# Trying to get 4K video @ 60Hz using HDMI 2.0



## derekchung (Jun 18, 2014)

Two questions actually.
1. Any Radeon video card ready to support that? I have a R7 260X. I have a hard time telling if it is ready to support 4K video (3840 x 2160) at 60HZ using a HDMI 2.0 cable.
2. As of now (Jun 2014), most of the 4K monitors are hdmi 1.4 only and supporting up to 24hz or 30hz. A few of them use some non-standard ways to achieve. I have my eye on one monitor - the 55LA9650 as I can get it cheap immediately. LG promised a upgrade path (hardware + firmware) for this monitor to be HDMI 2.0. Anyone got any progress with LG to get the details, like if all 55LA9650's can do or only some, say, after certain serial number, or the cost, time frame, etc? Anyone got them to put the info in writing?


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

you wont get that card running 4k @60Hz read this Display Technology - AMD Radeon R9 280X, R9 270X, And R7 260X: Old GPUs, New Names


----------



## derekchung (Jun 18, 2014)

So what video card does now? R9 and R7 series cards?
Good article. A lot to read.


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

that card will do 4k but at 30hz. It depends if you have a true 60Hz 4k display then you would need a couple of them and obviousley a decent power supply to handle them.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

R9 295x is the fastest video card on the planet. It should be able to push 60+ fps @4k resolutions in theory. Try looking up some benchmarks for this card.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

Mrsamson said:


> R9 295x is the fastest video card on the planet. It should be able to push 60+ fps @4k resolutions in theory. Try looking up some benchmarks for this card.


The GTX 780Ti is right up there with it.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

No it definitely is not. Your thinking of the GTX Titan Z, and even then it still has less compute performance than the R9 295X. Not to mention that it costs literally 50% more for 5-7% less performance.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

Mrsamson said:


> No it definitely is not. Your thinking of the GTX Titan Z, and even then it still has less compute performance than the R9 295X. Not to mention that it costs literally 50% more for 5-7% less performance.


Ummm, NO, I know what I'm thinking.
In comparative benchmark tests the 780Ti is below the R295, but never far from it, And for best performance for your dollar, it wins.
The Titan Z actually performs worse than the GTX 780Ti.
It looks like another black mark against Nvidia in the history books, unless you purchase it for it's massive frame buffer and compute performance, but then there's always Nvidia's Tesla for that.


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

Panther is correct, The 780Ti is the card to get. Yes the R295 is better on paper but not when it comes to price/performance.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

Until AMD releases the full Mantle API, which will be used in most new games. The 295x will actually end up being the best bang for the buck, especially for the "future proofing" which some people look for. The 780ti loses by minimum 20 fps in the Tech power up benchmarks. You need as many fps as you can get while running 4K resolution.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

Wether or not power or money is an issue.


----------



## gcavan (Aug 13, 2009)

At $1700 a copy, I can't see anyone making the argument for the 295X in the price/performance department. 

Future proofing? There is no such thing. There will always be a bigger, faster and/or meaner animal on the horizon. And for those people who want the biggest, fastest, and meanest card for their PCs, the manufacturers are happy to oblige.


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

The nvidia 800 series wont be long.

As said there is no such thing as future proofing but you can keep up but you will need a big wallet and use it every 6 months and that includes upgrading your cpu,GPU,Monitor and sometimes the RAM.

The only thing you very rarely need to upgrade is the DVD drive.

As for the 4K thing there are not many monitors which do true 4k that can do 60Hz unless your spending big money and your talking a minimum of £500 up to £5000 but going past the 1k mark is usually for TVs.

I read an article the other day that says true decent 4k monitors do not exist yet and you shouldn't get one for at least a year until they do start coming out.


----------



## derekchung (Jun 18, 2014)

I really don't need it for games. I just wanted to have a HUGH 50" monitor running Windows 8.1 at 4K 60Hz for browsing, Outlook, MS Word only. Last one I tried was an TCL LE50UHDE5691 which could run 4k at 30hz only. The mouse was just wandering too much for me.
I really don't need a $1500 video card.
Since my first post, I have learned about DisplayPort 1.4 with MST (Multi Stream Transport) but only a few small 28" 30" monitors can do. It would be nice to have a 50" + video for under $1500. I am waiting for Seiki to release their "Pro series" and a video card (no gaming needed) to drive that.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

If you do not need it for gaming then a normal 780 should do fine. Also, the R9 295X is 1500$ a copy excluding the taxes.


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

sorry am I missing something?

You say you are not gaming but you need a 60Hz monitor for using word and outlook?
Your mouse is wandering too much?

I suggest you actually need a better mouse, you don't need a 60Hz display for any of that.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

I am confused as well along with greenbrucelee. Which probably caused all of this mess haha. What your having seems to be mouse troubles.


----------



## derekchung (Jun 18, 2014)

Mousing never works well on a 30hz screen. I first thought my MS Intellimouse explorer was too old for it. Then I tried Logitech G500s, then a DeathAdder. All the same. You can't just precisely tell where the pointer is.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

Most current screens are 60Hz, excepting 4K at the moment.
You would only need a 50" screen at 4K if you wanted to sit on the other side of the room while working on Office Docs.....


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

Is it even logical getting a 4k monitor or tv to use docs??


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

Mrsamson said:


> Is it even logical getting a 4k monitor or tv to use docs??


I don't think a screen of that size is logical unless you are in a classroom or boardroom situation.


----------



## Mrsamson (Aug 3, 2013)

If we get some detailed Information, we might actually be able to help haha


----------



## derekchung (Jun 18, 2014)

Thank you for all your help, everyone.


----------



## derekchung (Jun 18, 2014)

Here is the answer to my question:
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/697171/is-mst-the-only-way-for-4k-/

I guess I should have gone there first.


----------

