The author should correct the note in such a way as to highlight the disadvantages of such solutions with declarations of support for 4k@240Hz. DSC compression comes with information losses, and the more complex the picture, the higher the losses.
In the case of the most primitive mode 4k(16:9)@240@24bit, to avoid loss, you need to achieve compression of at least 13%, but rather 15%.
In the case of 4k(16:9)@240@30bit(HDR 4:4:4) to avoid loss, you need to achieve compression of at least 85%, but rather 90%
Thus, monitors with support for DP1.4b and declared 4k@240Hz distort complex images as much as possible. But it little significance for games and this target audience.
But if someone tries to use them in 240Hz mode for normal work with complex content, this is a clear problem.
So we are waiting for 8k@60Hz monitors with DP2.1/UHBR20 and a response time as short as possible.
For games, 4k@120Hz is still sufficient for 99.9% of the population. Especially if you remember the general input lag, which closes the control loop to a much longer reaction time.