Decontamination Silo
Banned
I can see a difference, but currently the res difference is not worth the cost of a new GPU. I will upgrade when I can no longer get 1080p60 with good settings.
Last edited:
-
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.
[PSA] If you can't see a noticeable difference between 1080p and native 4K, then you sit too far from your TV.
- Thread starter Dust-by-Monday
- Start date
PeteBull
Member
Got 1080p tv for my ps4, once i upgrade console i will upgrade the tv to at least 55incher and i will keep 2-2,5m distance.
On my pc i sit about 0,5m from 32 inch 4k screen and even tho my eyesight isnt amazing, i still see clear difference between 1080p and 4k, less but still visible difference between 1440p and 4k, almost no difference(would have to compare screenies and specifically look for sharp edges/telling signs) between 1800p and 4k.
I feel the ppl who saying they cant tell the difference between 4k and full hd are usually not experienced in recognising this stuff, very often take some checkboarderd/drs 4k for native 4k and then ofc difference isnt big, on top ofc they often have bad glasses/need new glasses or/and sit too far from the tv.
In the end tho framerate is always the king, i would 100x prefer 1080p stable 60fps than 8k 30fps with dips even tho if u compare actual graphis power to run those 2 its about 8x more power needed for 2nd option.
On my pc i sit about 0,5m from 32 inch 4k screen and even tho my eyesight isnt amazing, i still see clear difference between 1080p and 4k, less but still visible difference between 1440p and 4k, almost no difference(would have to compare screenies and specifically look for sharp edges/telling signs) between 1800p and 4k.
I feel the ppl who saying they cant tell the difference between 4k and full hd are usually not experienced in recognising this stuff, very often take some checkboarderd/drs 4k for native 4k and then ofc difference isnt big, on top ofc they often have bad glasses/need new glasses or/and sit too far from the tv.
In the end tho framerate is always the king, i would 100x prefer 1080p stable 60fps than 8k 30fps with dips even tho if u compare actual graphis power to run those 2 its about 8x more power needed for 2nd option.
Mister Wolf
Member
5-7 feet from the TV is my desired distance. You definitely should be able to see the difference between the resolutions playing on a big screen.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
It's not altered it was shot that way @120fps
It also compressed compared to the UHD Blu-ray version
Depending on the source they will look good on any screen.
For example a Prores Master at 480p can look as good as 1080p but a general 480p video will look like shit on a HD screen
Plus Gemini Man was shot on the ARRI Alexa it's gonna look good regardless
Tqaulity
Member
1. Because it's pretty much impossible to get a TV these days (especially at 77") that is NOT 4K. That said, I am a technophile and will always strive to get the highest spec piece of technology. There are other aspects of modern 4K TVs that are desirable like the extensive HDR options, upscaling of lower resolution sources (Blu-Ray, Cable etc), and general premium designs. But having had a 4K TV for 5 years now and viewed all types of content on it, I'm not going to be disillusioned in thinking that the difference in viewing 4K is nearly as big as going from SD to Full HD for example. It's there, but not drastic in my environment from the distance I am sitting
2. Yes thanks for calling that out. My mistake, console is doing the upscaling for games and outputting the full 4K frame buffer.
Cyberpunkd
Member
That is true but the optimal distance is not feasible, it’s something like 2.5m for 65 inch TV. That’s a massive screen straight in your face.
Kuranghi
Member
Its not really a great comparison though, a shite (comparitively) contrast/brightness monitor panel vs. a bloody OLED TV panel. The massively increased contrast/dimming capabilities of the OLED panel will make the same image at the same resolution look sharper to your eyes, even with that huge screen size difference.
The difference between 1440p and 2160p on a 77" display is really massive ime.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
I could clearly see how sharp 4k was even when I had 27" monitor.
Check out the difference on clock text. Same text and icons size (matched with scaling).
(ctrl wheel down to make it a bit smaller to seethe clock)
Generaly, 27" 4k was super impressive.
hard to see on old picture but Dark Souls 3 looks amazing at 4k.
And now? Cmon. I wouldn't want 1080p on that. 4k is pretty good since you don't sit as close as you do to normal monitor.
In fact, at least 4k is usable with only 150% scaling now. Previously everything was super small.
And DPI does not look tooooo bad: (different wallpaper, not the best pic)
And look: 4k is really beneficial. Small detail are all sharp and do not shimmer
Check out the difference on clock text. Same text and icons size (matched with scaling).
Generaly, 27" 4k was super impressive.
hard to see on old picture but Dark Souls 3 looks amazing at 4k.
And now? Cmon. I wouldn't want 1080p on that. 4k is pretty good since you don't sit as close as you do to normal monitor.
In fact, at least 4k is usable with only 150% scaling now. Previously everything was super small.
And DPI does not look tooooo bad: (different wallpaper, not the best pic)
And look: 4k is really beneficial. Small detail are all sharp and do not shimmer
Last edited:
StateofMajora
Banned
Or you need glasses
Krappadizzle
Member
I could clearly see how sharp 4k was even when I had 27" monitor.
Check out the difference on clock text. Same text and icons size (matched with scaling).
(ctrl wheel down to make it a bit smaller to seethe clock)
Generaly, 27" 4k was super impressive.
hard to see on old picture but Dark Souls 3 looks amazing at 4k.
And now? Cmon. I wouldn't want 1080p on that. 4k is pretty good since you don't sit as close as you do to normal monitor.
In fact, at least 4k is usable with only 150% scaling now. Previously everything was super small.
And DPI does not look tooooo bad: (different wallpaper, not the best pic)
And look: 4k is really beneficial. Small detail are all sharp and do not shimmer
That setup is HILARIOUS, you're like ERGONMICS? WHO NEEDS 'EM! Your neck will be pretty sorry in about 5-10 years.
Pegasus Actual
Member
Yeah, a 1440p monitor looks great. At least my 27" does.
I seriously doubt an inch would make a difference.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
It is perfectly fine. That's 48" oled.
I have it for almost a year. It is more ergonomic than slouching over a fucking small monitor, that's for sure.
You can lean back with a controller, every detail is nicely visible and it's super immersive.
I can see whole screen perfectly fine.
People saying it's bad ergonomics need to stop listening to what their mothers said. In fact you sit a bit further away from this than 27" monitor. So at no point, my eyes need to focus closer than then did on 27".
And why would moving my head around cause neck pain? Don't humans use their heads? Besides... It doesn't happen. Everything is awesome and visible
To be honest - after 3 days I got just as used to it as any new monitor in the first few days. Remember, we all used to say "wow this is huge" looking at our new 23" monitors in 2008
edit: one thing - it could be a bit higher. My head is at 2/3rd of the height so tiny bit too high. But it's not too bad
Last edited:
Warablo
Member
That's exactly what I had to do to read these tiny texts that are in every game now. Finally got glasses.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
So IGN was right. As long as Insit back far enough, resolution doesn't matter.
"Mothers" aka all the ergonomic science for the past 20-30 years.It is perfectly fine. That's 48" oled.
I have it for almost a year. It is more ergonomic than slouching over a fucking small monitor, that's for sure.
You can lean back with a controller, every detail is nicely visible and it's super immersive.
I can see whole screen perfectly fine.
People saying it's bad ergonomics need to stop listening to what their mothers said. In fact you sit a bit further away from this than 27" monitor. So at no point, my eyes need to focus closer than then did on 27".
And why would moving my head around cause neck pain? Don't humans use their heads? Besides... It doesn't happen. Everything is awesome and visible
To be honest - after 3 days I got just as used to it as any new monitor in the first few days. Remember, we all used to say "wow this is huge" looking at our new 23" monitors in 2008
edit: one thing - it could be a bit higher. My head is at 2/3rd of the height so tiny bit too high. But it's not too bad
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
I am telling you - it is perfectly ergonomic and better for my eyes than sitting closer to smaller screen was. And the chair is doing a lot of work."Mothers" aka all the ergonomic science for the past 20-30 years.
And one more thing - it is fucking awesome and everyone needs to play the evil withing 2 at night on huge oled with lights off
bentanchorbolt
Banned
Not really. There are two things at play here if you don't notice a difference between 1080p native content on a 1080p display versus 4k native content on a 4k display. You are either sitting too far from the television OR your eyesight
is poor.
Also:
Suffice to say thanks to this user for pointing it out, pixel density also plays a part here. I should have stated that size being equal between the two above sets.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
Seriously.
I'd have to upgrade for a 75-85" TV in order to see a difference in fidelity from my sitting spot (currently have a 50")
8BiTw0LF
Banned
You forgot the most important part - inches/size of screens.
1080p on a 24" is better than 4K on 55"
8BiTw0LF
Banned
It is.Oh right because this is clearly 1080p.
Keep on trolling
Upsampled 1080p - like 99% of all 1080p newgen games.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
It's dynamic up to like 1600p.
Besides... look at the screensots again. no 1080p looks like that. This is accumulation like dlss.
This fine detail is impossible at 1080p. Even with TAA. It looks better than native 4k without any aa
Last edited:
Xdrive05
Member
While true, for almost all games, those returns diminish quite quickly over 1080p (especially compared to the performance cost). Some genres benefit more than others the higher you go, but again, diminishingly.
That's why going under 1080p can sometimes be the right choice to improve performance on aging hardware, and why FSR and NIS are very viable solutions even in that range.
Should you shoot for 4K if you have the horsepower to spare? Sure! But it probably won't make your games play any better.
That's why going under 1080p can sometimes be the right choice to improve performance on aging hardware, and why FSR and NIS are very viable solutions even in that range.
Should you shoot for 4K if you have the horsepower to spare? Sure! But it probably won't make your games play any better.
kingpotato
Ask me about my Stream Deck
Maybe I just take for granted the things that need to be expressed for the benefit of others. As part of the human experience, it's common knowledge that you can see things more clearly if you are closer to them.
Look for my upcoming thread:
[PSA] If you can't hear a noticeable difference between stereo and sound sound, then the volume of your home theater is too low.
8BiTw0LF
Banned
So DF is lying about it being 1080p? The "dynamic" is upscaling tools.It's dynamic up to like 1600p.
Besides... look at the screensots again. no 1080p looks like that. This is accumulation like dlss.
This fine detail is impossible at 1080p. Even with TAA. It looks better than native 4k without any aa
It's impressive nevertheless! But the 1080p Vs. 4K debate is dead.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
It's info from DF video. The internal res is dynamic before temporal upscaling.
any fucking way - you are not looking at 1080p output. The output is 4k image... acheived in whatever way. It's not 1080p.
You can scale it down and enlarge to 4k output again and it will look like shit.
So whatever internal res is, it is not what you are looking at.
Why are you arguing ?!
are you trying to prove 1080p looks becaues it's 1080p?! it is not 1080p.
... you are so stubborn about the stupidest topics sometimes cmon
Captain Toad
Banned
Was it Don Mattrick who implied if PS4 looked better to you than the base Xbox One, you just need to sit further away from your TV?
This sounds like the reverse.
This sounds like the reverse.
Last edited:
Well the quick end to that thread is that the idiots don't have their speakers properly tuned, although a budget AVR doesn't really allow all the frequencies to be discrete unless it's pumped up a little bit.
bentanchorbolt
Banned
Yes, pixel density most certainly is a big part of this, good catch.
8BiTw0LF
Banned
Dude.. UC4 1080p on PS5 is not 1080p either if we count upscaling techniques. 99% of all games sub 1440p uses upscaling.
Stop being plain-ass stupid.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
uc4 1080p is exactly 1080p. There is no addition or detail reconstruction. It is a plain ass burry 1080p game with pretty ok anti aliasing.
You are trying to defend completely wrong angle dude
ethomaz
Banned
UC4 on PS5 is fixed 1080p... look really dated.
8BiTw0LF
Banned
It uses post processing to fix the blurriness. It's 1080p with post processing.
If you look at DF's video you can clearly see it's not a "normal" 1080p image. Also why John Linneman chose to play it at 120hz, cause the difference in Fidelity Vs performance wasn't worth it.
8BiTw0LF
Banned
With post processing..
Agent Ironside
Member
Sounds like a very Mattricky thing to say.
Reallink
Member
You would have to sit around 4.5 feet from a 65" TV to fully resolve 4K resolution with 20/20 vision, though it's a spectrum and the difference from 1080p begins to be noticable around 7 feet. Very few people sit less than 7 feet from a 65" display though, 9 - 15 feet is most common which is absolutely not visible to like 95% of people.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
It's just 1080p with good TAA.
I've compared all 3 modes. 4k is way superior when it comes to clarity and sharpness.
The 1080p in uc4 is not as bad as in bloodborne for sure tho
8BiTw0LF
Banned
And that's what I mean - we can't compare newgen 1080p with lastgen 1080p, because newgen GPU's have the power to upsample/upscale and add more post processing.
The 1080p Vs 4K debate is dead. - or extremely close to be.
Dream-Knife
Banned
Isn't anything below the native res of a display very noticeable?
People throw screen size around without taking into account how far you sit from it. There's also pixel density and whatnot. "Pro" gamers use 24" screens sitting 20" away at 900p.
People throw screen size around without taking into account how far you sit from it. There's also pixel density and whatnot. "Pro" gamers use 24" screens sitting 20" away at 900p.
Last edited:
