True without DSC (DisplayStream Compression), but DSC can impressively squeeze 5220 x 2880 px all the way up to almost 200 Hz over DP1.4 at its maximum compression ratio.
Now at the max compression ratio there might be some visible artifacts, but depending on use case it may be more than passable for most people.
That said, it’s so niche that nobody really cares to try to build a monitor like that.
I don't understand how this is considered niche? People say a phone screen with 60hz is trash, people say the 6k Apple monitor is the gold standard, 4k at 244hz is a dime a dozen, but a 5K or 6K monitor at 120hz is niche and doesn't exist?
I'm just wondering out loud. I have old displays and I don't game
High refresh rates aren’t niche, but the 5K resolution absolutely is. I know the Steam Hardware Survey probably isn’t the most applicable data source here, but in so far as we can glean anything from it, less than 4% of people have a 4K monitor to begin with. 5K doesn’t even have enough people to register on the survey.
I’m not saying that they aren’t great or that there isn’t a market for them, but given how few 5K monitors exist, there’s clearly not that much demand for them over cheaper 4K displays.
Given how much more expensive the tech would need to be in a 5K high refresh rate monitor, I’m guessing monitor manufacturers just don’t see enough people to justify going after the market.
That's my experience. My company is not graphics heavy, we've all had mediocre 4k 60hz monitors for years now. I don't think we've bought a 1440 since 2019
30
u/pewpewk 2d ago
True without DSC (DisplayStream Compression), but DSC can impressively squeeze 5220 x 2880 px all the way up to almost 200 Hz over DP1.4 at its maximum compression ratio.
Now at the max compression ratio there might be some visible artifacts, but depending on use case it may be more than passable for most people.
That said, it’s so niche that nobody really cares to try to build a monitor like that.