Sure, that’s personal preference though. And your monitor at 1080p at 125% scaling is probably still easier to read text than say a 900p monitor at 100% scaling at the same size.
I assumed this thread was for media consumption resolution not monitor work
At computer-like distances, of course - that was my argument up-thread for using a 4K TV even though I always stick to 1080p content and a 1080p desktop. Smaller physical pixels, at a distance where it matters.
Sure.
I guess my initial point. Based on my regular daily usage, I could easily see the benefit to having more pixels, personally.
Sorry for not reading all of it, but the thread just seems to start out scoffing at the concept of anyone ever needing more pixels to begin with in general.
I personally use my one main display for all my work and general media consumption as well. So I spend a lot of time in front of it at varying distances in general.
Problem is, internet access round the world is nowhere near powerful enough to stream 8k (or even 4k30 in my case).
Which is why 4k BluRay exists and why I said flash based movie distribution may become a thing.
1 Like
Technically South Korea can pull it off because their internet infrastructure is so far ahead of everywhere else. Or at least that’s what I remember reading
2 Likes
What kind of geolock would that be?
“You can’t even because you don’t have good internet”
1 Like
At least where I live here in California, there’s probably enough bandwidth as well. I’m sitting on a 1Gbps connection… and the bottleneck is actually my home network… where I’m limited to around 600-700 Mbps.
‘Enjoy 240p on your 8ktv, courtesy of netflix’
We can barely run 4k streaming video
How did Google ever think stadia was going to work?
“we can barely run 4k video”
THANKS COMCAST
actual 240p gaming btw will probably be horrible on these things…
your TV has to upscale all of your gaming and not only is it very bad at it (nearest neighbor making it look even uglier than you remember), but also have a lot more lag and unnecessary deinterlacing (thank you my life in gaming for telling me this)
Yes, If I had too much money I would love to have a 100 inch 8K screen between two Klipsch Cornwall speakers.
1 Like
I’m sure a 100" 8k screen will eventually be considered “affordable”… i mean look what you cna et for under $400 these days.
Give it maybe 5-10 years or so… we’ll see where we are at by then.
Consider an ultra short throw projector for that
Also use a heresy as a center channel
1 Like
I feal like everyone forgets about the real issue with modern displays, the display tech itself. IPS is good for most applications, but can’t get the kinds of black levels as something like OLED (also backlight bleed) and seems to struggle with high refresh rates and low response times. OLED is beautiful and has STUPIDLY good response times and black levels (mostly due to the individually lit pixels) and does not struggle with high refresh rates, but is expensive and burns in static images over time and eventually becomes less color accurate as the blue elements wear out faster than the green and red. TN panels are just plain ugly, but are cheap and have good refresh rates and response times (OLED is still better). TN panels are a good intermediate tech, with great color accuracy and decent refresh rates but they still struggle with high response times and have similar issues with black levels and backlight bleeding as IPS panels. Resolution is at a point where it is fine for a while. What we really need is a display technology that looks like OLED and has OLED response times but it not so hard/expensive to produce and does not burn in/wear out.
Theres two tech coming which is dual layer emissive lcd tech which is putting a 1080p black and white panel behind thebips to act as a light gate. Which produces oled black levels and micro led which is self emissive led like oled but made of modular snap together panels
2 Likes
The biggest point I have to make against 8k is that it is entirely a marketing gimmick as almost no 8k content exists to the casual market. And we can not visually benefit from that resolution unless we are so close the screen basically eats us.
What people should be putting their money towards are 4k screens with either hdmi 2.2 support for gaming or high fidelity color accuracy and reproduction. Bad color makes movies look lower res as it turns out
That or 4k projectors.
2 Likes
When the Nvidia 900-series came out, the 980ti could almost manage playable 4k, the Titan Xm (= Maxwell) could.
1080 could barely manage 4k, 1080ti (~ $800) could barely manage 4k60.
Now we have the 2080ti and 4k at 80FPS, for the same price of $1200
I say, unless game devs put as much effort into their games as they did in 2014/15, 4k gaming stays a meme.
2 Likes
Especially since the new hotness in enthusiast gaming is ultrawide and super ultrawide aspect ratios at 1080 and 1440p.
1 Like
Not realy.
2560x1440p (16:9) is gaining some traction, but ultrawide (2560x1080 and 3440/3840x1440p) is still an “out there”-format.