lol
Why?
Because if they were competent they'd be designing their spec for the future, not just wasting all this time to bring it up to par with what manufacturers are already doing by having to use hacky workarounds.
Why?
I'll care when I can get a TV with 4k. And that won't be for a while.Do people actually care about 4k?
Why care for 4k when games aren't even 1080p yet
This console generation is supposed to be 10 years long. That's like saying 'do people actually care about HDTV' when the 360 / PS3 was launching. In 5-6 years 4k will be the norm.
Can't wait for DisplayPort to march all over this.
I'm skeptical whether this will be the norm in 8-10 years as some of you guys are suggesting. 1080p was adopted by the masses as there was an abundance of media that used it, blu ray, cable (or sky HD here in the UK) and to some extent gaming with this gen which (although 720p) made people think they were missing out by having a SD set.
4k prices will only drop to current 1080p panel levels when they are producing enough of them to drive costs down and I think the masses aren't going to be that taken with it personally. It's unlikely that cable services are going to be broadcasting at 4k levels anytime soon given they still cannot manage 1080p (well here in the UK at least it's interlaced, not sure about elsewhere) and many people still shun blu ray as upscaled DVD looks good enough. As others have mentioned consoles couldn't dream of rendering anything close to 4k for actual games.
As an enthusiast I hope I'm wrong, I will be getting one as I like new shit, but does it have mass market appeal? If they can come up with some media or whatever that can use it other than films then yes, otherwise I'd say it will be niche until TV or on demand TV services start using it, which I can't see happening anytime soon personally - well until the worlds BB infrastructure is at sky net levels anyhow
So only 4 years behind display port with support for 4K@60HZ....
Can't wait for DisplayPort to march all over this.
ehh I see this console generation being shorter.. Like 5 or 6 years honestly.
This console generation is supposed to be 10 years long. That's like saying 'do people actually care about HDTV' when the 360 / PS3 was launching. In 5-6 years 4k will be the norm.
One more time:
YOSHIDA EXPECTS TEN YEARS OF PS4
'A key executive at Sony Computer Entertainment has pledged a decade of support for PlayStation 4 and expects the new console's lifespan will be as long as its predecessors.'
These consoles will be supported for 10 years. SONY
One more time:
YOSHIDA EXPECTS TEN YEARS OF PS4
'A key executive at Sony Computer Entertainment has pledged a decade of support for PlayStation 4 and expects the new console's lifespan will be as long as its predecessors.'
These consoles will be supported for 10 years. SONY
No 120 Hz 4k? Considering how incredibly slowly connection standards advance, that's a bit disappointing.
HDMI is predominately a Media connection standard and Media doesn't need anywhere near 120FPS realistically speaking. Maybe a new Display Port revision will oblige but doubling bandwidth isn't easy to do.No 120 Hz 4k? Considering how incredibly slowly connection standards advance, that's a bit disappointing.
The reason they stopped at 60hz is because they wanted to maintain full compatibility with cables/sets. This is good(ish) in the short term... but a pain for the long term.
Really shouldn't have called it HDMI 2.0 as it really seems more of a HDMI 1.5 territory.
HDMI 1.3 had more than 2x the bandwidth of HDMI 1.2.it has almost 2x the bandwidth of HDMI 1.4 so it would be crazy of them to call it HDMI 1.5.
HDMI 1.3 had more than 2x the bandwidth of HDMI 1.2.
Numbers really mean nothing.
Yes?Do people actually care about 4k?
Do people actually care about 4k?
Do people actually care about 4k?
I can't see how it would be worth getting a 4K tv early on if you're not buying a 70"+.
I kind of don't want to see 4K become a standard just yet as my blu-ray collection has just gotten kind of decent and don't want to have to buy it again in 4K.
Seriously, they're kind of forcing me towards streaming everything since atleast then I get what I pay for.
Millions, at least.How many consumers even heard of Display Port or care.
I'm waiting for a decent brand to get to 2.5k $ and I'll jump in at that point.
The chart definition of "enough" is "more would be indistinguishable". Given that, it's reasonable.Is it just me or is this chart ridiculous? Most living room TVs are between 40 and 60 inches and I'd guess that most people are around 10-15 feet away from their TV, but the chart suggests that you should have 4k resolution for that setup. 1080p is just fine for those conditions. I realize that in the future, 4k will be more common, but I would set that as the high bar, not as the recommended settings.
My PC disagrees with you.I think there's a serious case of diminishing returns here.
I know a lot of people who had a hard time telling the difference between SD and HD when HDTVs were just coming out. Hell, some of my family members still can't be bothered to switch to the HD channel from the SD channel when watching broadcast TV because they don't notice the difference enough.
So to assume that the jump from 1080P to 4K is going to matter in a mainstream way is folly. Maybe it looks good on the display when you walk by the Sony store, but that's not why most people buy their HDTVs. HDTVs caught on after the enthusiasts bought them and were able to show off HD content (both BluRay and broadcast) to their friends. Until cable and Netflix broadcast much higher resolution content, and until higher capacity BluRays become normal, nobody is going to notice how much better 4K is.
Because the OP was curious on whether it is likely that consoles will get HDMI 2.0+ compliant revisions down the line.Why is this on the gaming side?
Do people actually care about 4k?