Will you be upgrading to 4K anytime soon?

Avatar image for speeny
#1 Posted by Speeny (1518 posts) -

I won't be. Not worth it, right now at least. I'd imagine there wouldn't be much difference between 4K & 1080p especially when you're sitting back far enough away from your TV/Monitor.

Avatar image for joshyjess
#2 Posted by joshyjess (51 posts) -

It's true that for most games you don't really notice that much of a difference, but there are some games that you do. I have a 4K TV, and an XBOX One S, and when I play Red Dead Redemption 2 (4K version), believe me, there is a huge difference.

Avatar image for barbauwu
#3 Posted by Barbauwu (3 posts) -

4k isn't worth it in my opinion. Too expensive for computers to even process it!

Avatar image for thereal25
#4 Posted by thereal25 (1745 posts) -

For a computer monitor it's probably not worth it anytime soon.

But for a large tv it makes a difference. Also, a high-quality screen with hdr etc. can really make a noticeable difference.

Avatar image for MarkoftheSivak
#5 Edited by MarkoftheSivak (253 posts) -

I already have (at least I think). My 720p Plasma tv was headed out the window so I got a 4k instead of a 1080p since they were only a couple hundred more.

Since I had just gotten the TV, when the store had an X1X the day it launched I picked one up along with Forza 7 in HDR and there has been no looking back.

Avatar image for rmpumper
#6 Posted by rmpumper (565 posts) -

I would not go higher than a 1440p 21:9, but seeing as my 10 year old 1200p ZR24w is still working flawlessly, I don't have any reasonable excuse to upgrade.

Avatar image for joannyoung
#7 Posted by JoannYoung (12 posts) -

I agree with that it only works for the gaming consoles like PS and xbox in order to play he advanced multiplayer video game like Grand theft auto 5, COD.

Avatar image for warmblur
#8 Edited by warmblur (2169 posts) -

No but I'm going to upgrade my GPU sometime in the next two years.

Avatar image for RSM-HQ
#9 Posted by RSM-HQ (8218 posts) -

Not really, 4K is bragging rights for those who usually like to be smug (among other things). . . Or at least what I've noticed. What does 4K really offer me? Downgraded FPS on P.C. and a slideshow on console? . . For a slightly better picture quality. . No thank you!

For gaming my funds go towards games, and last year to upgrade my P.C. to max performance in Quake: Champions. While for some games a stable 30FPS is fine(so long as consistent/ 'Bloodborne is not). I would prefer 60FPS always. Reading DMCV will go for 60FPS on every platform at a minimum, is very nice.

If anything I think developers/ publishers need to get off the gimmick wagon and focus on optimisation. Even before 4K, publishers focused on 3D television tech, and honestly who still uses that garbage?! was all the talk in the forums here, heavy smug bragging rights for owning one, and now just accepted as a wasteful gimmick.

Capcom and Nintendo seem to be the only companies that give a care for optimisation. Hope Capcom also ditch the VR train as well honestly, but that's a whole other argument.

Avatar image for MarcRecon
#10 Posted by MarcRecon (8163 posts) -

I bought a ''50 Sony 4k TV off of a buddy of mine last year for pretty cheap, besides that all the other TV's in my house are 1080p. After having it for a while I will say that I can see that 4K is an improvement, but not that huge of an improvement that I feel a need to upgrade all of my TV's at the present time. But I am surprised to see that the price on 4k TV's are dropping drastically, so I will be upgrading a lot sooner then later.

Avatar image for osan0
#11 Posted by osan0 (15380 posts) -

I did recently. It was kind of foisted on me.

I was planning to maybe do it this year, though I was also thinking of waiting 2 more years then get the new PC, PS5 and new 4K screen to go with it. I had some requirements for a new screen that nothing really matched such as:

  • Size: around 45"
  • Resolution: 4K
  • Refresh rate: 120Hz and fast response times and low input latency
  • HDR
  • Freesync 2
  • At least 4 HDMI ports with the standard required to hit 4K 120Hz

I know it would be expensive but a monitor/TV is something i only buy once every decade and getting a good one allows the GPU to shine. So the hardware doesnt exist yet for, say, 4K 120FPS now but it will.....someday. Panel tech doesnt tend to evolve very quickly either so getting a good one can make sense. It's like getting a good power supply or a good PC case.

Asus announced a very nice looking monitor at CES 2019: the XG438Q. It was making a lot of the right noises for me. Thats a panel that has what it takes to show off what the PCs and consoles of tomorrow can do. So i was contemplating it. But holding off for another couple of years still made sense. my PC and consoles are really 1080P gaming machines.

Then my TV, a 10 year old 47" LG crimson series 1080P TV, blew up. A capacitor or something in the back went boom. In fairness it was very old and heavily used and owed me nothing. So i needed a new screen. As i said i only buy screens once in a blue moon. I didnt fancy getting some cheap placeholder as once i got that i know i wouldn't replace it.

So i bit the bullet and got a 4K screen: the LG 43 UD79. Except for the size and resolution it meets none of my criteria above unfortunately. but it's image quality is quite nice (also surprisingly good speakers for a monitor). For anyone interested in local MP it also has a great implementation of PIP.

Unfortunately, for now, my ability to play games at 4K is limited. The switch, wiiu and PS3 are certainly not 4K gaming hardware. Nor is a radeon RX 580 (i tried rise of the tomb raider briefly at 4K for the laugh. No.....just not happening). Older or technically less demanding games on My PC can work at 4K (though the UI in older games is a problem. just tried Civ 5 there and i cant read the text at 4K. Pillars of eternity seems fine though.).

1080P games look fine though. they basically look the same as if i was playing on a 1080P screen. the upscaling done by the monitor hasnt made it any worse or anything.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#12 Edited by Ezekiel43 (1409 posts) -

Already did. But not for games. I would have kept gaming on a monitor. I wanted a TV to watch movies on. I seldom go to the cinema, so, after being wowed by the visuals in Star Wars: The Last Jedi, I decided that I did not want to watch movies on a monitor anymore. I almost wish I had gone with a 74 inch one, but 64 is good. The screen HAS to be big when you're watching a movie. I knew that I would use this TV for many years, so it only made sense to go 4K HDR in 2018, with where things are going. I have a decent 4K movie collection now (and some porn). They mostly look pretty good.

I'll keep PC gaming in QHD (2560x1440) probably for years. I don't even know if I'm getting next gen consoles. Sony barely makes any great games now and Microsoft never was at all relevant to me. Thinking back on the PS2 era, even back then most of my favorites were from third party publishers and later ported to other platforms. God of War used to be fun, but they've ruined it. My favorite PS4 games were Gravity Rush Remastered (a PSP port), Shadow of the Colossus (a PS2 remake) and Until Dawn. Surprisingly, I have no desire to replay Bloodborne, which is the main reason I got the PS4 but ended up being my least favorite FromSoftware game. I'm glad they've decided to drop most of the RPG elements in Sekiro. I feel that Japan is producing games of much more value than western console devs, which is why I prefer my Switch and PC. Resident Evil 2 is better than The Last of Us. It's more of a game, with far superior level design, resource management and problem solving. Sekiro will trump any action-adventure game on the PS4. It sucks that Sony Computer Entertainment is headquartered in California now.

Avatar image for gmak2442
#13 Posted by GMAK2442 (954 posts) -

Just for desktop use it has been very good. But you need to good eyes.

For a game like Crossout, it's pretty cool in 4K.

Avatar image for BassMan
#14 Edited by BassMan (10039 posts) -

I've had a 4K OLED TV (LG B6) for a while now and it is amazing. I have my PC hooked up to the 4K TV and a 3440x1440/120hz G-Sync monitor. I do most of my gaming on the monitor though because I prefer the ultrawide and high refresh rate. I will be upgrading to the new HDMI 2.1 OLED TVs at some point as they support 4K/120 and VRR.

Avatar image for storm_of_swords
#15 Edited by storm_of_swords (2749 posts) -

4K is a marketing gimmick and really won't provide a significant benefit for most people.

However, HDR and OLED are worth it and do provide significant benefits. So don't upgrade for just 4K; upgrade to a TV with HDR and an OLED screen.

Of course, any TV in 2019 with HDR and an OLED screen is also going to be 4K, but 4K alone should not be a selling point.

Avatar image for qx0d
#16 Edited by qx0d (333 posts) -

Technology gets better all the time. You don't really need 4K, since a new technology will take its place after a while anyway.

I see 4K TV's at Wal-Mart, and I do notice a big difference. However, it's just not something you need. If you wait a while, like I said, 8K or better will arrive.

I don't plan to upgrade to 4K anytime soon. Only when our present TV stops working, will I want to buy a 4K TV.

I would advise people to wait. I don't think there's enough 4K content to justify a 4K TV right now anyway. And 8K is right around the corner. Technology changes rapidly nowadays, and if you wait, you'll get something better than 4K.

If 4K had a lot of content and was the last resolution on Earth, I'd definitely say buy it. But that's not the case.

Avatar image for Random_Matt
#17 Posted by Random_Matt (3955 posts) -

Nope, do not watch television and so buying one is a complete waste of money.

Avatar image for AcidTango
#18 Posted by AcidTango (1660 posts) -

No. When I build a new PC in few years I will go for 4K but right now I'm perfectly fine with 1440p.

Avatar image for BassMan
#19 Edited by BassMan (10039 posts) -

@qx0d said:

Technology gets better all the time. You don't really need 4K, since a new technology will take its place after a while anyway.

I see 4K TV's at Wal-Mart, and I do notice a big difference. However, it's just not something you need. If you wait a while, like I said, 8K or better will arrive.

I don't plan to upgrade to 4K anytime soon. Only when our present TV stops working, will I want to buy a 4K TV.

I would advise people to wait. I don't think there's enough 4K content to justify a 4K TV right now anyway. And 8K is right around the corner. Technology changes rapidly nowadays, and if you wait, you'll get something better than 4K.

If 4K had a lot of content and was the last resolution on Earth, I'd definitely say buy it. But that's not the case.

Your logic is flawed. There is always something better around the corner. If you keep that mentality, you will never buy anything. 4K is not going anywhere anytime soon and 8K will not become mainstream any time soon. 8K is way too demanding and there are definitely diminishing returns over 4K. 4k is noticeably better than 1080p, but 8K is getting to the point where it is hard to tell the difference. There is also plenty of 4K content with games, blu-rays, streaming, etc..

Avatar image for mandzilla
#20 Posted by Mandzilla (4037 posts) -

4K? Pfft, I might upgrade to 1080p someday however... :P

Avatar image for davillain-
#21 Posted by DaVillain- (36087 posts) -

On the PC side, I'm happy to game in 1440p only! 4K is all about bragging rights and it eats up alot of framerates thus why I never bother with 4K at all. Until 4K becomes mainstream, I will remain gaming in 1440p.

Honestly 1440p at 27" is really amazing and it been said often 4K at 27" is too small. Now if we are talking about 4K at 32" and above then I'm with you.

Avatar image for pyro1245
#22 Edited by pyro1245 (4926 posts) -

I have 4K TV's. Even got one with a local dimming array 65" HDR10 and DV support for the living room. Great for movies which I hardly ever watch.

4K is stupid for gaming. What a waste of resources. Sony's gotta sell them TVs tho.

1440 remains the sweet spot for PC gaming. A 27" 1440p display looks sharp as hell 1-2 feet away. Then you can allocate your resources to pretty graphics and frame rates rather than pumping your pixels per inch.

4K is great for productivity, programming, etc... Really helps with text. I have 4K monitors at work and they are great.

So I would say, if you're not sure, don't worry about 4K.

Avatar image for goodzorr
#23 Posted by goodzorr (496 posts) -

I have a 50" 3d HD LED Samsung in my lounge which is fine for now. I've had it for 4 years so won't upgrade to 4K unless that gives up the ghost.

Avatar image for cejay0813
#24 Edited by cejay0813 (1456 posts) -

Meh, got one for free and bought one for Black Friday for dirt cheap. It's up to you. HD is still completely fine and I wouldn't buy a 4KTv out of the shopping season. UHD movies are a sight to see and out side of the crisp HDR visuals, you're not missing that much on the gaming side. Like someone else said, in some games it's a huge difference, in others not so much.

Maybe because a lot of console games don't even run at true 4k and at 60fps no less.

Avatar image for warmblur
#25 Edited by warmblur (2169 posts) -

Forget TV and and normal gaming for 4k it will benefit VR the most less screen door effect. Just wonder if the next gen VR headsets Oculus, Vive and PSVR will have 4k or higher.

Avatar image for Yams1980
#26 Edited by Yams1980 (3436 posts) -

Not gonna upgrade to 4k.

I use a 1080p ultrawide right now at 2560x1080. Works good with my 1080gtx. I don't quite have enough left over gpu power to run much higher. Sometimes i can toss up the res to 3440x1440 if a games not too demanding if i need to take out some aliasing.

Mostly 1080p is what I like, windows programs that lack UI scaling look good and not too small and all my old games that lack proper UI scaling look nice at native 1080p.

Down the road i'd likely get a 5120x2160 monitor but would keep around my 2560x1080 one so i would have nice backwards compatibility for games that didnt look good on it.

I already have VESA monitor mounts that would allow me to have two monitors infront of me and would be easy to swing in and out of my view depending on what monitor I wanted to use.

In the end, there is no point investing in 4k if i can't run it at that with current games; plus 4k 21:9 is roughly 25% more demanding than 4k 16:9 and even a 2080 ti RTX would struggle to push 60fps at 5120x2160.

Avatar image for kadin_kai
#27 Posted by Kadin_Kai (342 posts) -

Upgrading your TV to 4K is worth it in my opinion but not all 4K TV’s are equal.

Avatar image for blazepanzer24
#28 Posted by Blazepanzer24 (146 posts) -

If I can get a 19" monitor in 4K, then I might when my current 900p monitor dies. Untill then, I'm sticking to 900p, even though I plan to build a new computer next year.

Avatar image for l34052
#30 Posted by l34052 (3902 posts) -

I'd like to but I'm sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place. I love my d8000 plasma but I've wanted an OLED for well over a decade since I saw the first Sony model many years ago.

The problem is that I use my TV as my pc monitor and play games on it as well, OLED is prone to screen burn with static huds from games and with the windows task bar permanently along the bottom of the screen as well this could be a big problem.

The other option is Samsung qled but that is just a fancy lcd and I've never liked lcd tech at all, it just doesn't look natural to me and the black levels are lacking.

I'm hoping that true quantum dot/micro pixel or whatever you wish to call it will be the solution but that's probably 5yrs away still and is very much an unknown quantity at this point.

As much as I'd like a new TV it's very much looking like a waiting game for now.

Why oh why can't we have plasma tvs again!!

Avatar image for jackamomo
#31 Posted by Jackamomo (2157 posts) -

480p is the optimal resolution for all games.