Read more.A relentless pixel-profit pursuit?
Read more.A relentless pixel-profit pursuit?
For me, I don't see the point of anything beyond 4k.
2.5k on a 30" in front of me is more than enough. 4k is the effective resolution of 35mm film, so I can see there is room to experience the difference on some material (once they start remastering everything AGAIN), at least as long as you have a gigantic TV (70"+) or you sit with your nose touching the screen.
Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive
The power consumption is already high to get a stable 30FPS or more in 4K, now with 5K more energy efficient hardware should be required for better FPS.One thing is for sure; a lot of pixel-pushing power is going to be needed to get playable frame-rates at such a high resolution.
Can't wait for 5k to arrive.....so I can pick up a bargain 4k
I thought someone had prototyped an 8K monitor already, though?
I don't get why we have the likes of 720p, 1080p and 1440p, but we're now talking 4 and 5K when they're more accurately 2160p and 2880p... It's not like we need a fancy marketing buzz-term for them.
The 4K stuff I've seen has looked great and I love how the TVs are insanely expensive, while the monitors are a few hundred quid - I only watch films on my PC anyway, so I'm happy with that... though I'd be even happier if I actually owned one, I expect!
I worry that the game textures required to meet 4K and above will mean games are insanely large, taking weeks to download on my 0.5Mbps connection and that games will look awfully unrealistic because they will be in sharper levels of focus and detail than my eyes normally see in real life!
Then again, we're still playing silly head-bobbing, motion-blurring games...
I guess ultimately, I don't and won't properly care until such tech is in the shops and at least vaguely within my budget!
I remember watching something on Click a few years back showing that the movie companies were transferring from film to a digital resolution of 16,000 x 16000 (obviously I've not remembered this quite correctly), I remember it being way higher than was needed for the time.
Perhaps someone has a link to the BBC Click episode?
I will say as I do a lot of video/photo editing and can see an advantage to 4k and 5k, but currently I find my 1440p monitor good enough, for video I use a 720p preview which is normally enough but do have scope for it being bigger if needed which is nice.
With that I am keeping an eye on the new breed but waiting for IPS panels as I need the colour accuracy.
imo 4k is perfect for desk top. currently also using a 28" 4k monitor and natively the text is way too small. besides the scaling issues its been great. would never go back to 24" 1080p monitors (surround) again. but around 32" 4k would be ideal.
This is getting ridiculous the current 4k monitors are still a niche with various problems be it low fps in games even with the recent 980s that came out or scaling in progams now their is talk of 5k to get a production increase next year just stupid to me.
I'll be sticking with my 29" ultra wide 2560x1080 for quite some time.
Bought a new tv few months back and was looking at the 4k ones but settled for a 55" 1080p Samsung in the end.
A few days later watched a good video on youtube about how 4k content is better on a 1080p screen anyway due to how the pixels work. True or not U;m happy at 1080.
I use a 30" 2560 x 1600 monitor and even at a large 30 inch size i cons are still quite small. Even at this relatively low 2560x1600 resolution i cannot obtain 60 fps and full ultra details on every single game and I have a GTX titan. Now these 27" 5120 x 2880 are really absurd. There is no possible way you can use 1 : 1 scaling in windows so you are going to need software that can scale things properly which is still a total fustercluck. As far as GPU power is concerned well there is no way a single GPU will be able to play anything. To even have a chance at playing you will need a top end card meaning either GTX 980 in SLI or R9 290x in Xfire just to hopefully get 30 fps after you turn some graphics settings down.
Graphics processors are just not advanced enough for 5k resolution yet. We are just barely getting there for dual gpus and 3840x2160 and really even that resolution has not been properly taken care of yet. Nvidia's next generation pascal's large GP210 chip with its stacked dram and large bandwidth should finally be able to support 4k resolution at 60 fps and ultra settings using 2 flagship gpu's in sli but I think it will take another 1 or 2 generations after that before we have 5k and 60 fps in the same sentence.
What I'm saying is gamers you have no rush to get a 5k monitor while the prices are still insane. You can even hold off for a couple years on 4k. Right now 2560x1600 is still the practical limit for gamers that want ultra detail and stable 60 fps.
My issue is the interconnects required are getting pretty silly. In the last year or so UHD monitors have become available in the mainstream and we've been able to support them with Displayport 1.2 (2009) and HDMI 2.0 (2013, but first cards to support it were the GTX 900 series just a few months ago), but we've suddenly jumped again and need double what either of those standards can support, so we're waiting for displayport 1.3 (it'll get there first) before a single cable can drive these resolutions.
Ah well, I'll just pick up a cheap-ish UHD monitor for now while I wait, 2560x1440 is nice but could be better.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)