I don’t have a Switch 2 yet, but I wanted to upgrade my screen and would like it to be future-proof for a Switch 2 when I inevitably get one.
According to the specs, docked output can be HDR and it can do 120Hz @ 1080p and 1440p and 4K60. Output at best uses either HDMI 2.0 or 2.1 (it’s ambiguous).
Has anyone who’s got an HDR-capable monitor comment on whether the HDR is noticeable from what you’ve seen so far and if HDR gets output regardless of refresh rate? There’s a 1440p monitor in my budget that is HDR400 certified that goes up to 120Hz and beyond, but I’ve also read that the max refresh rate the monitor can handle a 10-bit signal at is 60Hz (not sure if beyond that it does 8-bit + FRC or just doesn’t support HDR). I’m not sure if this is perhaps overkill for a Switch 2 or whether I still have scope for a monitor that will make better use of the S2’s output.
I don’t think it’s possible to test this at the moment as there’s no actual game out right now that uses both HDR and 120Hz at the same time.
Ah, okay! Thanks. I’d still find any comments on general HDR output interesting, though.
I’m running a QD OLED monitor, so take that into consideration with my results. HDR in Nintendo titles seems to be more focused on increasing colour accuracy rather than “pop”, which will be something that is down to your personal taste. For example, the sun in Breath of The Wild turns from a white blob in SDR to a well defined sun with rays in HDR. It is definitely noticeable, but not in the same way as a lot of other consoles or PCs do HDR. However, this depends on the game, as Cyberpunk 2077 (I don’t own it so have to go off what other people say) has a far brighter and more traditional HDR master that has high contrast.
I would not recommend getting a HDR 400 monitor if you can. The specifications for HDR 400 are significantly watered down (10 bit not required, sRGB colour gamut rather than WCG, high black level luminance allowance, so on) compared to even DisplayHDR 500 certified displays. If HDR is a priority, it would be worth getting maybe a lower refresh rate monitor but with at least DisplayHDR 500, as the HDR will be far better.
I can’t comment on HDR at high refresh rates as I have no games at the moment that use both, although I assume it would work fine at high refresh rates.
Awesome, thank you. All good to know. I know HDR400 is the lowest, but much of the other things I’m looking at in the same price range don’t have any certification, they just support HDR10 in some way. If I could find HDR500/600 for a small price premium, I could go for it.
I’m assuming you are in the UK from the instance (same as mine). What sort of budget do you have, and what size do you want? I’ll have a look and see if you can scrape in DisplayHDR 500.
Okay, sure. Don’t spend too much time on it, though, because I’m sure I’ll end up happy with whatever I get.
I was planning to get this Samsung G50D for £242. My reasonable shopping list includes 32-inch screen, wide viewing angles (so probably IPS), a height-adjustable stand since I’ll use it for some office work as well and might move it about, [edit: and 1440p]. Preferably I’d like to keep it below £300.
Unfortunately couldn’t find anything better than DisplayHDR 400, but I would recommend this Alienware AW3225DM instead of the Samsung as it has HDMI 2.1 support, which is most likely needed for 1440p output at 120Hz for Switch 2. The Samsung only has 2.0, so will be a bit flaky when it comes to 1440p 120Hz output - my Alienware AW3423DWF for example has a HDMI 2.0 port, and the Switch 2 only allows me to use either a 4K 60Hz input (downscaled by the monitor to 1440p 60Hz for a better 1440p display) or 1080p at 120Hz.
Awesome, thanks. I appreciate my budget doesn’t give much to work with. I did already think about this one for a while - there are loads of 1000R out there, but I thought it might be a bit much, so would prefer a shallower curve. The AW has better ports and is probably going to have better HDR as well. It’s still in the shortlist.
If you have to prioritize one feature over the other, my personal suggestion is to prioritize 4K and HDR over 120 Hz. You’re going to get 60 FPS for the vast, vast majority of Switch 2 games. Currently only one title in the launch lineup supports 120 Hz: a single game in the Welcome Tour. Mario Kart World, their premier title, is 1440p at locked 60 FPS in docked mode.
I suspect Switch 2 games in 120 Hz will be only slightly more common than PS5 games in 8K: Sony eventually removed the 8K logo from the box because basically no developer could achieve it and virtually no TVs supported it.
There may be game-specific performance modes with lots of caveats, like 120 Hz at 720p in docked mode for single player, but you would think you would see that with the showcase title. Instead the frame rate for MKW is crushed when three or more players play via couch co-op.
I did wonder how likely it is that the S2 would even be able to max out its display output. If MKW is 1440p @ 60, that might be the ceiling in practice (at that resolution, at least).
It’s unclear to me if HDMI 2.1 is supported at all because there’s no VRR while docked according to specs. I connected mine to 2.0 port and it says it’s capable of 120 Hz at 1080/1440p. I doubt 120 Hz with HDR would require HDMI 2.1 bandwidth since 2.0b can do 4K60 with HDR.
All I can tell you is that I’ve played HDR PC games and the difference is noticeable. If the Switch 2 can do it, it’ll be worth it. But maybe wait until there’s an actual HDR title that comes out?
The main launch titles and updates (Mario Kart World, Zelda Breath of The Wild/Tears of The Kingdom, and so on) already support HDR in game.
