-
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 it still ok to purchase 1080p TV's or should I go 4K?
- Thread starter Shadowhaxor
- Start date
Aztechnology
Member
As someone who owns an IPS 144hz Freesync monitor with the Asus MG279Q alongside my KS8000 I have to say while I agree on how important the smoothness and responsiveness that 100hz+ brings it doesn't Trump PQ for me so I can't really agree fully. I just want these TV's to support 120hz. They have the panels, why the hell don't they.
soundscream
Member
Thats the argument though. For the prices most of the bargin 4k TVs are going for you can get a better quality and larger 1080p TV. If your looking for a TV thats going to be your main TV it makes sense to wait. But if you would be looking to rotate the TV to another room in a year or 2, buying a really good 1080p TV makes sense.
TetraGenesis
Member
You sound like you hold onto TVs for a long time. Get a 4K. You'll need to future-proof. 1080p is already slowing creeping in pro irrelevance. It'll be a long time but you don't want to be left behind for the next five or six years.
For pricing, I quote a post I made in another thread just moments ago:
You can get the 49" for just $650 that way. This TV will last you a long time. It's a great investment, OP.
For pricing, I quote a post I made in another thread just moments ago:
You can get the 49" for just $650 that way. This TV will last you a long time. It's a great investment, OP.
The 55" Samsung KS8000 can be had for under $1000 now, so price-wise they're starting to hit the sweet spot. This does seem to be that "in-between" season though. Next year you probably wouldn't consider 1080p anymore. You can benefit from it out of the gate with Netflix, Amazon, and a few other things if you care. It comes down to a budget question I guess.
Douche McBaggins The 3rd
Junior Member
That's with the assumption that what you are viewing is NATIVE content. ANY sort of upscaling is going to raise that ms rating. And that's only the ms reading from console to picture. What about controller lag? Wireless interference? Enabling HDR? The upscaler in the tv itself? You can't just look at that as a baseline and go HURP NO LAGGINS. There's a lot of other factors you need to look at.
And clear motion or whatever that crap looks like shit. I'd rather have a plasma with the 2500 sub field drive as a bare minimum along with natural 600 hertz to make a true conversion with films 24 frames per second. A LED or 4k tv will never do a proper 24 frame conversion since it doesn't go into a multiple properly.
BlitzerRadic
Member
LED TVs have been doing this for a while. They display each frame 5 times for 120hz or 10 times for 240hz. Unless you are talking about something else.
Certainly more viable than what 3D ever was.
Yep, go 55" perfect size in my opinion. That price is a steal... and the TV is fairly "future proof". Definitely has some negatives but overall for the price there isnt a better TV.
Certainly nothing amazing but the Samung KS8000 is certainly very viable when it comes to input lag.
Anyone advocating buying a 1080p TV now for any purpose is talking out of their hole or are desperately trying to convince themselves that 4K and HDR are not something they need. There are great 4K TV options at low end (Samsung KU6300), low/mid end (Sony XD800D) and mid end (Samsung KS8000) that don't have additional lag with HDR enabled.
Douche McBaggins The 3rd
Junior Member
Anyone playing fighting games and advocating upscaling isn't serious about the genre. Any upscaling shots on muscle memory. I keep crts just for the times I have the urge for my old games. Fighting games are ruined by upscaling.
the_batman
Banned
4K TVs still have to improve by a lot to get to where they want to be, and the price is only going to get lower.
DangerMouse
Member
This. Especially with Netflix and Amazon already making pretty much all of their shows in 4K HDR and 4K Blu-rays coming of pretty much all new big movies (besides Disney yet). There's now plenty of content.
1080p games look great on many of these and he could even get a taste of HDR for games on his existing OG PS4 until getting a Pro which will no doubt get even better now that it will be part of the dev cycle in testing and not just back patches.
HDMI 2.0 does not have enough bandwidth for 4K @ 120 Hz and even with DisplayPort you need DP 1.3 or 1.4. If you would want to throw HDR on top of that it would require even more.
Highly doubtful. The image quality at 4K is significantly better than 1080p. I say this as the owner of a VT60. Now whether or not there is enough 4K content to justify the cost that is debatable.
Looking at the responses here, I'm thinking maybe getting either a new budget 1080p or a used 1080p TV from someone upgrading might be a better deal.
I think it'll be 2-3 more years until 4K/HDR really standardize and hit their stride--and until more content is available--but I want a larger TV now because I'm moving into a bigger living room. Thing is, I'm upgrading from a Sony 720p TV, so I'll get a resolution boost no matter what.
Meanwhile, I still watch TV the old-fashioned way (FiOS), and I'm not interested in streaming Netflix/Hulu, so content above 1080p is likely many years away. Last I checked, most broadcasts are still 1080i at best.
I think it'll be 2-3 more years until 4K/HDR really standardize and hit their stride--and until more content is available--but I want a larger TV now because I'm moving into a bigger living room. Thing is, I'm upgrading from a Sony 720p TV, so I'll get a resolution boost no matter what.
Meanwhile, I still watch TV the old-fashioned way (FiOS), and I'm not interested in streaming Netflix/Hulu, so content above 1080p is likely many years away. Last I checked, most broadcasts are still 1080i at best.
Aztechnology
Member
I meant for 1080p. I'm aware hdmi 2.0 doesn't have the bandwidth. I meant for future TV or Samsung Box revisions with new a HDMI revision. Or...Just Display port, for the love of god. Can you image, DP 1.4, supports adaptive sync maybe even XD.
The industry still using HDMI as a standard sucks.
ss_lemonade
Member
I believe the vizio p series TVs support 120hz @ 1080p, just not at 4:4:4
Aztechnology
Member
Everything except for the 50" does. However the 60inch is IPS, which means you have to hit 65" to get the feature, and the TV doesn't support 4:4:4 at all. If it did I probably would have gotten a Vizio already. They went forward in some ways since my 2015 series one, and backwards in others. Overall a good step forward, but just are feature incomplete for me. Honestly in addition there's no reason why TV's shouldn't have Display Port or a new HDMI revision already. The bandwidth limitations suck.
ss_lemonade
Member
I wonder if weak >60hz support is just a thing because manufacturers do not see it as an important feature. Just like how some do not make low inpug lag a priority.
Aztechnology
Member
The TV and other large display industries absolutely focus on Home Theatre enthusiasts. I think you are right on the head there. Gaming has grown immensely in importance and should recieve much more attention, especially given some of the display tech's created for it like Adaptive sync that can seriously help solve judder issues. However, the industry drags ass and is generally proliferated by older professionals who spent their years focusing on home viewership of films, TV and now streaming content.
Polioliolio
Member
Get a bigger 1080. They're a fraction of the cost, so no harm done.
Tried asking this in the Canadian deals thread, but it's more of a general TV question (and it quickly got buried) -- I have an old Sony KDL-32L4000 (32", 720p) and was thinking maybe it was time to upgrade. But I'd like to be as much of a cheapskate as possible, so I'm looking at the doorcrashers:
Sharp 40" - Best Buy, $250
or
Westinghouse 40" - Walmart, $200
I'm going to see if I can look at them in person today, but I'd assume the jump from 32"->40" and 720p->1080p be so significant that even doorcrasher specials would be a decent upgrade.
The only other possible option would be this guy -- it's 4K, has HDR, but would be twice as much as the others (it would cost me $450 on Black Friday). I also only stream video through my PS3, so 4K + HDR are both things I'd never really see the advantage of. And honestly, I think $300 is probably my cutoff.
So, would one of those two doorcrashers not be the worst decision?
... or do I wait for Boxing Day and hope the <$300 options are better then these?
(... or get a <$400 Sylvania or VIZIO set from Amazon?
Sharp 40" - Best Buy, $250
or
Westinghouse 40" - Walmart, $200
I'm going to see if I can look at them in person today, but I'd assume the jump from 32"->40" and 720p->1080p be so significant that even doorcrasher specials would be a decent upgrade.
The only other possible option would be this guy -- it's 4K, has HDR, but would be twice as much as the others (it would cost me $450 on Black Friday). I also only stream video through my PS3, so 4K + HDR are both things I'd never really see the advantage of. And honestly, I think $300 is probably my cutoff.
So, would one of those two doorcrashers not be the worst decision?
... or do I wait for Boxing Day and hope the <$300 options are better then these?
(... or get a <$400 Sylvania or VIZIO set from Amazon?
DarkChronic
Member
I use a 1080p 60 inch screen for my PC and consoles currently.
Waiting for the drop in prices for OLED before I make the plunge. I'm in no rush. Content is so scarce. Silly to waste the money on it now. And I don't want to do a "minor" upgrade to an LED 4K screen when I know something better is out there. I would be kicking myself if I bought a KS8000 only to see 2 years later the OLEDS have gone down in price. Then I'd have to upgrade again.
Just doesn't make sense to me right now.
Waiting for the drop in prices for OLED before I make the plunge. I'm in no rush. Content is so scarce. Silly to waste the money on it now. And I don't want to do a "minor" upgrade to an LED 4K screen when I know something better is out there. I would be kicking myself if I bought a KS8000 only to see 2 years later the OLEDS have gone down in price. Then I'd have to upgrade again.
Just doesn't make sense to me right now.
I'd go with the Westinghouse, it's got built in wifi and smart tv stuff and the Sharp doesn't. It seems to be the better value.
I had an early 1080p LCD from Westinghouse that lasted me for about 10 years before I started having issues.
Absolutely. I've lamented the lack of gaming TVs for years. We are still stuck with getting lucky if a TV has a game mode that has low input lag whereas I want to see high refresh rates, adaptive sync or G-Sync. Those would do a lot for console gaming too which probably even supports adaptive sync over HDMI at least in the PS4 Pro but it's most likely not a feature that is enabled.
You'd think with the amount of PS4s and Xboxes in the world being able to sell a TV to all of those guys would be a fairly decent business move.
DreadfulOmen
Member
then 2 years later oleds go down in price again, then 2 years after that prices go down again.
Aztechnology
Member
I'm fascinated to see how they react to what I imagine is a very good year for 4k. Hopefully analysts attribute it properly, because I bet a huge chunk are gamers.
Aztechnology
Member
I'm pretty sure there is not. Were you hoping to save some money by going 1080p? The manufacturimg process doesn't really increase the cost much on their end so it wouldn't be a big difference even if there was.
4k will display 1080p pretty much perfectly as it's a perfect ratio for upscaling, so that isn't an issue either.
Nope i wasn't hoping that. So there is obviously no reason for another FullHD TV for me. I planned going 4K next year in Q1 anyway.
But its not the standard now. If it were ill say buy a 4k tv but its not specially for gaming.
wesleyshark
Banned
That's my plan. I have a 40" 1080p from 2007 haha. I want a 55", but the current 4k market is a mess. There's 2, maybe 3 decent options but even then they aren't perfect. I don't think we'll see a solid 4k market until next Fall, if not later.
soundscream
Member
When I said quality I meant build quality not picture quality.
Son.Ralph.Funk
Member
I was chatting with someone in another forum, and from what they told me, the United States doesn't even have 4k cable service yet. We've had it in my country for a couple of years now. I was shocked to hear this. So if you're American, I might just go 1080.
Bought this for my parents yesterday. They wanted $628 in store, but price matched to Walmart.com for $477.99. Its picture is way better than their old 1080p Toshiba even when comparing the same 1080p input. It's also much smarter than I expected for the price.
FalsettoVibe
Member
There is not reason to by yesterday's tech when 4k is so cheap now. I bet that the people saying not to go 4k, probably dont even have 4k sets. My 4k OLED is awesome.
This is a pretty dumb question probably, but is there a noticeable negative picture quality difference when going from let's say a 40" 1080 screen to a 70"+ 1080 screen? Or any size for that matter. I have a really old, but great, 40" from Samsung, one of the very first quality 1080p screens, but it might soon be time to upgrade. Don't you need more pixels the bigger the area of the screen is, so a higher resolution has the advantage? Or am I thinking about this the wrong way?