Display Stream Compression (DSC) is a compression algorithm that lets monitors and TVs display resolutions and refresh rates that they wouldn’t be otherwise capable of handling. It improves the capabilities of HDMI and DisplayPort cables, letting them too, serve displays that are higher resolution and refresh rate than they are natively capable of doing. DSC does all this without almost anyone knowing. You’ve probably had it enabled without realizing it.
That’s because DSC is a visually lossless compression format. While not mathematically lossless, you’d be very hard-pressed to see any kind of difference with DSC enabled. That’s a good thing because it means that your 4K 240Hz monitor can handle all that data it needs without compromising on quality.
DSC is a VESA-developed compression algorithm that’s supported by most modern TVs and monitors. It was first introduced in March 2014, but it wasn’t until version 1.2 was released in 2016 that it was officially included in the DisplayPort 1.4 specification. Version 1.2 was also added to the HDMI 2.1 specification in 2017, making DSC much more widely available. It’s since been adopted by DisplayPort 2.0/2.1.
The purpose of DSC was to reduce the amount of information being transmitted from a source device, like a gaming PC or UHD Blu-ray player, to a TV or monitor. In practice, this means DisplayPort 1.4 can support 4K 240Hz displays, despite the fact that the cable doesn’t actually have the raw bandwidth to support such a resolution and refresh rate combination.
You can see this with the excellent Samsung Neo G8, which comes with DisplayPort 1.4 and HDMI 2.1 inputs, and yet it can receive a full 4K 240Hz signal from either port option.
DSC can also be used by USB-C, USB4, and Thunderbolt 3/4 connectors to transmit higher-quality video than their bandwidth would allow.
DSC is a mathematically lossy, but visually lossless compression algorithm. That means that although there are some differences in the eventual image that is produced after the compression is applied, the human eye can’t really register it. It uses a range of encoding tools to achieve this but ultimately can deliver a 3:1 reduction in the size of the data being transmitted. It manages this with just a 0.5-microsecond increase in overall latency, making it the kind of technique that you can use during gaming without it having any kind of impact on the look or feel of your play.
This makes it possible for HDMI 2.1 to handle up to 10K at 120Hz (when also using chroma subsampling), or DisplayPort 2.1 to manage up to a single 16K display at 60Hz with 10-bit color and HDR.
It’s important to remember, however, that DSC only affects the data that’s transmitted from the device to the display. It doesn’t help your graphics card in the same way that FSR or DLSS does, so you’ll still need a GPU that can render your games at whatever resolution and frame rate you’re targeting, regardless of whether you use DSC or not.
Yes, absolutely. There’s no chance you’ll notice any difference with it enabled, and if your monitor and graphics card support it, then you’re likely already using it and didn’t realize it. Most of the cutting-edge 4K high refresh rate monitors utilize DSC in some capacity, and its use is what enables the latest Nvidia graphics cards to still sport DisplayPort 1.4 connectors, rather than the DisplayPort 2.1 found on AMD’s RX 7000 series.
The absolutely absurd idea of putting a touchscreen display on a mouse isn't exactly new. Turtle Beach already did it with its Command Series MC7, which features a 2.25-inch control screen. But apparently, even that wasn't ridiculous enough for Arctic Fox Technologies. Its new Super Mouse looks like someone took the chunky old Atari ST mouse, slapped a touchscreen and scroll wheel on it, and called it an upgrade.
The result is a rather unusual-looking mouse that is now on Kickstarter, starting at $199. And as ridiculous as it looks, some of its features are genuinely intriguing.
Apple is less than a day away from launching its highly anticipated OLED MacBook Pro with a touch-sensitive screen. But it appears that the upgrade is going to cost a pretty penny. According to a report by Bloomberg, Apple is reportedly eyeing a starting price of $2,899 for the 14-inch MacBook Pro, while the 16-inch version could start at $3,399 in the US.
"At $2,899, the 14-inch model would mark the highest starting price for a new MacBook Pro model, surpassing the $2,799 Apple charged for a 17-inch version introduced in 2006," says the report. The report claims that Apple is targeting a minimum price hike of $400 for its upcoming redesigned 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models.
I've spent a good amount of time digging into the spec sheet of the new M6 MacBook Pro (14-inch), and for all intents and purposes, this is a classic Apple "chip and connectivity" refresh. It's not a full redesign. The chassis, Liquid Retina XDR panel, speakers, ports, and battery, all of them carry over unchanged.
However, the M6 brings more cores, stronger on-device AI, higher memory bandwidth on the larger configs, and modern wireless. Here’s the practical rundown of what actually improved, and whether those gains are worth your money.