LG to release 98in 8k-television in 2nd half this year

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jan 3, 2016.

  1. vg24a3

    vg24a3 Active Member

    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 980TI Gaming 6G
    So what, like 8-way Titan SLI until 2020 when maybe 2-way SLI will be enough?
     
  2. yasamoka

    yasamoka Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,731
    Likes Received:
    183
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080Ti SC
    Nothing can run 8K properly, not even 4 Titan X's, unless they all scale perfectly (4x) and a single Titan X can manage playable framerates at 4K for the game in question (not so much).
     
  3. ivymike10mt

    ivymike10mt Master Guru

    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    12
    GPU:
    GTX 1080Ti SLI
    "98" in 8K in second half this year"
    8K for 98" sound adequate for a huge screen in generall.
    I not like LG brand, but that nice marketing from their side.
    Look like they keep pression and attention in TV's market :)

    TV devices evolve really fast (mby not same television) but in space of 3 years time they change alot.
    There are many players (brands) which fight eachother for our moneys like crazy :D
    So I think other brands must have plans aswell for (8K) in this or next year..?

    Anyway as a 4K TV user I must say its nice jump from 1080p - for PC usage and not only.
    That is something what u like see in any media type - belive or not.
    Colors are better, picture is sharper, and u see bigger scale of anything - details
    So ye, we sholuld press on it.

    Even if there are some scaling "problems" in some situations.
    It dosen't big matter.. 1st coz TV scaller are not bad..
    And second coz it be only better in near fature.

    When 4K bring nice crisp image.. 8K will bring very smooth crisp image - without alising.
    It simply like that, and it will be better (we can afford it or not).

    Ofcorse there are many other aspects in TV's screens which build finall picture - not just resolution and inches.

    PS: But if u like just watching medium quality TV channels by years maybe even budget 720p plasma TV still will fit for You ?

    Im just sure one thing - LCD monitors go so slow.. and enough expensive.. that I not even looking on them no more...
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2016
  4. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,244
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    Well... there's always plasma TVs if you want true black. :nerd:

    Seriously, I've been using a Plasma TV for a long time now. At the time they had a terrible reputation due to the older/cheaper ones having caps blow, severe burn-in, loss of luminance over time, etc. I got it significantly cheaper than comparable LCD panels of the time and IMO it looks far superior.

    I've lost track of the time I've had it (3 or 4 years?), but so far it hasn't noticeably faded or shown any burn-in.
     

  5. vidra

    vidra Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    10
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX1060 6GB
    Lol, I have a 20" Sony Trinitron flat-panel CRT TV from 1990 and it's still going strong. So far, in the 25 years that I've owned it, I've had 2 minor repairs done on it. Strangely enough, unlike most CRT screens, this trinitron one still has vivid colours. Somehow, I don't feel the need to replace it until it finally goes kaput. I'd much rather invest that money into a new monitor for my PC.
     
  6. Tuukka

    Tuukka Active Member

    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Asus GTX660 OC 2 GB
    Well you are in luck, here in (Finland) you don't have to own TV, even if you're blind you have to pay taxes for our version of BBC it's called YLE. And this is no joke :bang:
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2016
  7. Clawedge

    Clawedge Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    695
    GPU:
    Radeon 570
    i was looking at some native 4k content n a hd panel,nut 35mm scans, the extra pixels just add a solid level of crispness to the picture.

    i have noticed that old movies shot on 35mm are a bit blurry, but understandable as those days had limits to technology.

    but if you look at 4k video, even those taken off mobile phones ( i know, i know, dont give me that look :nerd: )it looks very solid.
     
  8. Ryrynz

    Ryrynz Active Member

    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GTX 960
    It' not pointless. Upgrades to technology are never pointless.


    Read up about upscaling. Also 8k content already exists.. but how the hell are you going to market 8K content when nobody has a TV set out to play it? Have to improve technology some time...
     
  9. Pineapple

    Pineapple Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    7950 boost

    Also, 29in is SMALL, 40 is better, but is still small, so if you bump up to a 55in, the diff will be night and day.

    There's also the problem of viewing distance, as at 3mtrs on a small TV, nearly anything looks good.
     
  10. Pineapple

    Pineapple Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    7950 boost
    Bitrates ARE the story...for example, I have a American 1080i HDTV sample at full HD+17mbps, and damn does that look good, it really does look as good as any of my blurays, however, back here in the backwaters of the world{Australia}, we now have some of the worst OTF=FTA HD one's eyes could have the misfortune of viewing.

    The annoying thing is that we once had very good HDTV, ie, full HD+ 15mbps, but sometimes these jokers broadcast 1080i at 1440x1080i+9mbps...pathetic.

    The point is, WE and other parts of the world don't even have decent 1080i, so salivating over 4k or the more ridiculous 8k is totally pointless unless they decide to match the signal with the TV sets capabilities, granted, I doubt 8k would come into it's own until TV size is far greater than 60in.
     

  11. CDJay

    CDJay Member Guru

    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    NVIDIA GTX 1080 FE SLI
    I think you misunderstand. If the source content is only 25/30 fps, then when deinterlaced to 1080p 50 or 60 the result *is* 1080p when recombined but with one less frame per iteration. The only place that 1080p has mattered is on blu ray (with no 48hz refresh option already existing on TVs, it made more sense to just stick to 1080p/24 and run at that as a native framerate) or PC content which actually has content per frame. If you took 1080p/25 and played it back on a 1080p display you'd just end up with repeat frames.

    The reason 1080i made sense is because it could match up to existing PAL/NTSC frame timings. The reason 1080p makes no sense for TV broadcasting of low framerate material is that it would require twice as much for (at best) better compatibility with dubious deinterlacers in STBs or displays.

    I'm amazed there are places broadcasting in 720 lines though, in 2016. What's the point :bang:

    CDJay
     
  12. huilun02

    huilun02 Master Guru

    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    MSI R9 290X Lightning
    They want to 'push tech' huh?

    Very well all I ask for is one simple thing.

    OLED monitors.

    Its that or its pointless tech.
     
  13. ivymike10mt

    ivymike10mt Master Guru

    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    12
    GPU:
    GTX 1080Ti SLI
    There are some 4K OLED but TV's not a Monitors Ofc.
    And U just need enough "deep" pocket to get them.
    Also u may cry - twice.. Once when U pay for it.. and second when pixels start wearing-out too fast.

    Monitors in OLED is even more risky decision.
    Coz for PC usage U may want use more static pictures - on desktop sample. OLED don't like that.
    Color degradation is similar to "plasma" or can be worse.
    Two months abusive using OLED Can cause huge picture degradation.
    Imagine u will use desktop evry day on bit bright settings.
    Sure they can improve durability, but I will not count on huuge changes in that.
    Even it they increase lifespan pixels lets say around.. 100% its still be risky for desktop use.
    But I like be wrong with above anyway...

    What about Laser TV - silence..?
     
  14. Dch48

    Dch48 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,822
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Sapphire Nitro+ RX 470 4g
    40" is the biggest I would ever want. My viewing distance is right at 8 feet or 96 inches. The two TV's look the same at that distance. I found a Google spreadsheet that calculates what resolution your eyes actually can see at variable distances and screen sizes. At the 8' distance, you don't need more than 1080 until the screen exceeds 62". 720P is good up to a screen size of 42". At the 8' distance a 40" 1080 TV is displaying higher resolution than your eyes can physically see and so is a 29" 720 set. Resolution really only matters at close viewing distances like desktop computing and at those distances, say 18-24 inches, a 24" screen is more than large enough. Anything bigger and you have to turn your head to see the edges and on a 24" screen, browser pages are already too wide to be comfortably read in full screen mode.

    Therefore, 4k resolution is much better suited for computer monitors than TV's and 8K is just ridiculous for anything.

    Also, I can not understand why anyone would want to play games on a huge 50" screen at any distance. It has to make the game harder to play. I also can't understand gaming on a phone but that's another story.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2016
  15. Pineapple

    Pineapple Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    7950 boost
    You could easily plonk a 50-55in TV in there, granted, it would be best suited to HD content.

    re-size, size gives you what's called visible resolution, IOW, it's easier to see more detail as it's bigger, that's why HD addicts always crave larger TV's as the HD is best expressed on a bigger TV.

    If you go into a store and they happen to have a 50in next to a 55in, you'll see what I mean, the 55 is noticeably bigger despite only a few more inches.
     

  16. deathroned

    deathroned Member

    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    950
    3 of these bad boys for eyefinity and surround with four pascal titans or polaris gpus.
     
  17. Pineapple

    Pineapple Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    7950 boost
    hahahaahah, madness.
     
  18. Dch48

    Dch48 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,822
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Sapphire Nitro+ RX 470 4g
    Of course I COULD use a 50-55" TV but to me they are just too big. They look too big in the stores. I can just imagine what it would look like in my house. I used the 29" Vizio in the living room for over 2 years and was for the most part satisfied since what it replaced was a 27" CRT set and the viewing area in square inches was pretty much the same. It just started to look a little small so I got the 40" Samsung on a Black Friday deal at Walmart and it actually looked big for a few days until I got used to it. Now it seems to be the perfect size. At my viewing distance, a 55" 1080 set would be approaching the limit of maximum clarity according to the spreadsheet I used. It says that 62" is about the max size before you would need a higher resolution. 62" would be way too big for me.

    Going back to the 98" monster, think of this. If you turned it upright on it's diagonal axis, it would not fit under your ceiling :eek3:. Isn't that too big for a normal house? It could have a place in lecture halls, auditoriums, or laboratories but for watching Modern Family in your living room? :giggle2:
     
  19. yasamoka

    yasamoka Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,731
    Likes Received:
    183
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080Ti SC
    I just explained how it's not the same. No interlaced content deinterlaced looks the same as progressive content. Please re-read my post.
     
  20. Pineapple

    Pineapple Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    7950 boost
    Thats pixel resolution....you're still missing out on visible resolution....and this is why you're a 1%, ie, the bulk of people buy bigger sets.
    Anyway, this is just info, i'm not trying to sell u a TV.
     

Share This Page