Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Power Entertainment Hardware Games News Technology

Sharp Unveils 27-inch 8K 120Hz IGZO Monitor With HDR (monitornerds.com) 105

Posted by BeauHD from the eye-candy dept.
Sharp has unveiled a next-gen monitor that is an absolute mouthful. It measures in at 27-inches and features a 8K resolution (7,680 x 4,320), HDR (high dynamic range), and a 120Hz refresh rate. Monitornerds reports: Sharp says that the IGZO name is an acronym for the semiconductor materials used in the monitor's backplane. It is comprised of indium, gallium, zinc, and oxygen. This material can also be utilized with several types of panels such as IPS, TN, and even OLED. The IGZO technology has benefits compared to standard silicon semiconductors in which the electron mobility is 20 to 50 times higher which translates to higher frame rates. It also uses smaller transistors, which translates to higher pixel density as well as lower power consumption. The panel which is show at the Sharp exhibit is a 27-inch model with a very notable pixel density of 326ppi: double in comparison to the average 150ppi of 4K monitors. It has a stunning 33 million pixels under its belt as well as HDR technology which promises that this monitor can deliver stunning images with ease. Sharp didn't disclose a price for the television, nor did they say whether or not the unit will be mass produced. However, we can imagine the monitor will cost a pretty penny if it ever makes it to the market.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sharp Unveils 27-inch 8K 120Hz IGZO Monitor With HDR More

Sharp Unveils 27-inch 8K 120Hz IGZO Monitor With HDR

Comments Filter:
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • You wont be able to read text

      Err... just make the text bigger. Problem solved.

      or tell the difference at that fine resolution and screen size

      That depends how close you sit to it.

    • You wont be able to read text or tell the difference at that fine resolution and screen size, so whats the point?

      If you sit on the other side of the living room ? Yeah maybe.

      On the other hand, this screen has a pixel density which is approximately in the ~300 DPI range.
      This put it in the same ballpark as eReader (and the various Apple Retina thingies)
      Which is a very nice resolution to have for close range.
      Which means this can be very useful as monitor on your desktop, to which you sit close and which you use to display tons of small windows.
      Basically the equivalent of a multi-monitor setup, but all in a single package

      • As this kind of resolution isn't even declared as a standard, it would be hard to advertise for a television screen.

        When has that ever stopped a marketing department?

        It's 8K and HDR! The advertisement writes itself*

        *With a tiny footnote saying that there's no such thing.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by swb ( 14022 )

      From what I can figure, a 50 inch monitor is the point.

      I'm probably going to pull the string on a 40 or 43" 4K TV as a monitor replacement because it will be useful at 100% scaling at that size screen and 4k resolution.

      1920x1080 is like Fisher Price dot pitch on a large screen and approaching less useful on anything over 24".

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Greyfox ( 87712 )
      Displays for VR still have a long way to go to get rid of the screen door effect. That might be what they're pushing toward.

  • It measures in a 27-inch

    What does it measure in there?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Quirkz ( 1206400 )

      Underwear, obviously.

    • Well consider that in the US bra cup sizing system, difference between measuring torso around breast and under the breast difference is used to determine cup size. If the difference is 4", that's a D cup size, 5" is E (or DD) and 6" is F (or DDD). O size is cup for 15" difference. A Z cup would be for 26 inches of difference. So this 27" is just one more inch of breast measurement bigness beyond the hypothetical Z hooter holder. I trust this makes everything quite clear.

  • The bandwidth needed for that!?

    • Depends on the color. Normal (24bpp RGB) means around 50GBit/s at 60Hz. HDR may increase the bitrate, chroma subsampling (lower color resolution) may decrease it.

      DisplayPort 1.3 tops out at 26GBit/s, barely enough for 30Hz 24-bit.

      DisplayPort 1.4 is the same speed but adds compression that should permit 60Hz HDR.

      HDMI doesn't currently support 8k at any refresh rate but may be superseded in a couple years by SuperMHL, which supposedly will handle 8K at 120Hz.

  • There is an important distinction that needs to be made. One place it was monitor and another it says TV. Which is it?

    • There is an important distinction that needs to be made. One place it was monitor and another it says TV. Which is it?

      These days, it really doesn't matter. Pretty much every TV has HDMI input and appropriate resolution for a monitor. TV just has extra bits for a remote and tuner. Both my 'monitors' are TV's, as in they have remote and tuner, but I just use HDMI input for my PC. Occasionally I'll watch TV on one of them.

    • UHD TV standard that is coming to broadcast has to support 120 and 100 fps. This is the second screen to be revealed that will be compatible with the new standards that are coming. Current TVs on the market will not be compatible with what is coming, they may fudge it by giving yo a downgraded image however. Blame TV makers for rushing to the market before the EBU, ATSC etc have ratified their standards, DCI have pushed something through the door with UHD Bluray but misses a lot of good features.

  • The article makes several references to satiating gamers appetites but this is not a monitor that a gamer would want, at least not for the next 5 years, because even the newest GPU tech isn't ready for this.
    Apart from the fact that this monitor needs 8 DP cables (so would require a tri-SLI setup just to connect it), beyond a certain resolution (that we've already reached) gamers care more about FPS and being able to use high quality graphics settings than they care about pixel count. Gaming @ 8k/120Hz is no

    • IMO the amount of polygons and quality of textures are much more appealing than increasing the number of pixels that much. I'll take full hd with detailed textures and lots of polygons over mediocre visuals at 8k

  • Now all we need is some 8K porn to watch on it.

  • Let me just cough up $24,000...

  • and at 120hz i bet you wont need a space heater in a cold room with that monster

  • It's a beast (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MTEK ( 2826397 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @05:27PM (#53034927)

    8K120+HDR is something like 15 GB/s (capital "B"). Anandtech reported that it has eight DisplayPort cables feeding it.

    • The obvious solution is to move to using a fiber optic cable... which is actually what is used for all the absurdly large displays. [adweek.com]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      There must be a new HDMI version in the works, as they are going to have consumer products on sale for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.

      This monitor is probably aimed at professional use, editing and the like. Last year they started testing live recordings in 8k but viewing on mostly 4k equipment. The cameras are incredible - they have to use auto focus because the human eye looking at a small camera mounted screen isn't good enough.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by MTEK ( 2826397 )

        There must be a new HDMI version in the works

        While I wouldn't rule that out, superMHL, which was announced over a year ago, can handle the bandwidth requirements. Lattice Semiconductor already has superMHL products ready for next-gen A/V receivers, and you may see it in graphics cards as early as 2018.

  • I'm completely ready for 8K. Having several completely readable terminal/text editing windows open along with documentation and other media or doing cartography/other visual media creation would be awesome at 8K. Right now I'm using a 34" 3440x1440 monitor and it's still somewhat grainy. I welcome displays so fine that I can't see the pixels. Once I can get an 8K @ 60Hz display for $1500, I'm going on a spending spree and replacing all of my monitors at home.

  • IGZO sounds too much like VIZIO (Score:3)

    by JoeyRox ( 2711699 ) on Friday October 07, 2016 @06:01PM (#53035099)
    The latter being an off-brand supplier of cheap flatscreen TVs. Sharp might want to rethink their name/branding for this technology.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      They have been using IGZO for years. It's synonymous with the best LCDs available, used in everything from phones to massive TVs.

      • [Citation needed] While IGZO was licensed to Sharp and Samsung 4 years ago I have yet to hear it make its way into a single product.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Literally the first result on Google is a thread from 2013 asking about the merits of IGZO panels: http://www.overclock.net/t/144... [overclock.net]

          They have been around much longer than that, just read the Wikipedia article.

          • Yes and the only information in that entire thread is:
            "Sharp makes some smaller IGZO-TFT panels - 4k at 23.6'' (LQ236D1JG01) and 5k at 27'' (LQ270D1JG01) but I don't know which monitors are using them (yet)."

            It is also the only google thread comparing the technologies where if you type IPS vs PVA or OLED you get thousands of pages with in depth and detailed comparison between them.

            So do you know of a monitor with this technology? Because the main thing Google is bring up is today's story.

    • Those don't sound anything like each other. If the name is similar to any other manufacturer's it'd be Eizo. Not a bad brand to be confused with (which Sharp won't).

    • Sharp might want to rethink their name/branding for this technology.

      It is neither branding nor is it Sharp's technology.

      It's a semiconductor material: indium gallium zinc oxide. It was developed over 10 years ago and is licensed to both Sharp and Samsung, though it looks like Samsung have yet to use it for anything.

  • I have been defending 4K screen against those claiming it doesn't matter, but THIS, this is stupid..

  • Instead of this, how about a 4k - 40 inch - 60 Hz. - wide gamut display that costs less than $1000.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mentil ( 1748130 )

      There are Sony ones you can buy on Amazon for $650 today.

    • Sony XBR X800D, 43 inches, 650 dollars, and pretty sweet. I bought one. One caveat is that even the latest HDMI spec doesn't allow 3840 x 2160 at ten bit with 4:4:4 chroma subsampling, it doesn't have the bandwidth. The panel is ten bit but for PC use I had to choose between outputting at ten bit or 4:4:4. Either way looks great, but I went with 4:4:4 (within nVidia's Control Panel. And the Sony itself needs set its HDMI to enhanced output to enable seeing the option for 4:4:4 chroma subsampling in the nV

  • This is basically the most important measure of any screen used for gaming, but manufacturers completely deny this information from the consumers.
    Also getting a decent support to 240p would not hurt.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TheSync ( 5291 )

      Most of the TV video latency now is due to pixel processing (such as high-quality upscaling, motion interpolation, and other weird stuff).

      Professional displays use 1:1 pixel scaling of the input to reduce latency. But that means you need an HD screen for an HD signal, a 4K screen for a 4K signal.

  • Expect people to hook it up to their cable/media box with a composite video cable running at 480i, and setting it up so the picture is a bad case of Stretch-O-Vision (even though the source is in widescreen/letterbox format) with much of the picture cropped out (I've personaly seen way too many cases of this with todays media setups)

  • I've noticed a fair number of comments about the silliness of having a small but very high DPI screen - the "Oh, you won't notice the difference so there's no point" type ones. The real world doesn't have a DPI count, so as far as I'm concerned the higher the DPI a monitor has, the better. Put a window showing a pleasant view and a 1080 display dressed as a window showing the same view side by side and you can easily tell the difference. Do it with an 8K display and it becomes somewhat more difficult. D

    • I'd like a display with the readability of paper. This means at least 300 dpi, preferably closer to 600, so you wouldn't need the blurring we fancily call anti-aliasing. I won't even start with the lighting/contrast issues...

      • Pretty much the Note 7's display - as long as it's not on fire. Doesn't matter if it's light text on a dark background or vice versa, it looks stunning, it looks like you're just holding something printed in very high resolution on smooth plastic. For best results, about 30-40% brightness gives that effect.

        I do hope there's not a second recall - I like this phone :)

        • Pretty much the Note 7's display - as long as it's not on fire.

          If it's prone to catching fire, then that just makes it even more like paper :D

          Seriously, though, this fad with phones is getting ridiculous. I'm trying to do real work on a real computer, which involves things like a keyboard and displays you don't want to carry around everywhere. Yet all the nicest computing tech is going into phones, which don't even have keyboards, despite most people using them more for writing text than talking.

  • Sharp has unveiled a next-gen monitor that is an absolute mouthful

    I think you are doing monitors wrong.

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close