Slashdot Mirror
HP's Omen 15 is the First Gaming Laptop With a 240Hz Display (engadget.com)
HP has just upped the refresh rate ante with its latest Omen 15. From a report: The company says it's the world's first gaming laptop with a 15.6-inch 1080p 240Hz IPS display, meaning it should stay ahead of even the quickest-shooting gamer. The laptop itself should also be able to keep up with the screen, as it's equipped with NVIDIA's latest mobile graphics, an 8th-generation Intel Core i7-8750H processor, 16GB of RAM and the latest 802.11ax wireless, aka "WiFi 6." The Omen 15 arrives in February at a starting price of $1,370.
Did anybody read the article title, think of how their only real possibility of escape from loneliness was marrying a 3rd world teenager, and do a double take?
The price on first glance is pretty eye popping. Of course hard core gamers will probably want to see all the requisite benchmarks.
I'm not sure why all the laptop manufacturers insist on 1080p even (especially) for their high-end models. Surely Apple doesn't have a corner on the market for HiDPI displays. The only ones I've found that consistently has HiDPI is of course Apple, and AlienWare.
By the way, is there anybody here that runs Linux straight on AlienWare and does it work well? Asking for a friend...
Displays now update the charges on the liquid crystals many times faster than the crystals themselves can update.
"His name was James Damore."
HP has been so badly managed that we don't buy from HP in the last few years. What has been your experience?
To tell us that this laptop is coming out in July? (as the article states). In any case, RTX 2070 or not, it's not pushing enough frames for a display like this to matter. Personally, I prefer reliable hardware with warranty coverage whose technicians don't treat me with absolute contempt when I try to get them to honor the coverage I purchased, causing me to have to email every vice president I can find locally here in Houston to get a simple motherboard swap done. Fuck HP.
More pixels, more power used.
Faster updating, more power used....
This is just ludicrous.
Stuart http://stuarthalliday.com/
That is the question.
Steam on Linux please.
\In any case, RTX 2070 or not, it's not pushing enough frames for a display like this to matter.
This is objectively incorrect. People who play competitive shooters (such as myself) such as Counter-Strike Global Offensive target 200 fps minimum and like to have close to 400 fps. An RTX 2070 is more than capable of that at the low settings competitive games are typically played at. I personally play at 1024 x 768 stretched to 16:9 in Global Offensive, which is a common resolution amongst professionals
And before someone replies to me here claiming that "humans can't see more than 30 fps" -- yes, they can. I can tell the difference between 60 Hz and 144 Hz with ease. And although the difference between 144 Hz and 240 Hz is less noticeable, 240 Hz still looks "smoother" when dramatic screen shifts happen, such as when quickly turning 180 degrees to face a flanker.
Why would anyone play games on laptop with poor cooling on 15,6" display?
For the same price you can have 24" display, more HDD, more RAM, better GPU and open architecture for upgrades and extensions.
Not mentioning much better experience.
You seriously arent using CS:GO for your analogies? That game is on 15 year old rendering tech and posts over 100 FPS at 1080p max settings on even low end integrated graphics.
"His name was James Damore."
its probably nothing to do with the actual video rendering at 30+, but the game engine stuttering along. 200/400 fps gives you plenty of room for the game to stutter before dropping below 30.
Then post a story on Slashdot, of upcoming technology that you think would fit you niche.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I think the point is targeting a laptop for 240hz is a bit silly, since people who are pushing over 60fps are almost exclusively using desktops.
These gaming laptops are marketed more towards people who have a lot of money to throw at their systems, not the actual "pro gamer" market.
120hz keeps up just as well. By definition in fact. Can anyone really see this difference?
That's not the only useless specification - this laptop can probably also discharge its battery in less time than it takes to recharge it given that its reported battery life for just web-browsing is under 4 hours.
240Hz is well beyond the human range of perception, and well outside the capabilites of any """gaming""" LAPTOP when it comes to modern games.
Drumpf and his nazifaggot friends belong in the gas chamber right alongside the jews.
... Is it a glossy display?
Always a deal killer
Displays now update the charges on the liquid crystals many times faster than the crystals themselves can update.
That's been true ever since the beginning of dot matrix LCDs in consumer devices. The original Game Boy compact video game system updated its 2.6", 160x144 pixel, 4-level passive matrix super-twisted nematic (STN) LCD panel at 60 Hz, but the display had so much "ghosting" (motion blur) that a lot of games ran at 30, 20, or even 15 fps just to let the LCD catch up. Game Boy pocket didn't improve response time but was nonetheless a bit easier to see because of better overall contrast. Pixel response times as measured with the homebrew 144p Test Suite didn't improve noticeably until Nintendo switched to TFT displays starting with Game Boy Color.
You're too stupid to realize this, but you just completely confirmed what they were saying about it being FPS intensive. You are a moron.
If you play multi-player games where awareness and reaction are paramount (Fortnight, Player Unknown Battlegrounds, CS:GO, Overwatch, League of Legends, Dota 2, etc. etc. etc.) you're putting an extreme amount of stress on your health, as your eyes are looking at a comparatively small monitor, your posture couldn't be worse and your arms position is ... let's not talk about that.
You had me at "RTX 2070"!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Does slashdot carry sexbot slashvertisements too?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Step away from the computer, go outside, and play real sports instead, stop being fat, weak, slow, and diseased, live a better overall life.
B-b-b-but I like playing shooters!
Go play lasertag, it's still a thing. Then you can stop being fat, weak, slow, and diseased -- and you might even get to talk to a real girl, won't that be great?
B-b-b-but I don't like people, they scare me!
Oh for fuck's sake is there any hope for your fat, weak, slow, diseased people? Humans are supposed to be social creatures, GO OUTSIDE AND MEET THEM.
Seriously stop being socially avoidant losers. Video games are a waste of time. GO OUTSIDE.
Video gayming is gay, and worse on a laptop. Fags.
No. Just you. Have you considered becoming a priest/minister?
lol video gayming is "progress"....fags.
Windows uses subpixel rendering for fonts (ClearType) to essentially turn a 1920x1080 display into a 5760x1080 display.
One of the primary markets for Macs is page layout artists. When they design a page, they need the letters of a font to show up exactly where they will in the final printout so they can get the kerning right. Image clarity is secondary, since the final printout will be much higher resolution than the screen. Consequently, OS X does not do subpixel rendering of fonts. It anti-aliases them at the pixel level based on their exact location. If it tried to use subpixel rendering, it would have to shift each letter slightly to align with the subpixel grid, which is unacceptable for page layout work. If you ever hook up a Mac and a Windows PC to the same monitor, you'll notice that the Mac's fonts look like crap compared to the PC's. This is why.
The only way OS X could increase font clarity was by moving to high DPI displays. Unless you're working with extremely detailed high-resolution graphics (e.g. photo editing), such displays are unnecessary with Windows, since it basically triples the pixels of your regular monitor when rendering fonts.
Most cant perceive anything past 60hz, with 90hz being the upper bound.
You are kidding yourself you can notice the difference between 120 and 240.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/12/22/why-do-we-need-120hz144hz-monitors-if-the-human-eye-cant-see-beyond-60hz/amp/
Stop using amp links ffs
Just want to make this clear: it's your assertion that the Slashdot community makes purchasing decisions on HP laptops based on CSGO, which "professionals" commonly are using these laptops at 1024x768 running in 16:9 instead of 4:3. Even more, you believe you are representative of people who might purchase this laptop.
Ok.
anything that can do 100FPS on integrated graphics IS NOT FUCKING intensive and anyone that thinks they can see a difference with 400FPS has serious mental issues.
In any case, RTX 2070 or not, it's not pushing enough frames for a display like this to matter.
What makes you say that? There's plenty of games where you exceed 120fps at 1080p even on a GTX 1070.
The usual “human eye can’t see above X hz” is hogwash from people that don’t understand the problem. There is still a visually perceptible difference between 500hz and 1000hz if there is an object in motion on the screen, even more so if you have a backlight that strobes in sync with the frames.
Consider a camera pointed at the screen. You set the shutter time to 1/100 of a second. Under 500hz, even though the camera is sort of emulating 100hz (not completely, but close enough for an example’s sake), it would capture a blend of 5 frames. Under 1000hz, it would capture a blend of 10 frames. So even though the monitor in both cases is outputting frames far faster than the camera can capture, a higher frame rate still results in smoother motion.
What? The game is 15 years old. I can play it on my 2012 MacBook pro with integrated graphics. Settings on High, 1080p and I still get 90+ frames per second.
CSGO is a horrible analogy to use. The pros I know who play play at 1080p on high settings with their dual 1080s and pump out 240+ FPS easy.
Modern games, anything below 60 FPS is unplayable. Especially competitively.
This. I have a GTX 780 that pushes 80+. FPS in most games.
Stop this nonsense!
wishful thinking (think outside the box, man!)
:P
I want that! Take my money! :P
I'll go out on a limb and guess that these CSGO pros that you "know" aren't real -- because very few professionals use high settings, even fewer play at a 16:9 resolution (favoring 4:3 instead), and literally all but a handful play at resolutions under 1080p. You don't know what you're talking about, quite frankly.
Just want to make this clear: it's your assertion that the Slashdot community makes purchasing decisions on HP laptops based on CSGO, which "professionals" commonly are using these laptops at 1024x768 running in 16:9 instead of 4:3. Even more, you believe you are representative of people who might purchase this laptop.
No, it's not my assertion. I never said anything about speaking for the Slashdot community or consumers as whole. I'm not sure how you got that impression.
And yes, I am representative of the people who might purchase this laptop. I actually drew on my own personal experience as a long-time competitive gamer who now has a career that requires travel, but still like to take competitive gaming seriously. I try to only play league games on my desktop (it's more performant, obviously), but having a 144 Hz laptop makes practicing on the road much less painful.
You sound like an audiophile. Probability as bright as one too.
Decent-enough specs for a mere lappy. For me, and most everybody I know, a lappy's just too frickin' small for games. If it's high(er)-res, great, thanks, but who the hell's gonna see it on a teeny lil lappy screen?
Lappy keys suck. Ittybitty lappy screens suck. Lappy pointing devices suck ASS. They're barely adequate for business, and for those of us that play a lot of games, do yourself a flavor; get a REAL compooter, a desktop. Upgradable, repairable, cool-running, and you can build it to fit YOUR needs instead of settling for the severe limitations of a lappy.
I build custom high-end PCs for select people, sometimes just advising those building one themselves. Often these folks tell me they've had an opportunity to play games on a real PC, so they're spoiled now. I (hopefully)won't bore you, the one person that took time to read this with unsolicited specs. I'll say only that after you play a recent game on a 65in. tv/monitor, connected to a PC that'll let you turn all the grafx options up to eleven, it's unlikely that you'll ever try tolerating a teeny lappy screen again. For the cost of the lappy this article refers to, you can build yourself a much more powerful machine.
Leave the lappy for ordinary stuff, and build yourself something better, something you'll be proud of, the machine you -really- want.
Well, hopefully it last more than 2 to 3 years before fizzling out like my last two HPs.
Apparently the marketing team wasn't told they'd sell more if they sold them for $33 cheaper... not a very leet move for such leet hardware!
No sig for you! Come back one year!