Exactly this, if i will be able to scale it from 1080p without image quality loss, i'm in, otherwise sorry, but FPS is more important in the end for me. I love downscaling, but not in cost of framerate.
-
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.
new 4K monitors @ CES: Will it become the next PC standard?
- Thread starter ScepticMatt
- Start date
Exactly this, if i will be able to scale it from 1080p without image quality loss, i'm in, otherwise sorry, but FPS is more important in the end for me. I love downscaling, but not in cost of framerate.
console peasant
16:10 is the closest to the golden ratio. 16:9 is absolutely horseshit for any PC use, it's too wide.
For me, 16:9 is just over the verge of being too flat. 16:10 covers my eyesight perfectly.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
It might, but not for another ten or twenty years. It's not worth buying the hardware you need to drive 4k with solid framerates right now. You'd be better off with 3D or 120Hz.
"Better off", isn't that kind of subjective. 120hz or 3D doesn't improve my image quality.
Exactly, losing orientation and having to turn head kills multitasking and fast scroll reading. I am very fast user, i hate crap software design and lag.
ScepticMatt
Member
I just read on AVS forums that LG uses IGZO for it's OLED-TVs.
So I think they should be able to make 4k OLEDs
So I think they should be able to make 4k OLEDs
exactly. Which is why games running at 1080p look sharper on a 21" display than they do on a 27" display.
I much prefer 16:9, and I have a 16:10 monitor.
$2500
Yeah, 16:9 just needs to go die in a fire. Massive chunk of screen real estate being cut off compared to 16:10.
Yup, also my golden limit.
Yup, also my golden limit.
How do you know this ? That is highly unlikely at this point, 1080p is a given.
How do YOU know this?
The devs themselves have been saying it. The focus will be on adding more bells and whistles rather than focusing on getting a higher resolution.
And also looks ugly because it feels like the top and bottom are cut out like a cheesy movie style screen. Blyak
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Well, your name used to be Dennis4k. But that's about how much people would spend on upgrades trying to keep up with that res over the next decade, unless they made huge compromises on framerates or settings. And I consider anything under 60 locked to be a huge compromise.
AstroNut325
Member
Source?
Well, I dont know at what resolution a 20/20 eye sight operate, but you can really see details in stuff. Like insane. A human eye can look at sand, and see each separate grain of sand.
I wonder if we will ever get that resolution.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
They might as well just push 4K Projectors. Very few people sit close enough to their TVs that they can discern the difference between 1080P and 720P, and it would be financial suicide to make content catered to 2160P.
The enthusiast market might be overjoyed, but if that segment actually bought enough hardware to be relevant stuff like the Vita would be selling better.
The enthusiast market might be overjoyed, but if that segment actually bought enough hardware to be relevant stuff like the Vita would be selling better.
I'd say it's a given. By the time those consoles are out prices will be at mainstream level. Look how fast the prices on 1080p displays dropped going from the start of this gen.
Goldrusher
Member
There is no PC standard.
Never was, never will be.
3D PC games run at any resolution you want.
Never was, never will be.
3D PC games run at any resolution you want.
ScepticMatt
Member
capable of outputting a 4k signal, probably
capable of playing next gen visuals at 4k, no (9x more pixels compared to 720p)
AstroNut325
Member
If that comes to fruition then I will be going PC exclusive. I might get PS4 if GT6 pisses all over Project Cars. But otherwise... no thanks.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
How odd
They're going to spend every 5-10 years when the bulb burns out or the caps go or the kid chucks a Wiimote through it or they just feel like treating themselves. 4k sets are already $6500ish for a 55-inch in Japan; (yield-based?) issues with an overseas launch aside, in a couple years they're going to be a standard premium product, and by the end of the next console gen 1080p and 1440p is going to be like 720p now--you're going to be hard-pressed to find it in anything but low-end laptops and TVs that come in a plain cardboard box labeled "TV".
As for what exactly new consoles do, 4k is likely to be MORE useful if they cling to 720p+effects; a big advantage of 4k sets is that they can display 720p pixel-tripled and 1080p pixel-doubled, rather than the terrible vaseline effect you get from consoles now where the console scales from 3/2 anamorphic 540p to 720p and then your TV scales from 720p to 768p or 1080p.
Coders? Why? Do they really need a smooth edge on a and <?
I would think its more for gamers or designers
Higher resolution, duh. That higher res allows for more text on the screen lol
More text, easier to stare at for
Well I dont know about that, there is a bare minimum at which you can see the actual text. If you have a bigger resolution but the same size of text, its pretty useless because all you have is text using more pixels.
But yeah, I agree that having more readable text by screen can help a lot.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
Tiny text all over the place. Most coder workstations have 27 inch 1440 monitors. It just makes you more efficient.
True, but it depends on the size of the monitor too and the person viewing it. I can stare a really tiny text and read it with no problem as long as it's clear, some others can't.
ScepticMatt
Member
Well, Sony just showed a 4K 56" OLED TV
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/7/3845586/sony-4k-oled-tv-confirmed
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/7/3845586/sony-4k-oled-tv-confirmed
Nappuccino
Member
Blu-Ray better look acceptable on these monitors.
ScepticMatt
Member
@Nappuccino: Well, Sony is going to release 4K BluRay and video streams.
Blu-ray on a 4k monitor will look identical to Blu-ray on a 1080p monitor, if unprocessed.
TyrantGuardian
Member
Man, who cares about 4K at 36"+ screens. What we need is 4K at 24". All about that pixel density.
legacyzero
Banned
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
The living room is a whole different subject. I don't think PC gamers will be that eager to jump in, considering how bad the upscaling is on LCD monitors. $4k is also on the low end for trying to maintain a high end PC for ten years. $4k on GPUs alone would be a conservative estimate unless there's some major breakthrough.
Plus, on the whole desktops are decreasing in popularity and notebooks are gaining ground. Those are definitely in no shape to drive 4k and a lot of them are still 720p. A good 70% of people in the Steam hardware survey are under 1080p, and there is little to no growth at 1080p and over.
Wouldn't the push for PC 4k standardization have a somewhat negative impact for the next few years, until GPU's are massively more powerful than today's best? Also, even as these cards are notably increasing in power with every new model, RAM speed and memory bandwidth aren't necessarily advancing at the same pace. That'll be a real issue that may take quite a while to solve if targeting 4k.
It's like everything top developers & middleware vendors were just recently boasting about - with their new engines and stuff - will be pretty much impossible at those crazy resolutions, while still maintaining the performance and features/FX that they were planning to wow everyone with.
Things were just now starting to get very exciting in the world of GPU performance and where graphics are going. I don't see many developers trading in all that just for a resolution bump.
Then there's the practical side to it all. While there's no argument that 4k on PC will allow more vivid IQ, it's just not going to be as noticeable as on very large screen TVs, which currently have worst dpi than PC screens. Given all that, it's asking developers to displace a heck of a lot of GPU power, for such little gain.
I think 4k PC standard(for everything besides games) could be another 2 years away. For games, however, I don't even want to imagine when.
It's like everything top developers & middleware vendors were just recently boasting about - with their new engines and stuff - will be pretty much impossible at those crazy resolutions, while still maintaining the performance and features/FX that they were planning to wow everyone with.
Things were just now starting to get very exciting in the world of GPU performance and where graphics are going. I don't see many developers trading in all that just for a resolution bump.
Then there's the practical side to it all. While there's no argument that 4k on PC will allow more vivid IQ, it's just not going to be as noticeable as on very large screen TVs, which currently have worst dpi than PC screens. Given all that, it's asking developers to displace a heck of a lot of GPU power, for such little gain.
I think 4k PC standard(for everything besides games) could be another 2 years away. For games, however, I don't even want to imagine when.
I Stalk Alone
Member
A 4k monitor has to have 120hz and 0 input lag and great scaling for me to consider it for gaming. If even one of those are missing then it is not even worth it for gaming for me as it will be somewhat of a downgrade in user experience. For gaming i need fast response, smooth motion and great image quality before any bump in resolution is considered.