Free get GPS Voice Navigation - Microsoft Store
Interactive Map of United States: Look for places and addresses in United States with our street and route map.
Web Search - Yahoo Maps
Choose your preferred type of travel. In the image, the Google directions is the light. Download GPS Navigation & Offline Maps Sygic for Android to sygic is the world's most installed offline GPS navigation app with real-time traffic for Android with free 3D offline maps from TomTom. Choose from one of three maps and select a rally car, a police car or an old car and hit the roads at breakneck speeds! TomTom GPS navigation maps with more consistent and reliable navigational information.
- Install Maps to Garmin Devices using MapSource
- What Is Android Auto? How It Is Different From Google Maps
- Find an Address, Business, or Location
- Google Driving Directions Turn By Turn - Pilo Arts
- Atomistic-object kinetic Monte Carlo simulations of
- MAPS.ME – Offline maps, travel guides & navigation
- MAP Update Instructions SYNC 3 - Ford of Britain
- How to Find Honda Radio Codes to Reactivate Your Radio
Sygic Car Connected Navigation for Android - APK Download
Export to PDF Maps - Avenza Systems https://boom-boom.ru/download/?file=208. Have been added or amended. Car DVD Navigation Maps & Navigation Units. MAZDA NAVIGATION SYSTEM OWNER'S MANUAL Pdf Download. Keep in mind everything else with the Maps app works fine.
Hacked amazon.com: Customer reviews: Mio C230 3.5-Inch Portable
Amazon.com: Customer reviews: Garmin MapSource WorldMap. I want to use the v3_epoly to place markers along a polyline. UberPool temporarily unavailable. Microsoft Streets & Trips is provided as a free download on our website. Download; For business; Partners; Help; Routes; Locals; Book a Hotel; Contacts; Maps; Blog; Destinations; Games; Mail; English.
Key change audio settings for turn-by-turn directions in Maps
If you don't find what you are looking for in the links below, don't hesitate to contact the tourism office of the destination you are interested in. Tourism offices generally offer free maps and brochures. HERE North America, LLC, 425 West Randolph Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60606, USA, an independent company. Cd hack 5 0 maps driving directions. A Guided Tour can allow for a full, relaxing day. Driving Maps Directions.
Car Tech's guide to using your Android phone in the car
Patch city Car Driving - Car Driving Simulator, PC Game
This allows us to show you our product - new tab page with free web search. As for the updated maps - the jury is still out. I just want to be able to go to google's driving directions, punch in my start and end locations, hit get directions, then get a file from there to parse through for the lat/longs. Google Maps) through sound system ([HOST]3) submitted 3 years ago by suitopseudo Mazda3 I have a new Mazda 3 and this has been driving me crazy. The hotel is located across the street.
Full text of "38009515-T233HST-T273HST-Service-Manual"
5 Best Navigation Systems - Nov. 2020. Attractions Attraction parks. Mercedes Android Auto provides many features that allow you to turn your smartphone into your automatic driving companion. Latest 2020/2020 version of maps, and most precise directions to wherever you go. This version is including new roads, new sub-divisions, and current addresses. Fun Junction; The Fun Junction app that allows you to get free tokens, play Tic Tac Toe, get driving directions and gives you all of the information you need about Fun Junction in the Ottawa/Gatineau area.
|1||Hacking The Omnitech 16878-US GPS, Updates||73%|
|2||Full text of "The Architecture of Scientific Software||19%|
|3||How to Use Google Maps for Marine Navigation||68%|
|4||Free Detailed Road Map of Australia||55%|
|5||Learn to drive a car: step by step||95%|
|6||Get Windows Maps - Microsoft Store en-CA||70%|
|7||Driving directions showing road constructions||96%|
|8||Car Navigation Maps & Updates Download||5%|
|9||Helpful maps and driving directions to AC Hotel Istanbul||26%|
Samsung Odyssey G7 32" - No Bullshit Review!
I have experience with these monitors previously, either owned for a longer period or purchased and returned after a week or two;
(Triple Monitor) BenQ 24" 1080p TN 120Hz (91 PPI) 5760 x 1080
BenQ 24" 1080p TN 144Hz (91 PPI)
ASUS 27" 1440p TN 165Hz G-Sync Module (109 PPI)
Dell 27" 4K AH-IPS 60Hz HDR (163 PPI)
Acer 32" 1440p VA 144Hz G-Sync Compatible HDR (93 PPI) 1800R Curve
Samsung 32" 1440p SVA 144Hz G-Sync Compatible HDR (93 PPI) 1800R Curve, Local Dimming
Samsung 32" 1440p SVA 240Hz G-Sync Compatible DisplayHDR 600 (93 PPI) 1000R Curve, Local Dimming
LG 55" 4K OLED 120Hz G-Sync Compatible HDR (80 PPI)
Summary; I have experience with TN 1080/1440p at 120, 144 and 165Hz, AH-IPS 4K at 60Hz, VA 1440p at 144 and 240Hz, OLED 4K at 60Hz and 1440p 120Hz.
What do I do with my monitors?
I game, mostly fast paced online first person shooters, but any big single player game might also be played here and there.
I do photo editing, in Photoshop as a hobby, so I calibrate my monitors with an X-Rite i1Display Pro.
I watch movies, and TV shows, mostly in 4K, and in HDR (conversion through MadVR to a 250 nits calibrated profile).
I essentially need my monitor to do all 3, and this is the reason why I ended up using a VA panel over TN or IPS.
The monitor I chose and have been using for the past 2 years is an Acer 32" VA 1440p 144Hz G-Sync Compatible HDR (93 PPI) 1800R Curve, calibrated to 120cd/m2 sRGB and 250cd/m2 HDR. At the time of purchase this monitor was €500, still being sold today for around that price.
So why this monitor?
At the time there were no 4K 120Hz monitors, they came out (without FALD) 6 months later, or 1440p 240Hz which came out a whole year later.
The only alternatives at the time; 27-32" VA/IPS 4K 60Hz which were unusable for gaming because of the refresh rate, 27" TN 1440p 165Hz being poor in videos and photo editing, and 24.5" TN 1080p 240Hz, even worse at videos and editing.
So these new (at the time) 32" Curved VA 1440p 144Hz panels were very attractive, the size, curve and panel type promised a great movie experience as well as immersive single player game experiences, on top of that it had a 144Hz refresh rate so it would work in faster first person shooters too, just not as well as TN or IPS. So I bought a Samsung C32HG70 with the SVA (Samsung VA) panel featuring local dimming and quantum dots.
My first impression was nothing short of mind blowing, the size and curve was absolutely incredible, I instantly knew that there's no going back, ever, to anything smaller, or a flat screen, 32" is just an incredibly perfect size for a computer monitor, it's that sweet spot between too small and too big.
But I quickly noticed what everyone had warned me about, redditors, forum users and reviewers, no matter where you went you'd find complaints about VA panels being slow, with smearing, compared to TN and IPS, and this was indeed the case. I could notice black trails right away, but I also quickly realized this wasn't as big of an issue I had been led to believe, because when I watch a movie it's running at such a slow frame rate that there is no smearing, same goes for photo editing, it's just not an issue, neither in a single player game locked to 60 FPS, since I like to use NVIDIA DSR, rendering the game above my monitors native resolution, at 4K or 5K, meaning a low frame rate. So this smearing only turned out to be apparent in fast paced online shooters, which actually didn't bother me in the slightest as in these online shooters, I tend to turn down most graphical settings anyway, to get an advantage over my opponents as some video settings allow you to see better, so when I did fast movements and there were black trailing behind objects or characters in front of me, I just ignored it, over time I didn't notice it much.
So about the features of this C32HG70 I had just purchased, this monitor was €200 more than the other 32" VA monitors, they just lacked lacked Quantum Dots and Local Dimming, this made me really question my decision, because after having tested the Local Dimming, HDR and Overdrive function, I just wasn't impressed at all, it had weird software decisions such as locking certain settings, even brightness when enabling the faster Overdrive levels, because they used strobing, so that's when I decided to order a second monitor, the much cheaper Acer model (this would also allow me to see how much of a difference the Quantum Dots actually made).
The day comes, I receive the Acer panel and right away I can tell that the Overdrive function is a hell of a lot better, it's not only unlocked from other settings and strobing, but it's also much faster, just as the Samsung should have been, complete control over all settings.
Having the monitors side by side, and running the EIZO Monitor Test, it was very obvious that the SVA panel with quantum dots, promising more vivid colors, were true! As an example the full red image was very clearly a stronger red, as well as brighter because the Samsung monitor had a higher cd/m2 spec. But, the only reason I was able to spot the difference is because I had the monitors running side by side for a real time comparison, there is no way anyone would have been able to tell the difference if they weren't standing next to each other, and you don't want anything other than 100% sRGB calibration, so my conclusion was that Quantum Dots was ultimately a gimmick (a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity).
The local dimming was also as expected, useless, very clearly another gimmick, it's just 8 zones in a simple pattern, trying out a few movie scenes it just did not work as you'd want it to, every reviewer will say and show this too.
These two things (Quantum Dots, Local Dimming) paired with the fact that the blur reduction was better on the Acer (not forcing Strobing and locking brightness to 200 nits), made me instantly return the Samsung and keep the Acer, which I have now been using for 2 whole years, enjoyed the hell out of it, sRGB calibrated, no pixel defects, blacks are incredible, very accurate and vivid colors.
Now is when things start to heat up in the back of my mind, about a year ago in 2019, new panels started coming out left and right, 27" 4K 120Hz IPS panels are widely available for a decent price as well as the 27" 1440p 240Hz TN panels. At the time of my Acer purchase, I was certain, not so much anymore. 240Hz is definitely a step up when it comes to faster paced games which is what I mainly play, and 27" is a big step up from 24.5", but still not curved or IPS/VA, meaning poor blacks and colors, so it was still out of the question, same went for 4K, which was now relatively outdated, when 240Hz was so fast and cheaper.
This is when I finally realized there truly is no winning when it comes to monitors, I felt this back in 2018, but this feeling was reinforced a year later, we are never going to get what we want with these panel types, to do the things I want to do, I simply have to buy one monitor with each panel type, 240Hz TN, 60-144Hz IPS Flat or 60-240Hz VA Curved. One for gaming, one for photo editing and one for movie watching. (Meanwhile in 2019, JOLED is finishing up their new factory that is going to mass produce smaller size OLED panels, up to 32", the real dream, every monitor we have today are pure and utter garbage compared to OLED and will turn obsolete the day these monitors start showing up in 2021.)
But for the time being this is what we're limited to, I first learned about the Odyssey just a few months ago, I wasn't paying attention at the news when they were first announced earlier in the year, but I did pick up on it eventually, while first reading up on them, I was very skeptical, because of my poor experience with their previous 32" VA panel (C32HG70), the only thing that made me look twice at it was the promise of 240Hz, but is that enough for me to warrant an upgrade? Since VA panels are generally so slow, what would the experience be like at 240Hz, severe smearing? I was just very unsure about this monitor, since the monitor was unreleased and I wasn't feeling like waiting for reviews, which are often incomplete, I simply ordered one myself to find out, and I've now spent a day or two with this monitor, here are my thoughts on it;
The differences between the new Samsung and my Acer,
144Hz to 240Hz
and.. that is it. The monitor costs €699 which is a lot, so this better be one hell of a monitor, at the time of writing this you can get a Samsung 32" Curved SVA 1440p 144Hz for just €290.
Quantum Dots, as I've already experienced and compared it on the previous Samsung monitor, nothing has changed, it's not even worth mentioning, it's not worth any money at all, ignore its existence.
Same with Local Dimming, it's just not a good experience, I will talk about it briefly later as they have changed it a lot from the previous monitor, it is better but still bad, this is not something you want to use, not worth paying anything for either.
DisplayHDR 600, this is completely useless, there is no reason to want this, HDR will never work on TN/IPS/VA panels (unless FALD), because of how they are lit, for the monitor to display these levels of brightness, the dark levels are completely shot, you are basically looking at a black screen with a gray tint. Much better image quality watching a movie in SDR (sRGB calibrated profile 120cd/m2). But I will also talk about this some more later, this ties in with the findings of the new local dimming behavior.
So, Quantum Dots, Local Dimming and DisplayHDR 600 are basically garbage, this is nothing new and was definitely expected. If I had the choice I would obviously get any other brand that do not have these features for a lower price, as I will not use any of them ever.
That leaves us with the refresh rate, and let me remind you again, you can get a great Samsung SVA 144Hz monitor without HDR and Local Dimming for as little as €290, this really puts the new monitor into perspective, as of writing this the Odyssey G7 costs €699 in Austria (MediaMarkt.at), €799 in Germany (Alternate.de), €699 in the UK (Overclockers.co.uk) and in Sweden €769 (Samsung.se). Meaning you are basically paying €400+ for just the refresh rate.. so the question is then, is it really worth it? After all, you can get a 24.5" TN 1080p 240Hz for less than €400 if that's what you're after.
Let me start off by saying I have never experienced 240Hz before, turning on the display for the first time, VRR was automatically detected by the OS and full screen G-Sync was enabled without me touching a thing, monitor OSD and NVCP refresh rate were both set to 240Hz, as I moved the mouse around I couldn't really tell it was 240Hz, it was when I first opened NVCP that I saw it was enabled, so I booted up Overwatch right away, the practice map with various AI roaming around, I enjoy flick shots so I chose McCree who wields a revolver, began shooting at some stationary targets and again, didn't really notice anything different from what I was used to, running around on the map, just looking at things and turning around, there was just an ever so slight difference, at this point I was really disappointed, got curious about the response time difference against my Acer, so I loaded up blur busters and damn, the difference here was massive, 240Hz looked extremely smooth, now I got excited again and placed my Acer next to the Samsung so I could compare them side by side, hooking both monitors up through DisplayPort.
Running blur busters side by side the difference was like night and day, this is what I expected to see in-game, which wasn't the case (at first). But this wasn't what I was actually most impressed by, it was the response time, smearing/trails, they weren't there? I was really scratching my head at this time, not believing what I was seeing, there simply weren't any trails compared to my Acer which was at the same time a complete and utter catastrophe, still as I'm writing this, I am truly at a loss of words, so I'm just going to let you see the pictures yourself, I recorded the monitors with my phone in "super slow-mo" of blur busters running, then captured a screenshot, both set to 144Hz for a direct comparison.
Starting off with the Acer, this is your typical slow VA panel, much slower than TN and AHVA, with the overdrive setting on "Normal", there is a lot of things going on, it's just very slow, but it works very well for watching movies and 60 FPS gaming. But that's the actual reality of daily VA use (until now), looking at this image I just keep thinking it really looks like a complete shit show, but surprisingly it looks perfectly normal when watching a movie at low frame rate.
Here's the last level,
- Fastest + MBR (dims the display/enables strobing, but you still have brightness control to counter it)
Game: Refresh Rate, Black Equalizer, Response Time, Adaptive-Sync, Low Input Lag
Picture: Picture Mode, Brightness, Contrast, Sharpness, Color (Red, Green, Blue, Color Tone, Gamma)
When you enable VRR (Adaptive-Sync) for G-Sync, these options are locked: Refresh Rate forced to 240Hz, Response Time to Standard, Low Input Lag to On, and that's it! So you retain full control over your color calibration while G-Sync is running, 240Hz and Low Input Lag forced on is also great, and expected I guess. But, the Overdrive being locked to the lowest level (Standard), is a slight problem, as it's worse than 144Hz set to Faster, seen here;
Last thing I want to talk about before the conclusion, the Curve! I've been using 1800R curve for 2 years now, so a Curve is nothing new to me and I never want to go back to a flat screen. My first impression of the 1000R was wild to say the least, I instantly did not like it, it felt way too curved, but after using the monitor for 2 days now, I don't mind it at all really, it feels like my 1800R right now as I'm typing this, the main difference seems to be that I've been used to sitting around 60cm away from the monitor, and with this more aggressive curve, it feels the best at around 50cm, so I guess I can just move the monitor a little closer, web browsing is when I really notice the curve, in games and movies I don't really think about it, feels like my 1800R curve.
Okay, so here we go, the conclusion;This is the first 240Hz 32" monitor, this is the first 240Hz 1440p VA panel, this is the fastest VA panel ever made, this is the first 1000R curved display.
That's a lot to take in! This monitor is truly something else, VA panels will never be looked at the same, VA is no longer the slowest panel as this one is without a shadow of a doubt faster than many AHVA panels.
Breaking it down: Samsung 32" SVA 1440p 240Hz G-Sync Compatible DisplayHDR 600 with Local Dimming.
Samsung, reputable brand, few think of it as a source of gaming hardware, questionable decisions on their last C32HG70 monitor, locking overdrive settings to strobing, disabling brightness as an example.
32", definitely the future, once you use 32" for more than a day you're hooked for life, same goes with the 1800R curve, the immersion is just amazing, there really is no going back to small and flat panels after truly experiencing it, shortly after I got my Acer I had several friends who bought them right away after I showed it off in person, it truly is a wonder to look at.
SVA, Samsung VA with Quantum Dots, this sounds good on paper but in reality is worth nothing, would you want it for no additional cost? Yes, but paying for it? Absolutely not.
1440p, which comes out at 93 PPI on 32", it's bothered me ever since I bought it, seeing people online constantly claim that it's somehow "bad", I doubt these people realize that 24" 1920x1200 60Hz (94 PPI) came out early 2008, soon to be succeeded by 23.6" 1920x1080 120Hz in late 2009, it took 5 more years for 27" 1440p 120Hz to appear with 109 PPI, and in 2016 the first 240Hz came out on 24.5" 1920x1080 90 PPI panels, 3 years before the first 1440p 240Hz came out in 2019. So what I'm saying and showing here is that 90-93 PPI is not bad, it's completely normal, and the actual standard for monitors, anything above this is considered better or great depending on what monitor you're looking at, and I don't mind it one bit, sure 27" 1440p is sharper, but so is 27" 4K 144Hz G-Sync FALD for $2000, you have to draw the line somewhere, what I can say though is that 27" 1080p (84 PPI) looks noticeable worse than 93 PPI, so that's where I personally draw the line, not under 93, that'd be an actual step back from 12 years ago.
240Hz, this can absolutely be debated, casual gaming you will barely notice it, certainly not worth spending hundreds of dollars on, a much cheaper 165Hz will provide an almost identical experience, 240Hz is only for fast paced online shooters, that's where that small difference comes into play, when doing very fast flick shots the difference is day and night, you might not necessarily shoot better but it'll feel a hell of a lot better at the very least, like if you play for money, a professional player on a team, even if the difference is just 2%, that's enough of a reason for that person to get it. But for casual players, just don't assume that because most professional players tend to use 240Hz, that it's some kind of magic refresh rate that makes a huge difference, it doesn't. Is it worth paying for? It really depends on what you're playing, it's not black and white as one might think. Do you play League only? Waste of money. Are you trying for max rank in Apex Legends, probably worth it, but you'd still have a very good shot on a 165Hz monitor for €399.
G-Sync Compatible, it's essentially flawless, all the right options are available or locked on gaming modes, I followed a guide on how to set it up properly and it felt perfect in Overwatch at 237 FPS, exceeded my expectations for sure, as I mentioned earlier, many monitors that are compatible out there, perform very poorly or odd with VRR enabled. I do acknowledge that that the range is 80-240, but all my online shooters are played at max refresh rate so that's not an issue, if you play low frame rate single player you can just use regular V-Sync.
DisplayHDR 600, sadly next to unusable, this has nothing to do with the monitor itself, it's just that HDR was and is never going to work on TN/IPS/VA (without FALD), so this is no exception, it will look bad to say the least in almost all cases, when compared to the very deep blacks on a sRGB 120cd/m2 calibration. But what we can do is compare this HDR against another monitors HDR, I noticed strange things happening, when enabling the local dimming, even the parts that weren't dimming, the zones, (all zones) were darker, and generally looked better, this clearly has to be tested by professionals. So, this HDR is actually worse than my Acer, when local dimming is off, since it has a higher cd/m2 value, meaning the blacks are extra bad, very dark scenes really look almost gray, but as mentioned earlier, when enabling local dimming this gray tone becomes much darker, even when the zones aren't dimming, so HDR on the Samsung with Local Dimming enabled looks a lot better than my Acer HDR**,** but worse with it disabled. Again, needs to be further investigated by professionals.
Local Dimming, by itself, is useless, the C32HG70 used 8 zones, this one according to a Korean review is using 6 zones, it's difficult to tell, I counted 8 of them, all vertical, and it looks very bad in movies when they toggle on or off in the middle of the screen, it's just a poor experience with it enabled, with the exception that paired with HDR it looks better than without it.
Let's try something; removing the SVA/Quantum Dots, HDR, Local Dimming completely, what are we left with?
A very fast gaming monitor that happens to use a VA panel with much deeper blacks than an AHVA gaming panel, but what are our other options? Oh, there aren't any, if you want a 32", this is the monitor, end of story.
But if we go down to 27", there's suddenly quite a few to choose from, first out we have the Lenovo 27" TN 1440p 240Hz 109 PPI with a G-Sync Module, now this is a very good gaming monitor, but the price is very high, starting at €1040. Then we have two more, HP Omen and AOC Agon, these do not feature the G-Sync Module or G-Sync Compatibility, but are a lot cheaper, starting at €650.
Then we have several 27" AHVA 4K 144Hz monitors, with the new DSC feature allowing full 10bit RGB in 4K 144Hz through a single DisplayPort cable, available with G-Sync Module or G-Sync Compatible, and the prices start at €900.
The first thing that that comes to my mind is that they're 27" flat panels, the immersion won't even come close to a Curved 32", the colors are also poor on the TN, but 240Hz. The PPI is off the charts on the 4K ones at 163 PPI which is very nice.
At second thought, are these actually alternatives? 32" Curved VA 240Hz vs 27" Flat TN 240Hz? They cost the same, and one could assume that the TN is a lot faster and look better at 240Hz, but that's clearly not the case with this brand new Samsung VA panel as it's by far the fastest VA ever made.
And for the 4K ones, not only are we talking 144 vs 240Hz, but to even drive a game in 4K is a major challenge, a single RTX 2080 Ti will struggle to even reach 100 FPS.
If we take a look anyway, at the current 32" VA panels, we find 3 monitors that run 165Hz, these are all brand new panels this year using a 1500R curve as opposed to the earlier 1800R curve last year (and this Samsung 1000R), these panels might have improved a lot just like this new Samsung VA. First out we have a Dell 32" VA 1440p 165Hz HDR, but no G-Sync Compatibility, then MSI Optix, lacking HDR and lastly a brand new Gigabyte released a month ago, with G-Sync Compatibility and HDR, for just €399 which is kind of mind blowing, Gigabyte going out strong with their new monitor lineup.
Is there anything on the horizon? Yes, but not for cheap, there is a new monitor coming out by Acer and ASUS, 32" 4K AHVA at 144Hz with G-Sync Module and HDR1400, but the unique thing about it, which actually warrants the price, is that it's using 1152-zone Mini LED backlight, this is unheard of and will provide close to OLED black levels, by far the best gaming monitor you can buy, nothing comes even remotely close, but the price.. $3600, no thanks. If you can afford it, then go for it, mind blowing monitor.
Quick mention that 24.5" 1080p 360Hz G-Sync is coming soon, so the die hard FPS gamers will want this one, and professionals probably, the thing is, the difference between 240 and 360 should be very small, so most people will not play any better on it, meaning it's a waste, if you get paid to play, sure, go for it.
Back to the Samsung Odyssey G7, it has 3 (potential) flaws;
Number one, it's definitely overpriced, they charge for features that is not worth your money.
Number two, the G-Sync Compatibility is only 80-240Hz, this can cause issues.
Number three, the PPI. For such an expensive and impressive monitor otherwise, it'd sadly not 4K resolution, but that's not surprising because none exist yet, and probably never will once OLED mass production starts.
Just a few last remarks;Some people, who has used 109-163 PPI monitors for years, might be annoyed by the "normal" PPI of 93, to them it's not their normal.
Some people, might find the G-Sync annoying, since it's not an actual module capable of 1-240Hz.
Some people, might be annoyed by the price, which I certainly am (because of the poor features).
I do not think anyone will be bothered with the 1000R curve after using it for a week.
I do not think anyone will be bothered by a possibly very slight blur at 240Hz.
When color calibrated for sRGB 120 nits this monitor will be good, not great for photo editing, because of the curve, as I'm just editing photos as a hobby I don't mind it, but I can definitely see some people being annoyed by it at times, straight lines absolutely do not appear straight, I've had issues on 1800R, so this will be even worse.
When color calibrated for sRGB 120 nits this monitor will be extremely good for gaming.
When color calibrated for sRGB 120 nits this monitor will be very good for movies or shows
Is it usable while gaming professionally? Absolutely, but 240Hz TN will still be faster and 360Hz is coming soon.
And the big question, is it worth €700? I don't know, you decide, I personally find it severely overpriced but I'm still going to keep it, so I guess it is worth it? To me at least.
Remember you can get a 1500R 32" 1440p 165Hz G-Sync Compatible with HDR for €399 from Gigabyte, how fast the panel is we don't know yet as it just released, but there is a chance that it is fast and it'd make you just as happy as this new Samsung, for €300 less.
I'm keeping it, because I feel this is the best we're going to get before 32" OLED (And I'm not paying $3600 for the new Mini LED one).
A very last note, it's likely this panel will show up in more monitors soon, without Quantum Dots and Local Dimming, possibly lacking HDR as well, these monitors will then be much cheaper, but only time will tell.
*Keywords*: Samsung Odyssey G7 C32G74T C32G75T 31.5" LC32G74TQSUXZG LC32G75TQSUXEN 2.500:1 VA SVA HDR10 DisplayHDR 6500 Quantum-Dot Quantum Dot QLED 10001m 10bit 125% FreeSync Premium Pro HDMI 2.0 DisplayPort 1.4 VESA 100x100 Acer XZ1 XZ321QU UM.JX1EE.009 2560x1440 3.000:1 AMVA3 18001.8m 8bit 100% MHL Mini DisplayPort 1.2
The Great Ensmallening
TLDR: We’re going to free up 6.6GB of space on PC next week but we need a 6.5GB update to do it. Most platforms will see similar improvements.
My memory is hazy about those early days back in 2012 when we launched our Closed Beta but I distinctly remember the entire download being small enough to fit on a CD-ROM. In the 8 years since launch we’ve seen the install image grow over 100 times in size and when you consider all the amazing content that was added over the years it’s easy to see why: that’s three open worlds, over a dozen tile-sets, 28 quests, almost 500 weapons, and over a thousand mods, to say nothing of several remasters that updated older content.
There’s so much content in Warframe now that some people can’t fit it on their smaller SSDs and have to run it off of a slow HDD instead. There’s so many things in the game that even for people with large NVME SSDs the game can’t always load everything as fast as we’d like. Luckily we have found some new technology that is going to help us -- we’re going to make the game smaller and load faster – but there’s a catch: you need to download remastered content.
We mentioned in the summary we’re going to free up 6.6GB of space in but in fact the real number will be much larger than that: we’re probably going to free up at least 15GB by the time we’re done. To reduce the pain for people updating we’re going to break these remaster updates into three parts spread out over the rest of 2020. We’re also taking advantage of these “mini-remasters” to make quality and performance optimizations to formats we have haven’t touched since we launched (back when DirectX 9 was our only supported renderer!).
One of the things we’re doing to reduce our footprint involves changing how our texture data is compressed. Although it isn’t a perfect analogy it’s similar to the trade-off between image-quality and file-size you get with different image formats: PNG is lossless but can mean very large files, JPEG files can be very small but may contain visible artifacts of the compression. The technology we’re using is called Oodle Texture and we’re extremely pleased with the savings we’re getting: our files are roughly half the size on disk and the visual differences are negligible.
In this first update we’re going to change our Lightmaps. We spent a lot of time carefully analyzing the quality of the results and we doubt anyone will even notice anywhere but the harshest of tests. That said, here are some of the most challenging cases we found (we’ve disabled the diffuse textures to further expose the subtle differences between them).
The nice thing about this solution is that we can easily tweak where needed: the game can default to the compact and fast format and we can increase resolution to preserve the quality of special assets (like that shelf in your quarters).
In the second update we will apply this same technology to the rest of the textures in the game and we expect we’ll see similar if not more savings. Again, we spent time looking carefully at the quality tradeoff and again we’re extremely pleased. Here’s a particularly challenging case: a normal-map:
Before (19 MB)
After (8 MB)
In this case the compression reduced the footprint from approximately 19MB to 8MB and the differences are extremely difficult to discern.
As someone who recently had to attach an external USB drive to my vintage test laptop from 2013 I’m personally very excited to see these changes roll out. I know the download will be inconvenient but getting 15GB of storage back and doubling my effective texture load-bandwidth is going to be awesome!