-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is 4K enough for you? Should the gaming industry pursue higher resolutions for PS6-XB? And what's the limit?
Cryio
Member
I'd say resolution depends on game generation.
6th gen games at 1080p + 4xMSAA + Transparency + something like FXAA + sharpening are PERFECT. Higher rez does almost nothing for them.
7th gen games NEED 4K + FXAA + sharpening. They look extremely clean. At the same time, 7th gen was the generation where we got really detailed texturing from a distance, mostly in Unreal 3 titles. 8K makes these games look like a painting in motion, but it's a bonus, not a requirement.
8th gen games? They look nice at 4K, but the image is not fully clean yet. So these would benefit from higher resolutions.
I don't know if we're going to go above 8K (we probably will though), but there is a point for 8K at least.
6th gen games at 1080p + 4xMSAA + Transparency + something like FXAA + sharpening are PERFECT. Higher rez does almost nothing for them.
7th gen games NEED 4K + FXAA + sharpening. They look extremely clean. At the same time, 7th gen was the generation where we got really detailed texturing from a distance, mostly in Unreal 3 titles. 8K makes these games look like a painting in motion, but it's a bonus, not a requirement.
8th gen games? They look nice at 4K, but the image is not fully clean yet. So these would benefit from higher resolutions.
I don't know if we're going to go above 8K (we probably will though), but there is a point for 8K at least.
Last edited:
PeteBull
Member
It depends on screen size, try to see difference between 1080p and 4k at 2meters on 28 inch monitor and i guarantee u wont see any even with 20/20 eyesight- got 32inch 4k hdr monitor here and to fully apreciate it i sit around 0,5m from the screen, at 2m difference between full hd and 4k is basically non existant.
trikster40
Member
Let’s at least get ALL games running at 4K60 before we start talking 8K, shall we?
VectorVictor
Member
4K 60FPS should be the bare minimum standard for next gen.
It *should* be the standard this Gen, but so far (insert fail horn here).
Once we get 4K/60 FPS on lockdown, then let’s shoot for 4K/120FPS. Then we can start talking about 8K or 12K or yo mamma K or Special K or whatever K you want.
But FFS, nail the basics first.
It *should* be the standard this Gen, but so far (insert fail horn here).
Once we get 4K/60 FPS on lockdown, then let’s shoot for 4K/120FPS. Then we can start talking about 8K or 12K or yo mamma K or Special K or whatever K you want.
But FFS, nail the basics first.
Kenpachii
Member
I will be sitting on 1440p for the next decade, absolute zero reason for a increase until gpu's are so fast on every setting in every game that u get zero performance impact by moving to 4k let alone 8k.
With AI upscalers, resolution above 1440p is kinda useless to me at this point.
With AI upscalers, resolution above 1440p is kinda useless to me at this point.
Last edited:
Fbh
Member
The current consoles that just came out struggle to run cross gen games at native 4K/60fps. It doesn't seem realistic to me to expect next gen consoles to come close to native 8K.
At most I'd expect next gen consoles to run games at 4K and then use some sort of upscaling like DLSS.
To me right now diminishing returns really start to set in after 1440p. It's not like I don't see the difference but the extra power required for native 4K doesn't seem worth it to me.
At most I'd expect next gen consoles to run games at 4K and then use some sort of upscaling like DLSS.
To me right now diminishing returns really start to set in after 1440p. It's not like I don't see the difference but the extra power required for native 4K doesn't seem worth it to me.
You clearly haven't seen 1080p fifa on a 75" 4k tv. It looks fuc**** TERRIBLE!
and im a guy who usually doesn't care that much about resolution either. I think 2k res is minimum requirement for some games, at least on a big tv.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
Don't Be Fooled. 8K TVs Are A Waste Of Money For Most Viewers
What's on the screen and what your eyes can see are two different things.
www.forbes.com
There is no reason to move into 8k for the next decade or so.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Honestly? I’m quite happy with 1080p, but then I don’t have a huge TV.
I’d much rather the extra rendering budget was spent on nicer graphics than smaller pixels. Resolution is one of the things I care about least in games.
It’s actually frustrating to see chip technology’s progress get constantly stymied by “MORE RESOLUTION!”
Aiming beyond 4K is just dick swinging.
I’d much rather the extra rendering budget was spent on nicer graphics than smaller pixels. Resolution is one of the things I care about least in games.
It’s actually frustrating to see chip technology’s progress get constantly stymied by “MORE RESOLUTION!”
Aiming beyond 4K is just dick swinging.
Caio
Member
Resolution alone means nothing; there are so many more important things that matter more, such as geometry, draw distance, constant ultra detailed texture work, full Ray tracing, effects, animations, collision/detection system for a much more realistic experience, not only from a gameplay mechanics perspective, but also a much more credible visual impact.
SkylineRKR
Member
More than enough I have 55 inch TV and yeah, for 2-3 m, 4k is useless. 1440p looks great.
hoplie
Member
65“ which i use combined with 1.31m away is fucking garbage. These are strange optimal viewing distances…Don't Be Fooled. 8K TVs Are A Waste Of Money For Most Viewers
What's on the screen and what your eyes can see are two different things.
There is no reason to move into 8k for the next decade or so.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
Guilhermegrg
Member
Would much rather see more and better work per pixel before going up. It's just easier to show a bigger number and push more pixels. Easier to sell those new TV and desktop parts.
Harder to achieve better rendering, more life like at the same resolution. Also, better animation, physics, etc. Not just more pixels for pixel's sake.
Harder to achieve better rendering, more life like at the same resolution. Also, better animation, physics, etc. Not just more pixels for pixel's sake.
Vick
Member
That's because your 4K screen is better than your HD one. And unless your 4K panel is among the few you can literally count on one hand, rest assured a 1080p KRP-500M is night and day compared to your 4K one.. in favor of the 1080p.
You're arguing science and mathematics mate. You think those charts are made by GAF users?
Doctor Hades
Member
The problem with 4K and 8K is that even on high-end super-expensive PCs developers are having to resort to using resolution scaling "cheats" such as FSR or NVIDIA's DLSS, to be able to run the games, especially with ray-tracing. On the consoles, the situation is even worse because both the Xbox Series X and PS5 are basically the equivalent of mid-range PC.
What irks me is that as the consoles become more powerful, there is a jump in screen resolutions so instead of being able to render more detailed games with better physics and A.I. etc, the target moves to supporting a higher resolution at 30 fps and lower ones at 60 fps, often without ray-tracing on consoles unless you enjoy 30 fps experiences. I'd just got used to 720p on Xbox 360/PS3 and 1080p on Xbox One (well perhaps more like 900p...)/PS4 and now we have 4K, not that the PS5 or the Xbox Series X are powerful enough to support all games natively at this resolution!
I think there comes a point of diminishing returns though. 4K is absolutely fine for up to 65" TVs (I have a 55" TV myself) and even then I'd argue that from a normal viewing distance it is sometimes hard for me to see the difference between upscaled 1800p and native 4K. 8K is only really viable for really large TVs in excess of 75" in my opinion and then it depends on your viewing distance. I guess there will come a point when 8K TVs are the only option available regardless of screen size but, right now, the lack of actual 8K content and the fact that on smaller screens the differences are harder to see over 4K (unless you intentionally scrutinise the screen up close!) makes 8K TVs a complete waste of money in my view. By the time, 8K does become mainstream and well-supported, including NetFlix, Sky Q and terrestrial TV, then such TVs will be cheaper and much better tech-wise. It makes no sense to invest in 8K now and that is almost certainly why neither the Xbox Series X nor the PS5 support it yet.
Personally, I'd be happy to stick with 4K for the next decade due to the limit on how big a screen I can have (55"). I would rather future consoles used the extra power to display better graphics and higher framerates at 4K then have a lesser quality game running at 8K. I suspect the TV manufacturer's keep pushing for higher resolution displays to keep enticing people to upgrade their TVs. It's the same thing that has happened with mobile phones so people feel forced to keep upgrading every few years.
What irks me is that as the consoles become more powerful, there is a jump in screen resolutions so instead of being able to render more detailed games with better physics and A.I. etc, the target moves to supporting a higher resolution at 30 fps and lower ones at 60 fps, often without ray-tracing on consoles unless you enjoy 30 fps experiences. I'd just got used to 720p on Xbox 360/PS3 and 1080p on Xbox One (well perhaps more like 900p...)/PS4 and now we have 4K, not that the PS5 or the Xbox Series X are powerful enough to support all games natively at this resolution!
I think there comes a point of diminishing returns though. 4K is absolutely fine for up to 65" TVs (I have a 55" TV myself) and even then I'd argue that from a normal viewing distance it is sometimes hard for me to see the difference between upscaled 1800p and native 4K. 8K is only really viable for really large TVs in excess of 75" in my opinion and then it depends on your viewing distance. I guess there will come a point when 8K TVs are the only option available regardless of screen size but, right now, the lack of actual 8K content and the fact that on smaller screens the differences are harder to see over 4K (unless you intentionally scrutinise the screen up close!) makes 8K TVs a complete waste of money in my view. By the time, 8K does become mainstream and well-supported, including NetFlix, Sky Q and terrestrial TV, then such TVs will be cheaper and much better tech-wise. It makes no sense to invest in 8K now and that is almost certainly why neither the Xbox Series X nor the PS5 support it yet.
Personally, I'd be happy to stick with 4K for the next decade due to the limit on how big a screen I can have (55"). I would rather future consoles used the extra power to display better graphics and higher framerates at 4K then have a lesser quality game running at 8K. I suspect the TV manufacturer's keep pushing for higher resolution displays to keep enticing people to upgrade their TVs. It's the same thing that has happened with mobile phones so people feel forced to keep upgrading every few years.
Last edited:
MilkyJoe
Member
I don't give a shit what the science of this random chart say, when you turn on your new TV and say "woo that looks a lot better than my old 1080p" then you can rest assured that you can trust in your eyes rather than a rickerty old chart off the internet and I'm pretty sure my Samsung Q90 has a better picture than some old plasma from eons ago.
Bankai
Member
"looks a lot better" isn't just about resolution, it's also about contrast, motion resolution and much more factors that come into play.
This topic is about resolution, not image-quality in its entirety.
MilkyJoe
Member
Go and run a 4K tech demo on a 1080p monitor then go and run it on a 4k panel. Is this the cataracts society ?
IFireflyl
Gold Member
You're comparing apples to oranges. Not all screens are created equally, even when they're using the same resolution. Run that test just using 1080p resolution on your 4k screen and it will still look better than the 1080p screen because the screen itself is better quality.
Last edited:
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Size and viewing distance is the only valid answer.
1440p is ridiculous for the Steamd Deck, for example.
1440p is ridiculous for the Steamd Deck, for example.
yurinka
Member
I'd prefer to stay in 4K but ensuring native 4K at 60fps + full, complete, photorealistic RT global illumination/shading/reflections with all bells & whistles with top tier quality and a 120fps option not looking that badass.
Most people don't/won/t have 100" or bigger tvs and aren't sitting more than 4 meters away from the tvs so they won't notice the differences with a 8K or higher tv. And in any case, scaling from native 4K to higher resolutions (8K/16K...) with a dedicated scaling chip and modern upscaling techniques would be easy and people wouldn't see the difference.
Most people don't/won/t have 100" or bigger tvs and aren't sitting more than 4 meters away from the tvs so they won't notice the differences with a 8K or higher tv. And in any case, scaling from native 4K to higher resolutions (8K/16K...) with a dedicated scaling chip and modern upscaling techniques would be easy and people wouldn't see the difference.
Last edited:
nkarafo
Member
Depends on size/distance. I feel like 4K is the "eye limit" for screens under 40 inch. After that, you wouldn't see a difference unless you were too close to examine the pixels.
Personally i don't care about resolution anymore. I wish developers and manufacturers cared more about motion instead of the quality of still images. 120hz TVs and VRR being pushed is a step to the right direction but motion blur is still a huge issue that has been ignored completely since CRTs were abandoned.
Personally i don't care about resolution anymore. I wish developers and manufacturers cared more about motion instead of the quality of still images. 120hz TVs and VRR being pushed is a step to the right direction but motion blur is still a huge issue that has been ignored completely since CRTs were abandoned.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
I could not agree more.
Don't Be Fooled. 8K TVs Are A Waste Of Money For Most Viewers
What's on the screen and what your eyes can see are two different things.
There is no reason to move into 8k for the next decade or so.
Yeah I'd say that chart is about right. You need to be MUCH closer to a 4k screen than is commonly supposed to get the full benefit.
I sit about 7ft from my 65 inch OLED and the difference between native 4k and 1440p is pretty hard to notice.
You can see from those figures how ridiculous the idea of an 8k tv really is. A typical lounge would require something like a 15ft screen to really make it worth it. That's 180".
It's just stupid. Stop it. Stop it now.
Pagusas
Elden Member
4k UI elements with AI upscaled world rendering is perfect moving forward. Resolution DOES have a place in Imagine Quality, but we have reached diminished returns for sure. That being said, I game at near native 4k all the time on PC, I spend a lot of money to do so, and on my 82" screen the difference between 1080p and 4k is extremely apparent. 4k/60 is the sweet spot to me right now, though i do drop to 1440p for 120hz play for some games, the IQ drop is worth it in some rare instances.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
I think we should stick with 1440p until we have lighting, effects and geometry like real life, then we can worry about higher resolution.
Soodanim
Gold Member
Vick
I think that the viewing distance graphs are for regular content and don't apply to games, which is what we should be talking about. With games you're going to see the differences more, which is why we have so much post-processing/anti-aliasing to help.That's why there's such a contrast in views - people are discussing two different things.
I've read that when you hit 8k, your brain starts to interpret things as 3D in a real way because the resolution is so high/natural looking.
As for whether there should be a push for 8K as early as next gen, I don't think it's feasible to go for true 8k. The rendering requirements jump by 4x, but hardware doesn't jump by 4x to match it. Don't forget that we're not consistently hitting true 4K on consoles yet, we're using upscaling tech to bridge the gap. Walk before you can run, and all that.
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd
Member
Sneakysnake
Banned
Well it depends on the size of the screen and your viewing distance.
ABnormal
Member
Of course, but even from close distance, if the image is clean, it's very good. I would not trade any advancement in rendering for additional resolution, past 4k.
Hayabusa83
Banned
I am willing to pay money for a powerful console that can display native HD resolutions, not checkerboard bullshit.
IFireflyl
Gold Member
Last edited:
RoadHazard
Gold Member
4K is more than enough for regular size TVs. Although I guess what's a "regular" size keeps going up. If we're all gonna have 88" TVs in the future 8K might be relevant. But for 55-77" at typical viewing distances there is no reason for higher than 4K.
I think even at 4K many games have quite a bit shimmering edges, aliasing and other artifacts that could be better resolved with increased rendering resolution. There are other techniques as well but resolution always helps if we have the horsepower for it.
I think we will not see widespread use of 8K very soon, but there already are games that downsample to 4K, DF made video about The Touryst downsampling from 8K to 4K in PS5
In longer term I think 16K can be useful in PC desktop use and 8K in usual TV watching distances.
I think we will not see widespread use of 8K very soon, but there already are games that downsample to 4K, DF made video about The Touryst downsampling from 8K to 4K in PS5
In longer term I think 16K can be useful in PC desktop use and 8K in usual TV watching distances.
Last edited:
Fare thee well
Neophyte
I'm all for more if....
1) we can even buy the consoles/GPUs for it
2) FPS can smoothly operate at 100 or more with said resolution.
I actually trashed my 4k screen because with its low FPS I couldnt compete in racing games, shooter games, or anything else requiring speed and precision. Hell even in Red Dead 2 I don't ever have to use deadeye for headshots or aiming in general. I love my 144hz 1440p ultrawide screen.
1) we can even buy the consoles/GPUs for it
2) FPS can smoothly operate at 100 or more with said resolution.
I actually trashed my 4k screen because with its low FPS I couldnt compete in racing games, shooter games, or anything else requiring speed and precision. Hell even in Red Dead 2 I don't ever have to use deadeye for headshots or aiming in general. I love my 144hz 1440p ultrawide screen.
UniformDeliverance
Member
These exact posts started popping up when the ps4 Pro and Xbox one X were announced. With people upset that so much energy was being spent pushing 4k over other performance vectors.
Here’s the deal. Video game consoles should and will always adapt to the latest tv technology. Video game consoles are meant to last 5+ years, so Sony and Microsoft have and will continue to make them forward looking, supporting technology that might not be wildly adopted at launch, but could be very common years into a consumers time with the console.
So to that end, yes. If we start to see more adoption of 8k displays, I would certainly expect my gaming consoles to support that.
Here’s the deal. Video game consoles should and will always adapt to the latest tv technology. Video game consoles are meant to last 5+ years, so Sony and Microsoft have and will continue to make them forward looking, supporting technology that might not be wildly adopted at launch, but could be very common years into a consumers time with the console.
So to that end, yes. If we start to see more adoption of 8k displays, I would certainly expect my gaming consoles to support that.
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
Well my TV is 43” Samsung 4K TV and the room I play my games is not big so I relatively sit close to my TV when playing games.
PerfectDark
Banned
Consoles don't even do 4k. I have a rtx 3080 pc, ps5, series x. Consoles have such low quality on games that go close to 4k that it doesnt even look good. That would be like putting every video setting on the lowest on my pc just to say its in 8k.
Similar threads
- Poll