thread about this
New term: "Frame Rate Amplification" (1000fps in cheap GPUs) and came up with a new term for this.
This is one of the steps we need for lagless & strobeless ULMB. It will probably trail ultra-high-Hz panels.
(2) At 480Hz and above, VSYNC ON and VSYNC OFF becomes almost the same lag even at 100fps
Keep in mind that VSYNC ON 60fps on a 480Hz panel has only a 2ms VSYNC penalty -- so 480Hz VRR panels can be practically as good as VSYNC OFF, as tested with the Blur Busters GSYNC vs VSYNC OFF lag tests. For 240Hz monitors, enabling VRR is almost but not quite as good as VSYNC OFF but CS:GO players still use VSYNC OFF instead of GSYNC, and scanout lag gradient is still 4.1ms.
With a 2ms scanout, even at lower framerates of a mere 100 frames per second -- the scanout lag gradent becomes virtually a non-issue, and can make VRR good enough (even at lower framerates) to use instead of VSYNC OFF. VSYNC OFF advantage is eliminating the lag issues of having to wait for the next scanout opportunity, or even interrupting the current scanout (tearline) -- and at 2ms refresh granularities nearly eliminate the lag-gradient (latency range / latency jittering / latency asymmetry) between VSYNC ON versus VSYNC OFF versus GSYNC methodologies, even for lower framerates such as 100fps.
Near zero scanout lag penalty. Near zero frame-transmission lag.
With faster frame-transmission of 1/480sec over a video cable, you eliminate the scanout lag (scanout lag = frame transmission lag). The VSYNC ON lag penalty is caused by scanout latency, and at 480Hz, the scanout penalty is only 2ms (1/480sec).
VSYNC ON and VSYNC OFF gets almost same lag
So when VSYNC ON and VSYNC OFF almost equalizes in input lag at any framerate (because of sheer fast scanout), the decision of which sync tech to use -- matters a hell lot less. Choose the way you prefer to play, rather than trying to fix lag.
Remember, VSYNC ON lag is the scanout lag / frame transmission lag / refresh cycle duration lag. This scanout lag goes down at higher Hz. Push it to near zero via sheer high Hz and ultrafast frame delivery -- and the lag difference of VSYNC ON versus VSYNC OFF becomes nil as we go towards 480Hz and 1000Hz
Microstutter becomes smaller at 100 frames per second at 480Hz
Also, microstuttering also will go down dramatically at 480Hz too, even at Windows desktop. 2ms granularities makes fixed-480Hz look almost like VRR for most low framerates (e.g. 50 to 100fps) since any beat-frequency / harmonic-frequency between framerate and refreshrate creates much smaller microstutter amplitudes -- e.g. 23fps@480Hz versus 24fps@480Hz versus 25fps@480Hz will look almost identical, unlike 23fps@120Hz versus 24fps@120Hz versus 25fps@120Hz. And the mouse-lock feel to display will be even better at 480Hz even for low framerates -- low framerates feel noticeably less laggy.
100fps@120Hz = very microstuttery (I clearly see it)
100fps@240Hz = less microstuttery (I can still see it)
100fps@480Hz = barely microstuttery (if still visible)
1000Hz starts looking equivalent to per-pixel VRR
It's like supporting VRR at multiple different framerates simultaneously on the same display. 1000Hz can essentially almost make VRR unnecessary, and make the display fully ambidextrous in framerate simultaneously due to the ultra-small refresh cycle granularities that essentially turns it into "a per-pixel VRR" behaviour rather than a "per-refresh-cycle VRR". Whether it's a browser scroll, or stuttery browser animation on fixed Hz. The microstutter amplitude of 23fps@480Hz is only 1/4th the vibrationwidth of 23fps@120Hz. All random low framerates start looking smooth simultaneously without need for VRR, so multiple animations running at different framerates (21fps in one browser window, 47fps in photoshop window, 63fps in a third browser window) all suddenly start looking much smoother simultaneously, because the refresh-cycle-granularity is so small, it ceases to become much of a microstutter issue. I've seen this phenomenon when testing at 480Hz that almost any random framerates no longer behave microstuttery at off-multiples. 24fps and 25fps videos (two windows side by side playing simultaneously) looked perfectly smooth. Yet 480 is not a multiple of 25. But it doesn't matter much because it's only a 2ms stutter in 40ms frame times (25fps = 40ms frames). So a 1/20th-amplitude microstutter is often below the noisefloor of visibility. This means you can play NTSC 24fps and PAL 25fps on the same fixed-Hz 480Hz screen at the same time, and both looks simultaneously perfectly smooth on my Zisworks 4K120Hz when it's in 480Hz mode (Sure, resolution is crap, but fast-motion looks completely non-stuttery in both video windows). This is a phenomenon that is beneficial.
When a pixel is able to refresh anytime on demand to within a 1ms timing accuracy, the need for full-panel VRR diminishes hugely.
Tearing becomes less visible at 100 frames per second at 480Hz
Also, tearing is still visible on 240Hz monitors, less than 120Hz. Tearing at 480Hz will be even less visible.
100fps@120Hz = tearlines are visible for 1/120sec each
100fps@240Hz = tearlines are visible for 1/240sec each
100fps@480Hz = tearlines are visible for 1/480sec each
The briefer a tearline is visible for, the harder is to see them. I still easily notice tearlines at 240Hz in games for bright content -- dark vertical walls on bright backgrounds. Others can't. But, needless to say, tearing visibility is also an issue.
All this combined, this helps you even at only 100 frames per second. Once 480Hz is cheap enough to add. Being the world's first website to test 480Hz (and it still sits on my desk next to other monitors) -- I have discovered many unexpected benefits --
like playing PAL 25fps and NTSC 24fps simultaneously side-by-side in a stutter free way -- that's tantamount to behaving like per-pixel VRR simply by sheer near-zero refresh cycle granularity, eliminating refresh cycle granularity from becoming a stutter factor. 1000Hz mice were dismissed as hooey at first until most grudingly agreed it worked. 480Hz is also cheaper to pull off than a FALD backlight. 480Hz displays are not hooey, for many reasons I've explained above. It benefits low frame rates too.
Imagine replacing GSYNC, FreeSync, VSYNC OFF, VSYNC ON, Fast Sync, Enhanced Sync, LightBoost, ULMB, with just simply sheer Hz
Once you've got ultra-high Hz, a hell of a lot of display motion problems are solved
simultaneously in a virtually lagless way. Who cares about the sync tech or blur reduction tech once you go past a specific refresh rate. (For the blur reduction part will still require high frame rates -- or will still need strobing tech to eliminate motion blur in low-framerate material -- but for everything else, VRR is easily replaced via ultra-high-Hz). Heck, imagine VSYNC ON and VSYNC OFF becoming identical in input lag when a display's frame granularity approaches ever closer to 0ms. Even if it won't happen quickly, but it is a worthwhile journey in the
Amazing Journey To Future 1000Hz Displays. I will probably be writing a sequel to that article, because I have never (yet) written how 1000Hz behaves like per-pixel VRR. And I haven't clearly written about how the difference between VSYNC ON and VSYNC OFF and VRR converges and disappears as refresh granularities approach 0. But it does and I've visually confirmed that behaviour, as has many researchers of 1000Hz+ displays. There are many additional benefits of 480Hz+ that now belongs in a new followup article. Consider this forum post a taster.
It'll still be a niche sure, but so is 240Hz. (And even 1000Hz mice was a niche for a long time till they became a widespread standard feature in gaming mice). For years, this was pie-in-the-sky stuff. But an indie single-handedly added 480Hz to an off-the-shelf 4K60 LCD panel -- and this is no longer unobtainium. Now the engineering world just has have to fill-in the missing technology pieces (e.g. for GPUs to gain more frame rate amplification tech) to allow manufacturers to properly commercialize the benefits of this.
Do not underestimate benefits of 480Hz operation, even for low frame rates.
Further reading for other readers not aware of our ultra-high-Hz research:
-
Our 480Hz Tests
-
Blur Busters Law And The Amazing Journey To Future 1000Hz Displays