[QUOTE="Modbetto"][QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]
People are missing the logistics - 4k or Ultra TVs where shown last year at CES as well, now why arent they getting mass produced or taking off? Well 1st of all no one is going to make mainstream 4k stuff for a while so its all going to be upscaled until then, most movies/tv stations have only just upgraded to 1080 they arent going to change again anytime soon, this along with sat and cable companies wont use up more bandwidth. Secondly i think i read somewhere that TVs need to really be over 80" for 4k to become viable as there are really only so many pixels you can have in 1 inch square before it doesnt matter or you see so little difference.
yachtboy
4K is viewable right infront of the screen since it's "pixelless".Sharp is already mass producing a 32 inch for 5000USD
Video cards support it
Games support it
Mid-high A/V receivers fully support it (Mine does)
Cable and sat content is already available in europe (where i currently live)
movies will all be streamed with 500mbps internet connection.
http://youtu.be/9fa5AXMUI-o
Im not shure you know what you're taliking about i guess.....
Plus im talking about monitors......NOT TVs.....according to you my 1920x1200 monitor, i'm looking to upgrade from the looks of this thread, shouldnt exist since "there is no content for it."
4k is DOUBLE not 4x the res of hd... The gpu power required to max a top notch game at 4k is insane at the moment. There is almost NO 4k content outside of some tech show demos... I am not sure you really know what you are talking about.4096*2160 = 8,847,360
1920*1080 = 2,073,600
8,847,360/2,073,600 = 4.267
Maths is good. 4k is 4.267 times the pixels of 1080p.
I am not sure you really know what you are talking about.
Log in to comment