DreamWorks co-founder Jeffrey Katzenberg’s venture fund WndrCo co-led a $15.5 million Series A round for Creatify, an AI video ad platform.
Creatify’s AdMax platform uses AI to quickly generate dozens of video advertisements, which are geared toward social media marketing — AdMax analyzes high-performing social video campaigns on apps like TikTok and Instagram to shape its output.
Tech industry titans have been bullish on AI advertising. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently spoke about his ambitions to automate all of advertising with an AI ad tool, which would test thousands of ads on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads users.
This degree of automation may seem drastic, but it is not a foregone conclusion. While Katzenberg has been an entertainment industry executive since before DVDs were invented, his bets are not always correct — he was also the founder of Quibi, the short video platform that infamously raised $1.75 billion and shut down six months later.
Rivian has finally revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.
The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under $60,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at $48,490 in 2027.
Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.
Rivian has finally revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.
The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under $60,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at $48,490 in 2027.
Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.
#Rivian #deliver #SUVs #June #TechCrunchelectric vehicles,EVs,Rivian">Rivian will deliver the first R2 SUVs on June 9 | TechCrunch
Rivian has finally revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.
The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under $60,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at $48,490 in 2027.
Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.
This is where hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.
Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.
The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.
Firmware is where the device actually thinks
Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.
Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.
Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.
If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.
Connectivity is a series of trade-offs
Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.
Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.
Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.
Sensors and the messy job of trusting them
A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.
Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.
This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.
For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.
Where the AI hype meets the silicon
Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.
The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.
The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.
Security can’t be the last step
For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.
Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.
Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.
This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.
Why the next generation is harder to build
Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.
None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.
So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.
This is where hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.
Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.
The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.
Firmware is where the device actually thinks
Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.
Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.
Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.
If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.
Connectivity is a series of trade-offs
Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.
Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.
Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.
Sensors and the messy job of trusting them
A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.
Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.
This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.
For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.
Where the AI hype meets the silicon
Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.
The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.
The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.
Security can’t be the last step
For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.
Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.
Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.
This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.
Why the next generation is harder to build
Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.
None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.
So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.
#Smart #Devices #Built #Engineers #Viewengineering,smart devices">How Smart Devices Are Actually Built: An Engineer’s View
Pick up any smart device you own. A doorbell that recognizes faces, a watch that reads your heart rhythm, a thermostat that learns when you leave for work. They feel simple. You tap, they respond.
That simplicity is a lie. A useful one, but a lie.
Behind the clean app and the satisfying click is a stack of engineering decisions that most people never see. And the gap between a device that works for five years and one that dies in eight months almost always traces back to those invisible choices. So let’s look at what actually goes into building the connected gadgets shipping in 2026.
Smart starts with the circuit board, not the cloud
Most coverage of smart devices jumps straight to AI features and voice assistants. But the foundation is physical. A device is a printed circuit board, a microcontroller, a fistful of sensors, a radio, and a battery, all crammed into a shell that has to survive being dropped, sat on, and left in a hot car.
This is where hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.
Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.
The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.
Firmware is where the device actually thinks
Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.
Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.
Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.
If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.
Connectivity is a series of trade-offs
Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.
Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.
Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.
Sensors and the messy job of trusting them
A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.
Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.
This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.
For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.
Where the AI hype meets the silicon
Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.
The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.
The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.
Security can’t be the last step
For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.
Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.
Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.
This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.
Why the next generation is harder to build
Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.
None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.
So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.
didn’t change the game for big screens, Samsung still imagines a future where 4K is seen as old hat. We now have to consider the latest Odyssey G8 gaming monitor with support for 6K resolutions, promising sharper detail and crisper visuals in the paltry few games that support such high pixel counts.
The new Samsung Odyssey G80HS is a 32-inch IPS LCD monitor that pushes the fabled 6K (6,144 x 3,456) resolution at 165Hz. With a flip of a switch, the monitor can drop its pixel count down to 3K (3,072 x 1,728) and 330Hz if you’re hoping for faster gaming scenarios. Higher resolutions will necessitate higher pixel counts, and the new G8 can max out at 224 PPI (pixels per inch). Visual clarity is less about resolution and more about maximizing the pixels on screen, which is where 6K resolution may make more sense for a 32-inch monitor.
Samsung’s Odyssey monitors are gaming-focused first and foremost, so you may be wondering what’s the point of a $1,600 non-OLED monitor like the G80HS. Samsung does promise a relatively wide viewing angle for LCDs at 178 degrees without losing visual quality. It also meets a 1ms pixel-to-pixel response time, meaning the monitor can change images relatively quickly. But, in reality, it’s to see content at an even higher pixel density.
For comparison, 6K is nearly 2.5 times the number of pixels as 4K, often referred to as UHD. The problem with 8K TVs was less the technology and more the dearth of content that could support that scale of resolution. Some titles, like Cyberpunk 2077 and Ghost of Tsushima, should manage to hit 6K resolution. Samsung’s latest monitors still support its own HDR10+ standard but not Dolby Vision for high dynamic range content.
The Odyssey G80HS promises to hit a typical brightness of 350 nits and a peak luminance of 400 nits. It doesn’t exactly seem very bright for an IPS monitor that demands such a premium price.
If you were looking for something more standard, the $1,300 Odyssey G80SH (don’t get confused now) is the 32-inch 4K OLED variant that promises 300 nits typical and 1,000 nits with HDR.
Samsung is also pushing another G80HF (okay, seriously…) 27-inch monitor that tops out at 5K resolution and has an IPS display, though this one only costs $950.
Whether you can hit playable frame rates at that top resolution and still push graphics settings or ray tracing to the max will depend on your PC’s capabilities. There are reasons why 5K or even 6K monitors exist. Those working in creative fields who need ultra-high-end, pixel-perfect screens like Apple’s Studio Display XDR can make use of those higher resolutions, though mostly when editing video or 3D objects that require higher resolutions.
Compared to 4K, 6K is relatively untested in gaming circles. At the very least, you’ll likely avoid a situation like what occurred with the PlayStation 5 that promised it was 8K-capable. Sony eventually removed all mentions of 8K from its console packaging when it became clear few games supported the resolution. Things may be different with 5K and 6K, though we can’t promise you’ll be able to tell the difference between UHD and the new hotness of high-resolution monitors.
didn’t change the game for big screens, Samsung still imagines a future where 4K is seen as old hat. We now have to consider the latest Odyssey G8 gaming monitor with support for 6K resolutions, promising sharper detail and crisper visuals in the paltry few games that support such high pixel counts.
The new Samsung Odyssey G80HS is a 32-inch IPS LCD monitor that pushes the fabled 6K (6,144 x 3,456) resolution at 165Hz. With a flip of a switch, the monitor can drop its pixel count down to 3K (3,072 x 1,728) and 330Hz if you’re hoping for faster gaming scenarios. Higher resolutions will necessitate higher pixel counts, and the new G8 can max out at 224 PPI (pixels per inch). Visual clarity is less about resolution and more about maximizing the pixels on screen, which is where 6K resolution may make more sense for a 32-inch monitor.
Samsung’s Odyssey monitors are gaming-focused first and foremost, so you may be wondering what’s the point of a $1,600 non-OLED monitor like the G80HS. Samsung does promise a relatively wide viewing angle for LCDs at 178 degrees without losing visual quality. It also meets a 1ms pixel-to-pixel response time, meaning the monitor can change images relatively quickly. But, in reality, it’s to see content at an even higher pixel density.
For comparison, 6K is nearly 2.5 times the number of pixels as 4K, often referred to as UHD. The problem with 8K TVs was less the technology and more the dearth of content that could support that scale of resolution. Some titles, like Cyberpunk 2077 and Ghost of Tsushima, should manage to hit 6K resolution. Samsung’s latest monitors still support its own HDR10+ standard but not Dolby Vision for high dynamic range content.
The Odyssey G80HS promises to hit a typical brightness of 350 nits and a peak luminance of 400 nits. It doesn’t exactly seem very bright for an IPS monitor that demands such a premium price.
If you were looking for something more standard, the $1,300 Odyssey G80SH (don’t get confused now) is the 32-inch 4K OLED variant that promises 300 nits typical and 1,000 nits with HDR.
Samsung is also pushing another G80HF (okay, seriously…) 27-inch monitor that tops out at 5K resolution and has an IPS display, though this one only costs $950.
Whether you can hit playable frame rates at that top resolution and still push graphics settings or ray tracing to the max will depend on your PC’s capabilities. There are reasons why 5K or even 6K monitors exist. Those working in creative fields who need ultra-high-end, pixel-perfect screens like Apple’s Studio Display XDR can make use of those higher resolutions, though mostly when editing video or 3D objects that require higher resolutions.
Compared to 4K, 6K is relatively untested in gaming circles. At the very least, you’ll likely avoid a situation like what occurred with the PlayStation 5 that promised it was 8K-capable. Sony eventually removed all mentions of 8K from its console packaging when it became clear few games supported the resolution. Things may be different with 5K and 6K, though we can’t promise you’ll be able to tell the difference between UHD and the new hotness of high-resolution monitors.
While 8K resolutions on TVs didn’t change the game for big screens, Samsung still imagines a future where 4K is seen as old hat. We now have to consider the latest Odyssey G8 gaming monitor with support for 6K resolutions, promising sharper detail and crisper visuals in the paltry few games that support such high pixel counts.
The new Samsung Odyssey G80HS is a 32-inch IPS LCD monitor that pushes the fabled 6K (6,144 x 3,456) resolution at 165Hz. With a flip of a switch, the monitor can drop its pixel count down to 3K (3,072 x 1,728) and 330Hz if you’re hoping for faster gaming scenarios. Higher resolutions will necessitate higher pixel counts, and the new G8 can max out at 224 PPI (pixels per inch). Visual clarity is less about resolution and more about maximizing the pixels on screen, which is where 6K resolution may make more sense for a 32-inch monitor.
Samsung’s Odyssey monitors are gaming-focused first and foremost, so you may be wondering what’s the point of a $1,600 non-OLED monitor like the G80HS. Samsung does promise a relatively wide viewing angle for LCDs at 178 degrees without losing visual quality. It also meets a 1ms pixel-to-pixel response time, meaning the monitor can change images relatively quickly. But, in reality, it’s to see content at an even higher pixel density.
For comparison, 6K is nearly 2.5 times the number of pixels as 4K, often referred to as UHD. The problem with 8K TVs was less the technology and more the dearth of content that could support that scale of resolution. Some titles, like Cyberpunk 2077 and Ghost of Tsushima, should manage to hit 6K resolution. Samsung’s latest monitors still support its own HDR10+ standard but not Dolby Vision for high dynamic range content.
The Odyssey G80HS promises to hit a typical brightness of 350 nits and a peak luminance of 400 nits. It doesn’t exactly seem very bright for an IPS monitor that demands such a premium price.
If you were looking for something more standard, the $1,300 Odyssey G80SH (don’t get confused now) is the 32-inch 4K OLED variant that promises 300 nits typical and 1,000 nits with HDR.
Samsung is also pushing another G80HF (okay, seriously…) 27-inch monitor that tops out at 5K resolution and has an IPS display, though this one only costs $950.
Whether you can hit playable frame rates at that top resolution and still push graphics settings or ray tracing to the max will depend on your PC’s capabilities. There are reasons why 5K or even 6K monitors exist. Those working in creative fields who need ultra-high-end, pixel-perfect screens like Apple’s Studio Display XDR can make use of those higher resolutions, though mostly when editing video or 3D objects that require higher resolutions.
Compared to 4K, 6K is relatively untested in gaming circles. At the very least, you’ll likely avoid a situation like what occurred with the PlayStation 5 that promised it was 8K-capable. Sony eventually removed all mentions of 8K from its console packaging when it became clear few games supported the resolution. Things may be different with 5K and 6K, though we can’t promise you’ll be able to tell the difference between UHD and the new hotness of high-resolution monitors.
Post Comment