Will You Buy a 4K HDTV for Your Next Gen Console?

[zephyrprime]

4k support sure but no games would realistically be able to use it. They would just be upscaled which means nothing. The newer consoles are more powerful but they will still have trouble running games @ 1080p60 like with Battlefield 4 which will be 720p60.

This. Hello upscaling.

 

[JackBurton]

I don't see 8K being a consumer technology. You need at least an 84'' TV to begin seeing the benefits of 4K if you sit 10ft away. Which is a massive TV in itself. 8k only begins to show benefits on screens over 12ft in size. Which only makes sense in very large rooms using projectors.

You could do passive 4K 3D with 8K.

 

[Wreckem]

I guess I always assumed that 4K would mean ~4000 lines of vertical resolution, which is how people have generally referred to TV res. 1080p, 720p, etc. Have "they" changed it to now refer to horizontal res in the hopes of making it sound like a bigger deal than what it really is? Or is this TV just a stepping stone to a real 4K TV?

They haven't really changed, just using different terms. 1080P is 2K(more or less). I guess you could call 4k 2160P but that doesn't have the same ring as 4K.

 

[AstroManLuca]

They haven't really changed, just using different terms. 1080P is 2K(more or less). I guess you could call 4k 2160P but that doesn't have the same ring as 4K.

They could also name them by the number of megapixels, which would allow you to directly compare actual screen area in a way that even using horizontal lines can't.

4K = 8MP
1080p = 2MP
720p = 1MP

Of course this won't happen but just doing this shows you how much of a difference 4K makes over 1080p vs. 1080p over 720p. At least theoretically speaking.

 

[exdeath]

I like how it took 50 years to finally go from shitty NTSC 240/480 to 1080p now all of the sudden we are on track to quadruple pixel count every 2 months.

 

[purbeast0]

isn't there a size/viewing distance ratio or something that has to be met before a 4k display would even be visibly noticeable to the human eye?

 

[alangrift]

A lot PS3 games still run on 720p when it supports 1080p, I think most PS4 games will run at 1080p.

 

[Midwayman]

A lot PS3 games still run on 720p when it supports 1080p, I think most PS4 games will run at 1080p.

That is wishful thinking. I bet we still see a ton of games render at various resolutions below 1080p and upscale to tune for performance. I'm just hoping they stay at least 720p and the UI will render at 1080p all the time for text, etc.

 

[cmdrdredd]

isn't there a size/viewing distance ratio or something that has to be met before a 4k display would even be visibly noticeable to the human eye?

Not really. Think about PC monitors. As you increase resolution at a given size you increase pixel density. That sharpens everything. Text, images etc are all sharper.

 

[Midwayman]

Not really. Think about PC monitors. As you increase resolution at a given size you increase pixel density. That sharpens everything. Text, images etc are all sharper.

The point is that you can only see so much detail. IIRC human vision acuity at 20/20 is about .9 arcseconds. IIRC at normal TV viewing distances that puts 4k useful around 60"

 

[purbeast0]

Not really. Think about PC monitors. As you increase resolution at a given size you increase pixel density. That sharpens everything. Text, images etc are all sharper.

yeah, and those details can't be discerned from certain resolutions the further back you watch it. that is why many people get 720p 32" tvs instead of 1080p, because from normal viewing distances you couldn't even tell a difference.

pretty sure a 4k image on my 120" screen would be noticeably different than the 1080p picture i get on it now. i can tell a noticeable difference between 720p and 1080p on it. my wife, not so much cause she doesn't care about that stuff nor look for it.

but i bet on the 50" tv in my bedroom that i sit like 16 feet away from, which is 720p by the way, that if it was a 4k tv i couldn't even tell a difference.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Consoles while technically being able to support the screen resolution, will lack graphical horsepower to drive complex 3D games at 4k resolutions with a smooth frame rate.

Performance scales inversly to screen resolution, and 'll honestly be surprised if some of the really big titles (like BF4 for example) even run at full 1080p, I don't think the console GPUs will pack enough punch for that.

Much less 4x more power they'd need for 4k when compared to 1080p

I've driven a 2560x1600 panel for gaming for many years now and that's approx 2x HD and that takes some serious hardware to power, we're talking multiple high end graphics cards, way out of reach of the consoles I'm afraid.

Some 2D indy games might look nice in 4 though.

 

[Subyman]

EBT? Really? You think I'm on food stamps or welfare because I don't want to drop $4k on a 60hz 4k TV to go with a console that can't even push 4k during games? That's a quick trip to being on EBT if you drop money on new tech all the time .

 

[Mushkins]

Not a chance i'll be buying 4k anytime soon. There's no content, and there wont be for a long time. Most current gen games are barely rendered above standard definition resolutions and upscaled to 720p or maybe 1080p if we're lucky. Current gen will hopefully be shooting for the 720p and more often native 1080p marks with higher than 30 FPS goals. Which is much closer to my 1080/60 native settings of my TVs. The hardware going into these next gen boxes is plenty for 1080/60 gaming, but just because they support 4K out the hardware does *not* have enough power to push resolutions higher than 1080p outside of upscaling.

Will there be a benefit to 1080 upscaled to 4K on a nice 4K set? Yeah, sure. Is it a $2000 investment-level benefit? Not a chance. It's like the difference between buying a 720p set and a 1080p set for a 30" spare bedroom TV, the difference is not worth the cost.

 

[dagamer34]

Consoles while technically being able to support the screen resolution, will lack graphical horsepower to drive complex 3D games at 4k resolutions with a smooth frame rate.

Performance scales inversly to screen resolution, and 'll honestly be surprised if some of the really big titles (like BF4 for example) even run at full 1080p, I don't think the console GPUs will pack enough punch for that.

Much less 4x more power they'd need for 4k when compared to 1080p

I've driven a 2560x1600 panel for gaming for many years now and that's approx 2x HD and that takes some serious hardware to power, we're talking multiple high end graphics cards, way out of reach of the consoles I'm afraid.

Some 2D indy games might look nice in 4 though.

It's really not even about packing enough punch. It will always be more beneficial to spend GPU power on better effects than higher resolution or frame rate because the latter two can ONLY be seen when playing a game where as the former is noticeable in any screenshot or online video. YouTube bitrates are too low to evaluate those latter qualities of a game.

 

[Koing]

When a 65+ screen is about £3k I can imagine getting one

4k on the 84" screen I saw looked IMMENSE.

Next gen consoles won't do 4k in game. 1080p at 60fps would be great imo.

Koing

 

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

Nope
I'll probably still be doing 1920x1080 pc gaming for years to come. I'm looking at all these cheap HDTV's and thinking, I don't want to be an early adopter for higher resolution screens.

 

[A5]

Your wish had been granted. This tv has been out for about 2 months. Quite a few people have already jumped on it.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...w_bottom_links

It's also a pretty bad TV, from all professional reviews. I'd rather have a good 1080p set.

I'll go 4K eventually, once there is live sports content. Upscaled console games aren't enough.

 

[alangrift]

Nope
I'll probably still be doing 1920x1080 pc gaming for years to come. I'm looking at all these cheap HDTV's and thinking, I don't want to be an early adopter for higher resolution screens.

They are a lot cheaper than when I got my TV. I even have a SD Plasma... what an expensive TV.

 

[AstroManLuca]

EBT? Really? You think I'm on food stamps or welfare because I don't want to drop $4k on a 60hz 4k TV to go with a console that can't even push 4k during games? That's a quick trip to being on EBT if you drop money on new tech all the time .

Well on top of that, if you hook a 4K TV up to a PC instead to run games at high resolution, you're also probably looking at $1000 in graphics cards alone to drive all those pixels.

Yeah, it's not about being poor, it's about being rich.

 

[mizzou]

judging by how there are still framerate slowdowns on game demo's like KNACK,

playing anything higher then 720/1080p would be detrimental

 

[shadiwon]

sharp quatron baby 60 inches of awesomeness

 

[spaceman]

imma getting a 19" randix crt from the80s w. beaverboard
just for ps4

 

[exdeath]

I'll use a screen with a native resolution matching the frame buffer.

I've been known to seek out a 1280x720 flat panel for 360/PS3 games

 

[reallyscrued]

No. I stick to native displays. I even have a CRT with RGB input for pre component video systems.

Even thinking about looking for native 480p and 720p panels for last couple generation systems.

I like how it took 50 years to finally go from shitty NTSC 240/480 to 1080p now all of the sudden we are on track to quadruple pixel count every 2 months.

I'll use a screen with a native resolution matching the frame buffer.

I've been known to seek out a 1280x720 flat panel for 360/PS3 games

We get it. You're old school and particular. Give it a rest, dude...