Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 20, 2018.
Well it gotta start somewhere i guess.
"videos are limited to 4K." and "no such devices support this"
so what you're getting is a 12 grand high resolution picture viewer
this thing is technically brilliant and functionally pointless
I have a feeling we will be here in 5 or so years talking about how useless the 80 inch 12k or 16k tv is for the price point
When 8K OLED and Ampere SLI becomes reasonable in price, 8K would be the way to go. Technology marches on and I see 8K TV or monitors more useful than 4K mobiles. I mean 6" at 4K is just crazy to pick out details, even a 12" tablet yet tons of people still buy these devices.
Lots of ppl might need to update their info:
All hd/fhd/qhd/uhd tvs will always upscale lower res signals.
All sony/lg uhd tvs that arent low end, are all 100/120 hz panels, mote thru software.
One of the main reasons for higher res is to get closer (getting more immersed) without being able to see pixels.
For 1080p recommend min distance is 3 times the screen height.
At 4k its half that, about 5ft for a 70in.
So even at 8k, its "still" 3ft.
Even without that, it will still be able to show a bit more detail when viewing 4k content, as the panel wont be the "bottleneck".
I was demoing a 1080p next to a uhd (65in) running a 1080p signal, the uhd allowed to be able to read signs from shops on a street, when the fhd set could not.
So for larger screens and/or sitting close, 8k does make sense (on the screen).
Care to share links to prove all this information ? Maybe i can learn a thing or two. Thank you
I think we're starting too see the mouse DPI equivallent of monitors. Just throw more pixel numbers at it, hope the cluless just buy it based on the higher numbers. Can't wait for 16k, gonna be about as usefull as setting my current mouse to work @16k dpi.
- Off topic mode on -
Well, at least us Guru's we will always be busy that way (and all the other discussions that re-occur any and every time a new CPU, GPU, MB, Chipset etc etc etc etc comes out) It's why we love to be "Techies" afterall
Without it, Guru3d would not last longer then a month lol
- Off topic mode off -
We are perfectly happy with our new Lg 55 " 4k tv set,Sharp is not one of the best names out there I dont know who will actually buy this thing at 12k almost.
I'm still waiting for 4K OLED panels to be cheaper. Either that, or microLED TVs need to make an appearance at something less than both my kidneys.
By the time 8K content is available to watch on TVs, this TV will be outdated and old and the then-new 8K TVs will be better.
What is the point here. That's like using a 4K display from 2006 or something. Why would you ever want that, if modern 4K displays are better and probably cheaper. Just because it cost $4000 in 2006 doesn't mean it's better than a $1000 modern 4K display. Same with this one. By the time 8K is a thing, this display will not be something you'd want to use compared to the displays available then.
This is just manufacturers wanting to stick BIG NUMBERS on the box, regardless of whether they make sense or not.
Yep. Its the 'more the better' marketing approach. To reel in uniformed buyers many of whom may not technically inclined to know any better and who think just by plugging it in, everything will be 8x more detailed than HD. I know that sort of customer type sounds ridiculous, but its a huge market they cannot ignore. And it applies to lots of products.
besides the fact that you dont need 8K content to see a difference (vs a 4k panel, not considering brand/panel quality), the same reason we watch non-4k content on a 4k screen.
it gets upscaled anyway. not sure why ppl always bring this up.
and i guarantee that a lg/sony UHD tv on sale now for 4000$, will still look better in 5y,
than any no name 1000$ set i can buy by then.
its the same with almost everything else.
how much faster is a 2018 pentium vs a 3rd gen i7??
A TV with a really, really SHARP image ;-)
I wonder if it would be possible to power with a GTX 1080 Ti and 3 DP to HDMI adapters, resulting in 4x 4K input signals.
Linus has made 16K resolution out of sixteen 4K monitors:
And it runs Counterstrike,Minecraft, Half-Life 2 and other games at 16K. Videocards are certainly capable !
This 8K tv is not even that fancy anymore...
Other than the crazy rich people who have more money than brains, nobody is going to buy this. I imagine this is more of Sharp saying "Hey look we have an 8K TV!". Besides the fact there is no 8K content, the majority of people don't even have a 4K TV yet. Hell I know people that don't even have a 1080p TV.
Also it will be probably 20 years before consoles can push 8K.
Ps4 has been on the market for about 4 to 5 y (depending on country and which unit) before switching from 1080p output to 4k without requiring a completely new ps.
So unless completely have no clue about hardware, i hope you had sarcasm mode switched to ON.
Not even talking about the no content nonsense, which is the same for any FHD an UHD tv, as no cable provider has a complete lineup (ALL channels) with "full" 1080p/30hz@50Mbit signal.
So are we supposed to throw out all our tvs (cause there is no broadcast yet matching it), or just let the tv upscale lower res content ??
Remember when the xbox 360 and ps3 were supposed to be able to play 1080 at 60fps? How long did it take that to happen consistently? Not until the xbox 1 and ps4 came out 10 years later. Now these consoles are marketed as 4K machines and they still can barely do it. 8K is a heck of a lot bigger jump than it was to 4K
A lot bigger pixel jump (x4) and a lot less visual difference (by virtue of diminishing returns). Theres a limit to what your eyes can see depending on screen size (see distance/res charts on previous page). THAT imo will be more the limiting factor in terms of future 8k development. Pretty sure there may be a genuine need for 8k (or even 16k) for certain niche requirements, just dont see its mass market potential in the same way as 4k has been.
Don't forget that resolution is not just about what our eyes are supposedly seeing, but also about what we shouldn't be seeing in an image. Things like aliasing.
For example, my phone is an S8 which has a gigantic resolution of 2960 x 1440 for that little screen size, making the pixels themselves pretty invisible for anyone ( ~570 ppi is a huge number )
I can clearly see on that screen the difference between a line which is using antialiasing (grayscale) and one that is not (just raw black and white pixels), even at arm length distance (which is about the distance I sit from my PC monitor)
We're still far, far away from making screens with pixels so tiny that they won't need antialiasing techniques.
Try switching text antialiasing OFF in Windows on a 4K display and you'll see what I mean.