Average consumer ; see no need for 4K now . Change my view.

  • 117 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for -God-
-God-

3627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 -God-
Member since 2004 • 3627 Posts

@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

Avatar image for m3dude1
m3dude1

2334

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 m3dude1
Member since 2007 • 2334 Posts
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

you cant even do basic math

Avatar image for soulitane
soulitane

15091

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#53 soulitane
Member since 2010 • 15091 Posts

Waste of money for the time being. Give it a few years for higher quality monitors and PC hardware that can actually run games on it well.

Avatar image for mr_huggles_dog
Mr_Huggles_dog

7805

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#54 Mr_Huggles_dog
Member since 2014 • 7805 Posts

It's just too expensive right now.

4k sounds good and I bet it's much better for larger HDTVs but I'm happy with 1080p for right now.

Avatar image for FoxbatAlpha
FoxbatAlpha

10669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 FoxbatAlpha
Member since 2009 • 10669 Posts

@Heil68 said:

I'll wait till the content for 4k becomes the norm.

Like when I go to Costco. I see the 80" 1080p t.v.s come down in price every time. I remember when 55" was untouchable and now you can get one for the price of a used microwave. 4K will be in the clearance isle soon enough!

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

12620

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 12620 Posts

@Cloud_imperium said:

According ex Naughty Dog dev, it'll take over 2 generations until Consoles come close to 4k. As for PC, it's expensive right now but I can see it becoming more mainstream in 3-5 years. I'm fine with 1080p.

2 years from should be fine for mainstream 4K on PC.

Avatar image for superbuuman
superbuuman

6400

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#59 superbuuman
Member since 2010 • 6400 Posts

@Heil68 said:

I'll wait till the content for 4k becomes the norm.

^ This...at TC, if you have $$$$ to burn then go ahead...if you don't well there's better stuff to spend on like more games. :P

Avatar image for schu
schu

10191

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#60 schu
Member since 2003 • 10191 Posts

Imo for the time being we should be chasing 2560 × 1440 @ 120+ fps

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61  Edited By Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

Avatar image for schu
schu

10191

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#62  Edited By schu
Member since 2003 • 10191 Posts

@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

1080p is similar to 2k but per Wikipedia it is not actually 2k:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution

"Occasionally, 1080p (Full HD or FHD) has been included into the 2K resolution definition. However, this appears to be incorrect consumer assumption, rather than official inclusion into the resolution terminology. Older and current media, web content, and books on video production and cinema references and definitions define 1080P and 2K resolutions as separate definitions and not the same.

1080p has the same vertical resolution as 2K Resolutions (1080 pixels), and 1080p can be utilized within the 2K resolution container. However 1080p has a smaller horizontal resolution below the ranged of 2K resolution formats.

According to official reference material, DCI and industry standards do not officially recognize 1080p as a 2K resolution in literature concerning 2K and 4K resolution."

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64037

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#63 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64037 Posts

@Blabadon said:

It's more pixels, meaning less need for artificial things like AA, higher picture quality, and an increase in sharpness.

1080p is awesome but spread across a 40+ inch screen it's obvious there's room to increase pixel number.

This

And more to the topics point. Great keep gaming at 1080p, modern PC's will destroy games at 1080p and play at a much higher framerate than consoles could ever hope to compete with. The Witcher 3's medium is apparently where the console versions are at, and my 970 would crush it in the frames department.

Avatar image for Bruin1986
Bruin1986

1629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 Bruin1986
Member since 2007 • 1629 Posts

There isn't a need for 4K right now.

It's a novelty, and an expensive one at that.

1080p is just fine for 99% of the population.

Give it 5 years. 4k tvs will be far better than today, and cost half as much. Plus, you won't have to get a loan to afford GPUs that can actually run games at 4k at 60+fps.

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65  Edited By Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@schu said:
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

1080p is similar to 2k but per Wikipedia it is not actually 2k:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution

"Occasionally, 1080p (Full HD or FHD) has been included into the 2K resolution definition. However, this appears to be incorrect consumer assumption, rather than official inclusion into the resolution terminology. Older and current media, web content, and books on video production and cinema references and definitions define 1080P and 2K resolutions as separate definitions and not the same.

1080p has the same vertical resolution as 2K Resolutions (1080 pixels), and 1080p can be utilized within the 2K resolution container. However 1080p has a smaller horizontal resolution below the ranged of 2K resolution formats.

According to official reference material, DCI and industry standards do not officially recognize 1080p as a 2K resolution in literature concerning 2K and 4K resolution."

None of them are actual 2k/4k/8k because the "true" resolutions refer to cinema 1.85:1 aspect ratio.. TVs are 1.78:1. It says the same thing for 4k but it doesn't matter. The number before the k refers to horizontal resolution. It's not a multiplier. And TV manufacturers have already named 4k/8k TVs in mainstream marketing at 16/9 and there's not a damn thing cinema purists can do about it.

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@walloftruth said:
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

Lol genius...I never said "k" was a multiplier.

It's a fact that 4k is 4 times 1080p, so take your bullshit elsewhere.

4k is 4 times 1080p by coincidence.. 2k is not twice the resolution of 1080p.. did you forget you made that moronic statement? rich that you ripped on someone else's math but completely misfired yourself

Avatar image for X_CAPCOM_X
X_CAPCOM_X

9552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#68 X_CAPCOM_X
Member since 2004 • 9552 Posts

@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

The average consumer on the planet is the average worker. The average worker worries more about whether they will be able to pay their bills the next cycle without having a major medical/vehicle/home/family/etc. expense. Do not speak of the majority with contempt like this.

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#70 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts

@Gue1 said:
@SecretPolice said:

Eh, 900P is the new sweet spot this gen. lol :P

on Xbone maybe. 99% of the games on PS4 are 1080p.

Stop with the pepe shit, you're not on 4chan

Avatar image for napo_sp
napo_sp

649

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 napo_sp
Member since 2006 • 649 Posts

anyone who think 4K as in 16:9 4K is the next best thing is either ignorant or stupid peasant who got successfully brainwashed by IT industry media

21:9 display give you something special than any 16:9 display, even 4^4K something

the other next best thing is of course VR

I say it again 4K as in 16:9 4K is pointless and stupid.

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
LegatoSkyheart

29733

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 1

#72 LegatoSkyheart
Member since 2009 • 29733 Posts

@princeofshapeir: But those Dank Memes man.

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73  Edited By Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@walloftruth said:
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

Lol genius...I never said "k" was a multiplier.

It's a fact that 4k is 4 times 1080p, so take your bullshit elsewhere.

4k is 4 times 1080p by coincidence.. 2k is not twice the resolution of 1080p.. did you forget you made that moronic statement? rich that you ripped on someone else's math but completely misfired yourself

Yeah, it's closer to 1.5 times, I shouldn't have rounded it up since there are always morons that take everything literal. I'll just answer your comment with your own words.

4k is 4 times 1080p by coincidence

"did you forget you made that moronic statement?" and "rich that you ripped on someone else's math but completely misfired yourself" go very well with this. Didn't I tell you to lay off the bullshit? Don't go around preaching about Mathematics, that subject clearly goes over your head.

Wow you are a moron. 2k 4k 8k have nothing to do with mathematics. They refer to the horizontal resolution.. 1080p IS 2k lmao i'm done.. you can't even comprehend what i'm saying or what these resolution marketing terms mean.. You are the only one spewing bullshit..

2k is not twice 1080p. its not 1.5times 1080p.. stop it.. you are fucking retarded. You assumed 2k is 2x 1080p because there is a 2 in the name.. lmao classic fucking dumbass

Avatar image for parkurtommo
parkurtommo

28295

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#74 parkurtommo
Member since 2009 • 28295 Posts

Not really worth it atm.

2k though, that should be standard by now.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#75  Edited By deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

Yeah as a pc gamer I won't ditch 1080p until I am forced to on my 42 inch tv or my 144hz 24 inch monitor..... I really don't understand this hard on for these higher resolutions when your going to see reduced returns... And really we have been for years now in which visual improvements are becoming less noticable compared to the leaps 10 years ago... I mean I have trouble noticing a difference with 1080p and upscaled 900p, what is noticable though is fps between 30,60, and 120..

Avatar image for -God-
-God-

3627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76  Edited By -God-
Member since 2004 • 3627 Posts

@X_CAPCOM_X said:
@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

The average consumer on the planet is the average worker. The average worker worries more about whether they will be able to pay their bills the next cycle without having a major medical/vehicle/home/family/etc. expense. Do not speak of the majority with contempt like this.

Look at the OP. That has nothing to do with it.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#77 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

@-God- said:
@X_CAPCOM_X said:
@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

The average consumer on the planet is the average worker. The average worker worries more about whether they will be able to pay their bills the next cycle without having a major medical/vehicle/home/family/etc. expense. Do not speak of the majority with contempt like this.

Look at the OP. That has nothing to do with it.

You really can't argue against the fact that 4k resolution is cost prohibitive currently with the cost of it on top of the hardware to use it at good performance.... Nor that you can make some kind of objective statement declaring that 4k resolution offers ore enjoyment than 1440p or 1080p...

Avatar image for notorious1234na
Notorious1234NA

1917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#78 Notorious1234NA
Member since 2014 • 1917 Posts

@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

Mad Max without Mel Gibson isn't worth watching

Avatar image for -God-
-God-

3627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 -God-
Member since 2004 • 3627 Posts

@notorious1234na said:
@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

Mad Max without Mel Gibson isn't worth watching

Fury Road is better than the original 3. Especially Beyond NeverlandDome.

Watch that shit asap.

Avatar image for jhonMalcovich
jhonMalcovich

7090

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 jhonMalcovich
Member since 2010 • 7090 Posts

@notorious1234na said:
@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

Mad Max without Mel Gibson isn't worth watching

Who cares about that catholic anti-semite drunkard.

Avatar image for CleanB
CleanB

289

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#81 CleanB
Member since 2013 • 289 Posts

lol hermturds are always in the minority

Avatar image for jhonMalcovich
jhonMalcovich

7090

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#82  Edited By jhonMalcovich
Member since 2010 • 7090 Posts
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

2k on PC is 2560*1440, not 1080p

Avatar image for -God-
-God-

3627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83  Edited By -God-
Member since 2004 • 3627 Posts

@CleanB said:

lol hermturds are always in the minority

There are more people on steam than xbl/psn, and pc has more gaming hardware/software sales than all 3 consoles combined.

That being said yes 4k is enthusiast/niche, but it doesn't take 4k to obliterate Lolstation4's 20 fps on low/medium.

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#84  Edited By Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@jhonMalcovich said:
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:
@ProtossX said:
@LegatoSkyheart said:

You don't need 4K gaming to enjoy PC gaming.

you can't maintain 60 fps at 4k now anyway.

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p if a monitor is 4k thats so many more pixels and so many more clearness its gonna be a completely diff level look at backgrounds on a desktop monitor at 4k res u can never go back to 1080p once u witness 4k as far im concerned its impossible for me to go back its twice as much its twice as good once u go there theres no going back tv's need to get there on this level

4k is twice the resolution of 1080p? The PS4 is also the second PlayStation console, am I right? Too bad that stupidity isn't reason enough to ban someone on here.

4k is 4 times 1080p, genius. 2k is twice the resolution of 1080p. Math must be a really tough subject for you.

lol genius.. since when is k a multiplier? 1080p IS 2k lmao. k means thousand and the nickname refers to the number of horizontal lines of pixels

4k = 3840x2160 ... 3840 is about 4000 aka 4k

2k = 1920x1080 aka 1080p aka 2k

8k = 7680x4320... 7680 rounded up to 8000 aka 8k

2k on PC is 2560*1440, not 1080p

No it's not. Actual 2k is 2048x1080 or 1990x1080. They are almost the exact same resolutions as 1920x1080 at around 2.1 million pixels and by the actual convention (vertical resultion) 1920x1080 is 2k. Actual 2k is 2.2 million pixels. 1080p is 2.1 million pixels

By the same convention, 2560x1440 would be 2.5k. It's also referred to as quadHD at 3.7 million pixels, much higher than 2k. Referring to 1440p as 2k or referring to 2k as twice the resolution of 1080p is dead wrong

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution

Avatar image for VanDammFan
VanDammFan

4783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#85 VanDammFan
Member since 2009 • 4783 Posts

@Blabadon said:

It's more pixels, meaning less need for artificial things like AA, higher picture quality, and an increase in sharpness.

1080p is awesome but spread across a 40+ inch screen it's obvious there's room to increase pixel number.

so when does it stop? what if i have 100" screen? then its time for 5k?6k? i still watch standard vhs from time to time. I still play oldschool games. I dont really give a s&* about 4k or 10k or anything else. Keep in mind that people are just really buying into the hd tv thing. FINALLY it seems more people have them in their homes. BUT also keep in mind that most people are watching standard tv OR only 720p on their hd tvs. SO 1080p is still yet to be utilized by probably 90% of the hd tv population. AND if it is you still cant see a difference in 720p to 1080p on most tvs..You cant..ive seen it in my own home and others..Sure in theory it should blow you away,BUT still...it dont. Will anyone ever be satisfied? I bet not. Im good though. I could not care less for any of it.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
ronvalencia

29612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#86  Edited By ronvalencia
Member since 2008 • 29612 Posts

@Cloud_imperium said:

According ex Naughty Dog dev, it'll take over 2 generations until Consoles come close to 4k. As for PC, it's expensive right now but I can see it becoming more mainstream in 3-5 years. I'm fine with 1080p.

It depends on the med-range GPU state around year 2018 to 2022.

Year 2015 = R9-390X for 4K(claimed to have R9-295 X2 level). Starts HBM video memory era and decline of GDDR5.

Year 2016 = R9-490X pushes R9-390X to R9-480X. GoFlo switches to 14 nm fab in 2015. R9-490X would have a new HBM design.

Year 2017/2018 = R9-590X pushes R9-390X/R9-480X to R9-570X. It depends on Samsung's 10 nm fab i.e. GoFlo is a partner of Samsung in fab tech.

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#88  Edited By Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@walloftruth said:

I must have told you like 3 times already to lay off the bullshit....seriously dude, heed my words and just step away, Mathematics clearly isn't your thing and that's fine. Not everyone completed high school and I'm not gonna judge you for it, so don't get all upset with me. ツ

2k reference resolution is 2048 x 1536 pixels, 1080p is 1920 x 1080, as you can hopefully see, those resolutions aren't the same thing, as you claimed before.

2048 x 1536 = 3145728

1920 x 1080 = 2073600

3145728 / 2073600 = 1.51703703704

Bu bu but 2k isn't 1.5 times 1080p....oh you're right, it's 1.51703703704, which rounded down is 1.5, in case you also don't know how rounding works.

Native 2k is 2048x1080 = 2.2million

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution

2048x1536 is 4:3.. what the hell whacky ass fuckin display still uses 4:3? You in 1990?? lmao gtfo with YOUR bullshit. You must have dug fuckin deep to try to save yourself there.. "2k is 2x 1080p derp"

Avatar image for notorious1234na
Notorious1234NA

1917

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#89 Notorious1234NA
Member since 2014 • 1917 Posts

@-God- said:
@notorious1234na said:
@-God- said:
@GhoX said:

Average consumer: see no need for Lamborghini.

Average consumer rather watch shit like Tranformers than Mad Max. The premise of this thread is trash.

Mad Max without Mel Gibson isn't worth watching

Fury Road is better than the original 3. Especially Beyond NeverlandDome.

Watch that shit asap.

Just saw it, movie is a Michael Bay Transformers rip-off that doesn't live up to the originals:

  • Needs more Mel Gibson
  • uh where is the story
  • less T&A
  • lesscool guys drive away from explosions
  • less feminist BS
  • More iunno how about Mad Max?

As soon as I saw that the word feminism was linked to this movie case closed no wonder this crummy sequel, standalone, remake whatever is getting rave reviews in Hollywood.

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91  Edited By Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@walloftruth said:
@Couth_ said:
@walloftruth said:

I must have told you like 3 times already to lay off the bullshit....seriously dude, heed my words and just step away, Mathematics clearly isn't your thing and that's fine. Not everyone completed high school and I'm not gonna judge you for it, so don't get all upset with me. ツ

2k reference resolution is 2048 x 1536 pixels, 1080p is 1920 x 1080, as you can hopefully see, those resolutions aren't the same thing, as you claimed before.

2048 x 1536 = 3145728

1920 x 1080 = 2073600

3145728 / 2073600 = 1.51703703704

Bu bu but 2k isn't 1.5 times 1080p....oh you're right, it's 1.51703703704, which rounded down is 1.5, in case you also don't know how rounding works.

Native 2k is 2048x1080 = 2.2million

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution

2048x1536 is 4:3.. what the hell whacky ass fuckin display still uses 4:3? You in 1990?? lmao gtfo with YOUR bullshit. You must have dug fuckin deep to try to save yourself there.. "2k is 2x 1080p derp"

Ah, so we move the goal post to include only 16:9 resolutions now? Also this comes from your own link kiddo: "Occasionally, 1080p (Full HD or FHD) has been included into the 2K resolution definition. However, this appears to be incorrect consumer assumption, rather than official inclusion into the resolution terminology."

See? Your own link proves that you don't know anything about the terminology you use. Only a moron would claim 2k is the same as 1080p and then post a link to a Wikipedia article that proves that claim utterly false. Oh well boys and girls, that's what happens when you rely on Wikipedia without reading the whole article and without actually knowing what the hell you're blabbering about.

#REKT

lmao.. why would you bring up an archaic 4:3 resolution? That's moving the goal post to make yourself not look retarded...And i already said 1080p isnt true 2k, but for all intents they are the same shit

Native 2k 2048x1080 = 2.2million

1080p = 1920x1080 = 2.1 million

"omg 2k = 2x 1080p" - wallOfRetardation

Avatar image for rogerjak
rogerjak

14950

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#93 rogerjak
Member since 2004 • 14950 Posts

Too soon IMO. 4k seems awesome, but getting the hardware to run it consistently is to damn expensive still.

Maybe 2-3 years. Can't wait to get a 4k pc monitor....glorious.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#94 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

@ronvalencia said:
@Cloud_imperium said:

According ex Naughty Dog dev, it'll take over 2 generations until Consoles come close to 4k. As for PC, it's expensive right now but I can see it becoming more mainstream in 3-5 years. I'm fine with 1080p.

It depends on the med-range GPU state around year 2018 to 2022.

Year 2015 = R9-390X for 4K(claimed to have R9-295 X2 level). Starts HBM video memory era and decline of GDDR5.

Year 2016 = R9-490X pushes R9-390X to R9-480X. GoFlo switches to 14 nm fab in 2015. R9-490X would have a new HBM design.

Year 2017/2018 = R9-590X pushes R9-390X/R9-480X to R9-570X. It depends on Samsung's 10 nm fab i.e. GoFlo is a partner of Samsung in fab tech.

Honestly I hope VR tech takes off far more than anything coming to 4k resolution.. It is a linear dead end of constantly sharp resolutions that we are seeing reduced returns on.. When we get to 4k resolution, we will just look for a higher resolutions, with even less returns.. VR at least feels like a real evolution in graphic technology that is far noticeable than having more pixels on the screen.. 4k will happen when it happens, this push for it in thinking it is going to "change everything" is stupid and absurd.. And hell I would state it isn't even the most important thing, fps is.. We have a large portion of the industry pushing for a 30fps standard, to the point that even some pc games are being released hardcapped at 30fps..

Avatar image for Couth_
Couth_

10369

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#95 Couth_
Member since 2008 • 10369 Posts

@walloftruth said:

Archaic? Just stop talking, you're digging yourself deeper and deeper into the mud.

A few month ago I got a Nexus 9 with that exact resolution, which released last year in November. I guess recently released mobile hardware is "archaic" in your mind. It's also funny that most new tablets use 4:3 and 16:10 resolutions, especially Apple has released a lot of monitors/tablets with that exact screen resolution the last few years.

Also, it's not using the goal post since I was using that resolution even before you bulged into the thread.

And i already said 1080p isnt true 2k, but for all intents they are the same shit

Nope, you said this:

1080p IS 2k lmao

Either way, both assumptions are hilariously wrong. Especially that "Native 2k 2048x1080" statement, because nativity is relative.

"omg 2k = 2x 1080p" - wallOfRetardation

I already corrected myself and said it was 1.5 times, not 2. I'm not sure why you are using outdated information. The harder you try to troll, the harder you fall, boyo. :)

#STAYREKT

The only wrong thing that has been said in this entire exchange is that "2k is 2x 1080p", which was said by you. "In the movie projection industry, Digital Cinema Initiatives is the dominant standard for 2K output". It only differs from 1080p in the aspect ratio. If you are talking about 1080p and 4k the obvious would imply you are talking about monitors and tv's, not 4:3 tablets, where 1080p falls right in line with 2k.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64037

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#96 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64037 Posts

@-God- said:
@notorious1234na said:

Mad Max without Mel Gibson isn't worth watching

Fury Road is better than the original 3. Especially Beyond NeverlandDome.

Watch that shit asap.

Word, the new Mad Max is fantastic.

Avatar image for Ghost120x
Ghost120x

6058

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#97 Ghost120x
Member since 2009 • 6058 Posts

Unless you are a person who loves to have the latest things, you most likely will be better off waiting.

Avatar image for suppaphly42
SuppaPHly42

1223

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 5

#98 SuppaPHly42
Member since 2014 • 1223 Posts

*slap* to all of you who do not bow down before 4k's might :P i will get it as soon as star citizen is out. before that though there is not really any point

Avatar image for TheEroica
TheEroica

22660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#99 TheEroica  Moderator
Member since 2009 • 22660 Posts

@ProtossX: I feel like you don't read the threads you post in sometimes.

Avatar image for PurpleMan5000
PurpleMan5000

10531

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100 PurpleMan5000
Member since 2011 • 10531 Posts

I'll start caring about 4k as soon as 4k monitors/televisions get cheap.