1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Samsung: More than half of the TVs in 2019 will be 8K Ultra HD

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Feb 12, 2019.

  1. Barry J

    Barry J Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,759
    Likes Received:
    115
    GPU:
    MSI RTX2080 TRIO
    My eyes with Free AA (glasses removed) using 4K and loving it, don't think 8k will be any good for me as I will need to keep my glasses on as 8K wont need Free AA
     
  2. rm082e

    rm082e Master Guru

    Messages:
    460
    Likes Received:
    79
    GPU:
    GTX 970 SLI Reference
    I just moved to a new house and bought a 75" TV. We're sitting about 12 feet from the screen, and regular 1080p Blu Ray looks great. I don't doubt there would be a slight clarity increase with 4K, but I don't see it being worth the $200 for a new player and buying discs at $30 a piece.

    8K is just a bad joke at this point. We need better contrast without paying high prices for OLED. We need better black levels and across the board standards for dynamic HDR, which haven't been made universal yet.
     
    airbud7 and alanm like this.
  3. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Uh... yes you did:
    "... about 8K. As other have said, it's just a gimmick, that will eventually become mainstream in a couple of years"
    A couple=2.
    Anyway, even 5 years sounds ambitious. Like I said, 4K is barely mainstream in 2018; I'm not even convinced that it actually is mainstream (many would argue it isn't). 4K sales are continuously increasing (I'll be contributing to that soon, hopefully) and more content is being made, but I'm pretty sure HD is still more popular.
     
  4. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,638
    Likes Received:
    1,079
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    I think the reason is that cost of manufacture of 8k TVs is getting close to that of 4k ones. As long as it looks OK with1080p content (which most consumers will be watching), 8k is a higher number and is therefore more marketable than 4k (if close in price).
     

  5. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,117
    Likes Received:
    1,256
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    RTX cards are TDP limited in traditional workloads. It's not like trading the die space would yield a faster card. Look at V100 for example, significantly more CUDA cores but irrelevant for performance.

    Also I've yet to see any real evidence that Tensors/RT take up a ton of die space. The CUDA/MM2 density of Titan RTX is nearly identical to GP100 (The only pascal variant with FP16x2). Turing doubled the cache, dispatch units, added RT/Tensor cores. How do you explain that they managed to do that without a die shrink unless those things didn't take that much space to begin with? I think a lot of people look at all these cores as being completely discreet when they aren't.Tensors/RT cores are operational modes of SM/ALU. There are some dedicated transistors to make them work but for the most part they are reusing the same silicon as the SM/ALUs.

    I'd much rather stay at QHD/4K resolution for games and focus on increasing image quality with hyper-realistic lighting/shadowing then diminishing returns with 8K resolution. Especially as a PC gamer playing on a 27-35" monitor where that resolution is even less effective. With Movies/TV - 8K probably makes more sense depending on your theater situation - I can see an argument for it there especially as prices of 4K projectors start hitting reasonable numbers (presumably 8K will be similar, relatively soonish).

    I think this is a big part of it. I was also thinking about panel binning for dead pixels. Would you even need to discard a panel at 8K if it had a few dead pixels? I doubt anyone would notice at that size.
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2019
    yasamoka likes this.
  6. EspHack

    EspHack Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,412
    Likes Received:
    22
    GPU:
    ATI/HD5770/1GB
    okey 8k now, can we please focus on refresh rates after that? k thanks
     
  7. Dimitrios1983

    Dimitrios1983 Master Guru

    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    46
    GPU:
    AMD RX560 4GB
    Just great the cable companies will have another excuse to raise my cable bill. I live in America and most channels are still 720-1080p Hulu and NETFLIX has decent quality but I still want to see the potential with my new 4K tv.
     
  8. yasamoka

    yasamoka Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,696
    Likes Received:
    169
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080Ti SC
    Where did you get that information from?
     
  9. Camaxide

    Camaxide Member

    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    9
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 Ti Gaming X SLI
    Micro Led does not have burn-in like plasma and oled does
     
  10. Moto_Life

    Moto_Life Active Member

    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    22
    GPU:
    Msi 1070 gaming X
    I dont understand why so many people are complaining about this. Technology is improving and always will. You dont have to buy one and its going to drive down the prices of the lesser panels. You think oled is better for you? Thats fine too go buy one. Also i feel the need to remind some of you that people were saying the same thing about 1080 years ago but you dont see anyone saying they want to go back to SD do you?
     

  11. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,003
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Although I wouldn't consider myself complaining about these displays, I do find them stupid for the masses. Technology will always improve but there's a point where those improvements don't matter, and 8K for livingroom TVs is one of such points. Take sound quality for example: we can continue to use higher bit rates and sample rates, but we're not going to hear the difference. As other people have pointed out, there's much better ways to be improving upon displays than just cranking up the resolution.
    I don't recall anybody ever saying that about 1080p. Just about everyone was excited about it or at least acknowledged it was a nice leap forward. Some might have been a little butthurt over the cost of the displays and Blu Ray players when they were new, but nobody thought it was unnecessary. It's also worth pointing out that many people at the time were more opposed to the form factor, or that only LCDs and plasmas could support 1080p. There are people today who would get a 1080p CRT if one existed.
     
    alanm likes this.
  12. warlord

    warlord Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,137
    Likes Received:
    684
    GPU:
    Null
    Useless innovations or not, everything goes for corporations, companies and general businesses to justify paying the workforce and scientists.

    It will never stop as long as the society lives for a damned salary.
     
  13. H83

    H83 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,635
    Likes Received:
    342
    GPU:
    Asus ROG Strix GTX1070
    Watching porn on one of those is going to be fucking amazing!!!
     
    Valken likes this.
  14. Babel-17

    Babel-17 Member Guru

    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    6
    GPU:
    RTX 2080 FE
    Remember how every movie that was released in full HD was amazingly better looking when re-released in UHD? Me neither, because that didn't happen.

    Some movies that were released in the early days of Blu ray did get remastered, and sometimes remastered in 4k, and a lot of them do show a solid improvement. But some of that improvement is due to improvements in the color range, thanks to HDR, and the 1080p versions that derive from this new remastering also show improvement.

    Yadda, yadda, yadda, go to imdb.com and look to see how movies were filmed, and what their digital intermediary is at (mastered in 2k, 4k, or whatever). It's going to take time before there's more than just a handful of movies that are mastered in 8k, or even 6k. A really good scaler can work its magic on less than 8k material when its shown on an 8k panel, but lets not expect a night and day difference.

    What I want to see is HDMI and display port get implemented at their highest specification on upcoming 4k sets. And I want to see the latest version of Free Sync supported. Give me a 4k panel that can support 120 fps, and HDR to a high level. Rock solid blacks, high contrast and brightness levels, and if not using OLED then I want (very) wide array local dimming.

    With such a panel it would be years and years before any single video card I'm likely to buy would be sitting at all idle feeding it the content from a AAA title, especially given that a new generation of consoles is coming.

    Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of movies getting "filmed" with 8k digital cameras, or whatever kind of film stock could generate a true 8k digital intermediary. And I'd like to game at at least 60 fps on one. But I'm not expecting all that to come together anytime soon.

    Nor am I counting on American cable providers offering much 8k content, or Amazon, or Netflix.

    I'd spend a bit more to get 8k rather than 4k if buying a new set, but not if I had to make a trade-off from what 4k sets had to offer. I'm currently using a 43" Sony XBR 800D and it' both pretty amazing, and more panel than my RTX 2080 can feed in newer AAA titles.
     
    schmidtbag likes this.
  15. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,671
    Likes Received:
    983
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    It's called capitalism, and it's the reason we have the technology that we have today. PC gaming itself is an unnecessary luxury, with many of us spending gobs of money on stuff that we don't need - does anyone actually need a 4K monitor and a 2080 Ti to play games? Nope.

    Yup, if anything, these screens will help drive down the price of 4K monitors/TVs and make them more affordable for the masses. It's odd to see people complaining about something that will lower prices and improve their media consumption and/or gaming experiences.
     
    warlord likes this.

  16. Lebon30

    Lebon30 Member

    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    GeForce GTX 680
    So, TV content continues to be around 720p/1080i and only very limited channels offer 4K.
    Netflix and YT offer 4K with limited bitrates...
    Blu-Ray UHD is the only very good UHD offer with video games.

    And I sit here with a 1080p monitor at 60Hz and a 1080p TV in the living room. Perfectly OK with what we have.

    Tbh, 1. it's way too early as 4K adoption is still pretty low (look at how much time it took for people to move to 1080p)
    2. At 4K, most images, if rendered at that resolution, will be very crisp unless you have that huge-*** TV.
    3. No content
    4. No hardware to output 8K in real time.
    5. Will need to have that 100Mbit+ internet to stream it.

    It's way way too early. It's all because they feel obligated to move new products.
    I would have waited another 3-4 years easily.
     
  17. tensai28

    tensai28 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,412
    Likes Received:
    365
    GPU:
    2080ti MSI X TRIO
    I've seen 8k tvs in stores in Japan for over a year now. Although it did look awesome, not going to make the mistake of upping my resolution any more until the hardware to actually power that becomes more standard/available. It was an absolute struggle (not to mention very expensive) to get my games working at my native resolution (4k) at 60fps ultra settings. I finally have a card that can do that but if I was to upgrade to 8k, it would be the same crap all over again. I'm sticking to 4k for the foreseeable future or at least until the whatever xx70/xx80 NVIDIA card can comfortably run 8k 60fps ultra.

    It's 2019 now.:p
     
  18. The Reeferman

    The Reeferman Active Member

    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    25
    GPU:
    GTX 970 @ 1400 MHz
    Check out this video shot with 3 8K cameras merged to one image. The sharpest footage I've ever seen. But I didn't really notice a difference playing that video set to 4K on a 1080 screen or a 4K screen. Also I didn't notice any difference setting the video to 8K on the 4K screen.
    I did see a noticeable difference setting the video to 1080p or 4K on both screens, but that is mostly due to video codec compression. So it seems to me that with 4K cameras we finally will get content that actually will give us video that is maxing out our 1080 screens, but wont be a big improvement on a 4K screen. Maybe at big screen sizes above 50 inch.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
    Babel-17 likes this.
  19. Ricepudding

    Ricepudding Master Guru

    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    105
    GPU:
    1080ti MSI Light
    We had this same issue when 4K first started, but what content is there? what can we watch... and we still for the most part have this issue... Beyond 4k Bluray and a few streaming sites and support a bit of 4k there isn't much... and 8k will most likely be the same thing, maybe even worse since films being produced aren't always being filmed on 8k Cameras, 4k up-res anyone?

    One good thing that could come from this is 4k dropping a bit in price, or better 4k panels (higher refresh rate, better contrast etc etc) It's still a bit too early for it, Even in the gaming area to power a 4k monitor well you need a 2080ti or higher to cover you in all games if you max out. 8k, i'd love to see the fps, but i assume we need a GPU with at least 4x the horse power which we won't have for many years. Even more so with moores law becoming less and less of a thing, process power isn't doubling at the rate it was back in the 90s
     
  20. Darren Hodgson

    Darren Hodgson Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,726
    Likes Received:
    313
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC2
    This is just PR marketing to hype everyone up for the next "big thing" and to help TV manufacturers sell more of their product in an already saturated market. It's the same thing that happened with the smartphone market where the manufacturers try and convince people that you need a newer, better product every year with a higher resolution screen, faster processor and more memory/features even though in reality most likely don't.

    I still haven't upgraded my 1080p Sony TV to a 4K one because the reality is that 4K content is still pretty scarce. I have Sky+HD (1080p) and play Blu-rays (1080p) so there isn't really much point in buying a 4K TV. I do own a PS4 Pro and Xbox One X but neither console has the power to deliver native 4K games outside a handful of titles so a 4K TV would really be wasted on me. I do own a few Ultra Blu-ray discs (which came with standard BD steelbooks) but I still watch those on my 1080p TV downscaled from 4K via my Xbox One X. X and Pro games look nicer too as they are also downscaled (that said, I do wish developers would offer a choice of a performance or a 4K mode for all games because the former is what appeals to me the most - 60 fps is always preferable to 30 fps).

    The confusion over HDR standards, the poor quality of most 4K TVs in terms of said HDR and contrast levels outside the expensive £1,000+ TVs that are too large for me, mean that I am happy to wait until the technology stabilises and prices drop. Given the dearth of 4K content then I have to ask why on earth the TV manufacturers would think anyone would want an 8K TV? As far as consoles go, we'll be lucky if the next generation Xbox and PlayStation will be capable of 4K/60 fps. One thing for certain is that they will not capable of running games at 8K unless they are on lower quality settings and at 30 fps!

    Maybe I'm just getting old but I find this push for higher and higher resolutions to be laughable. For me, 1080p is still perfectly fine for console gaming and TV/BDs as I use a 40" TV. I use a 27" 1440p monitor with my PC as I prefer higher framerates to higher resolutions and that is the sweet spot.
     

Share This Page