Image: Samsung

Samsung has teased a new gaming monitor called the Odyssey Neo G8 ahead of its CES showcase.

According to a press release shared by the company, this is the world’s first 4K (3,840×2,160) monitor with 240 Hz refresh rate. That’s a notable improvement over the faster UHD panels on the current market, which tap out at 120 or 144 Hz.

“As the world’s first monitor to feature a 4K (3,840×2,160) 1000R curved screen with 240Hz refresh rate and 1ms response time (GtG), Odyssey Neo G8 32” (Model Name: G85NB) is set to open a new chapter in gaming monitor innovation, offering razor-sharp performance for even the most dedicated PC gamers,” Samsung wrote.

Image: Samsung

“Its performance matches its stunning picture quality featuring Quantum Mini LEDs, Quantum HDR 2000 with a 2,000nit peak brightness and a million-to-one static contrast ratio, bringing out the most subtle details for increased world building and immersion.”

DisplaySpecifications has reported that Samsung’s Odyssey Neo G8 is equipped with 2x HDMI 2.1 ports and 1x DisplayPort 1.4. The monitor also includes a CoreSync feature that automatically matches its backlighting with the colors that are being displayed on the screen.

Source: Samsung

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

Join the Conversation

4 Comments

  1. Unless you put your graphics settings in potato mode, you won’t get anywhere near the FPS to take advantage of that. Still, its nice to see even if the monitor is smaller than I’d like.

  2. I use 2 G7 monitors today and they are excellent. I would’ve been eyeing this one now, except I plan to keep these two for a while.

    Can’t push 240fps at 4K today, in most games. There are plenty content that can’t do a stable 240fps on my 1440p monitors either. But LFC was invented for a reason. Unless you really do need that 4ms input latency of course.

  3. [QUOTE=”Dan_D, post: 46033, member: 6″]
    Unless you put your graphics settings in potato mode, you won’t get anywhere near the FPS to take advantage of that. Still, its nice to see even if the monitor is smaller than I’d like.
    [/QUOTE]

    Surely there are some games out there, that you can max their graphics out and get 240 FPS with a high end GPU such as a 3080 Ti or 3090.

    …but I suppose games from 10 years ago will look like its running off a potato even when settings are maxed.

  4. [QUOTE=”LeRoy_Blanchard, post: 46038, member: 137″]
    Surely there are some games out there, that you can max their graphics out and get 240 FPS with a high end GPU such as a 3080 Ti or 3090.

    …but I suppose games from 10 years ago will look like its running off a potato even when settings are maxed.
    [/QUOTE]
    Even if you can find one of those less demanding games to do that then you’ll run into all the other bottlenecks like CPU-RAM, etc. Regardless of resolutions these monitors pushing 240-360 Hz require some kind of HW insanity to pull off or some really low-end game that doesn’t need much of anything.

    When I got my MSI Optix 200 Hz, g-sync, 2560 x 1080, HDR400, I did a lot of experimenting/benching with my 3700x/3090 rig and then the MSI GP66 Leopard laptop it was intended for. In either case it was interesting to watch the workload switch over to the CPU and witness all the other limitations my rigs have. Now granted, I was testing games that are usually demanding but I was also cheating by using DLSS at its lowest settings to get the GPUs to render as fast as possible. In both cases they have 8C/16T CPUs running at 4125-4305 Mhz. I admit that it also seemed like DLSS starts to have some FPS limits but I don’t have any conclusive data to support it. Just seemed like I was hitting a wall at some point.

    The desktop has games installed on a PCIe 4.0 NVMe and if I remember correctly its RAM is 32 GB-3666 MHz or something similar. Now I know those aren’t stellar specs but at 2560×1080 they should knock it well over 200 fps for low settings. Even then things like, RE Village, METRO Exodus, SOTTR, Witcher 3 were struggling to consistently hold more than 200 FPS. Not saying they didn’t do it but I still saw dips around 140-160 fps. I’m sure fort stuff would be easy pickings but I don’t play that. I’m pretty sure I tested some other games like the original Crysis trilogy, Metro remasters, Shadow of Mordor, Batman Arkham Knight and saw impressive things but the overall behavior was similar.

Leave a comment