Back to Article

  • nathanddrews - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    I can push 2560x1600 at 75Hz to my FW900 over VGA. How can any modern display not hit 60Hz? Reply
  • nagi603 - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    If I read it right, it is not the whole display itself, but its HDMI connection that is to blame... On the DVI/DP port, it shouldn't cause any problem. Reply
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    HDMI up to v1.3 have a bandwidth limitation that prevents resolutions over 1920 x 1200 at 60 Hz. v1.4 increases the clock speed and thus bandwidth to enable 2560 x 1600 at 60 Hz and 3840 x 2160 at 30 Hz.

    DisplayPort and DL-DVI should be fine for driving this display at 2560 x 1600 at 60 Hz.
  • nathanddrews - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    I guess that's what I meant. How can any modern display not have 1.4? Like yesteryear's RAM, you'd think it more expensive to use an older 1.3 controller than a mass produced 1.4. 2.0 will be upon us soon... Reply
  • Darkstone - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    HDMI 1.4 optionally increase the bandwidth. For example, the GTX 680 supports HDMI 1.4a but no resolutions over 1200p (using the HDMI port). Reply
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    nVidia actually lists 4096 x 2160 as the maximum resolution over HDMI according to their spec sheet. It doesn't list the refresh rate though it is 30 Hz

    PCPer managed to get ahold of the Seiki 50" 4K resolution TV and got the Geforce GTX 680 to run at that resolution.
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    Quick correct, maximum refresh at 4096 x 2160 is 24 Hz, 3840 x 2160 is 30 Hz by HDMI spec. Reply
  • cheinonen - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    Because CRTs and LCDs work differently. You can get 120Hz LCDs, but they're of the TN variety (another review coming up soon of one). People can overdrive their IPS panels, but they don't ship with beyond 60 Hz as a standard option.

    For the HDMI thing, I'd imagine that's a combination of two things: It's cheaper to have an HDMI 1.3 chipset than a 1.4a chipset, and the vast majority of HDMI sources out there can't do 2560x1600, while almost all DisplayPort and DVI sources can. That probably causes extra support headaches, though I'm guessing it's more due to cost.
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    I'd add that the reason why HDMI 1.3 is cheaper is that it can be shared in the controller with the DVI-D decoder since the two ports have identical video transmittal/encoding formats. Reply
  • Nixeus Technology - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    Hi Chris,

    You are correct in your analysis. Both the NX-VUE27 and NX-VUE30 can support the full resolution via HDMI 1.4/1.3 connections - however due to the numerous hardware configurations and varibles of the quality of HDMI cables in the market(some HDMI 1.4/1.3 do not meet stated HDMI specifications) that may cause sync or flickering issues, we choose to omit the supported feature for the full 2560x1600 resolution for the HDMI input.
  • nathanddrews - Wednesday, May 29, 2013 - link

    So you're saying it can, but it can't. ;-) Reply
  • tnynyn - Wednesday, May 29, 2013 - link

    My Dell U3011 is like this also. It is due to the HDMI chipset limiting to 1080p resolution while othe inputs can do the full 1600p. Sounds like a nice monitor, can't wait to read the reviews. Reply
  • Mumrik - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    My FW900 isn't dead yet either. I hate that display tech has moved so little when it comes to refresh and resolution in all that time. The era of LCD was a massive setback in that regard. Reply
  • Sunrise089 - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    Props on still running an FW900. I owned two, but one was pretty darn dead and the other wasn't too much better. Dell 24" IPS now is OK, but I still miss true blacks and variable resolutions. Reply
  • nathanddrews - Wednesday, May 29, 2013 - link

    I've held onto it expecting a comparable quality high resolution, high refresh display technology to arrive, but so far nothing. Ever since SED/FED died, I've kind of lost hope. My FW900 has been a champ. It's over 10 years old, and it still calibrates to near perfection. The few 120Hz LCDs I've tried recently haven't been anywhere close to it. I'm hoping that 4K OLED can bring about a revolution, but only if we have a connection capable of 120Hz+ to eliminate the motion blur... and then we'll need GPUs capable of pushing games over 120fps at 4K res...

    Yeah, I'm asking for the world.
  • shompa - Friday, May 31, 2013 - link

    VGA = analoge. DVI (and so on digital). You need over 8Gbps bend with to get over 60Hz. Reply
  • This Guy - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    Can you do a GPU review with three of these please?

    Maybe around when AMD release their crossfire stutter fix?
  • 8steve8 - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    the title "Nixeus NX-VUE30 30" : A $699 WQXGA (2560x1600) IPS LED Monitor" refers to this as an LED backlit display, but I can not find a source for this.

    I would bet it's actually CCFL
  • Nixeus Technology - Tuesday, May 28, 2013 - link

    Hi Steve,

    You are correct. Thank-you for catching the mistake. This version of the NX-VUE30 is a using a CCFL backlight LG Panel.
  • scuffmcduff - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    I suppose I can use this on my Mac with a Mini Displayport to Displayport cable? Reply
  • Nixeus Technology - Thursday, May 30, 2013 - link

    Yes, you are correct. Reply
  • GlassDeviant - Sunday, June 30, 2013 - link

    So this will work fine with a DL-DVI equipped graphics card then? Or prefferably 3 of these?

    P.S.: "This Guy", there is already a fix for crossfire stutter, it's called nVidia :)
  • JustP80 - Sunday, November 23, 2014 - link

    What idiot is pushing or trying to push 3k and 4k resolutions with anything but DisplayPort?? Reply
  • JustP80 - Monday, November 24, 2014 - link

    Also, I've been using a HP 30" in conjunction with a gtx780ti at 2560x1600, with primarily Battlefield 4, on ULTRA settings. My HP too has a 7ms response time. To all you morons out there talking about input lag, motion blur, etc being a unacceptable problem, you are either clueless and inexperienced, or you have a standard that is completely off base and impractical! You also have a stick crammed up your ass! If you want a completely noticeable, flawless motion sequence in an fps, then stick to 144hz, 1080p midget monitors. However, I'll take the detail, robust color, out of this word resolution, graphical superiority, non-noticeable input lag to 99% of normal humans, and completely immersive experience of a 2560x1600 @60hz any day!!! Reply
  • LaraCroft - Wednesday, March 11, 2015 - link

    "4K enabled" is "4K-enabled" ! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now