Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Consumer Electronics > Audio/Video & Home Theater

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-13-2013, 12:14 PM   #51
brainhulk
Diamond Member
 
brainhulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,682
Default

So will they have to create a higher bandwidth hdmi cable for 4k?
brainhulk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:26 PM   #52
Railgun
Senior Member
 
Railgun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ORD-->LHR
Posts: 986
Default

No
Railgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:27 PM   #53
purbeast0
Lifer
 
purbeast0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 37,033
Default

i could see myself getting a 4k projector down the road whenever they become main stream. i wouldn't pay anymore than $3k for one though, and that would have to be when there is A LOT of content in 4k as well as consoles outputting in 4k. i don't expect any of that for at least a decade though.

going to suck to have to run new wires in the wall whenever that does happen, as i'm assuming current hdmi cables won't be compatible.
purbeast0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:34 PM   #54
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Uh, 40" to 50" sets were common even a decade ago. They just sucked because they were rear projection sets.
Again, these sets were considered "big" back then. They aren't now. Just about any Joe has a 50" set now.

As for the rest of your comments, I'm not going to go quote by quote, instead I'll answer them all in one post. Whether you want to face it or not, people ARE looking for larger sets. One of the biggest questions that comes out of the plasma camp is, "when are we going to get a 70" plasma?" Currently Panasonic and Samsung offer the largest plasmas (practically speaking) coming in at 65" and 64". They sell VERY well, and you're going to tell me people wouldn't be interested in a display just 5" larger with a much better resolution? You either are just speaking for yourself, or you are seriously underestimating the market.

As for BD battles, yes they were geeks battles, but outside of that, the general public didn't even know what BD was, let alone care enough to spend big money to overhaul their existing setup. But like with any new tech, the early adopters pave the way for the average Joe Blow, as will be the case with 4K. The videophile early adopters will get the latest and greatest first, while others pretend it is no big deal until they can afford it. Then it becomes the best thing since slice bread.

And in regards to DVD vs BD, DVD was in a different era than BD. DVD didn't have to compete with streaming content, torrents, and didn't require a different TV. That being said, just because DVD sold more in the past, doesn't mean Blu-ray is not a success. It definitely is a success, but it could have been better.

But let's get back to 4K. For me, if they can get a 70"+ 4K set out for under $10K before 2015, I'll jump all over it. And if they can offer an 80"+ 4K for under $10K, I'd be ecstatic! Everyone else can sit on the sidelines and pretend 1080p is good enough.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:36 PM   #55
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brainhulk View Post
So will they have to create a higher bandwidth hdmi cable for 4k?
That's the problem. The answer is most likely, yes. HDMI 1.4 will most likely NOT be the standard for 4K. The is one of the MAIN problems with buying a 4K set now. They haven't really agreed on a standard yet, and that goes for the connector AND media.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:16 PM   #56
Eug
Lifer
 
Eug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,863
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
Again, these sets were considered "big" back then. They aren't now. Just about any Joe has a 50" set now.
The SMALLEST rear projection set you could get back then was 40".

For rear projection, 50" was a normal set, and 60" sets were quite common.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
But let's get back to 4K. For me, if they can get a 70"+ 4K set out for under $10K before 2015, I'll jump all over it. And if they can offer an 80"+ 4K for under $10K, I'd be ecstatic! Everyone else can sit on the sidelines and pretend 1080p is good enough.
You are in the 0.001%, at least in terms of TV purchases then. Not a good recipe for TV tech adoption to depend on the 0.001%.
__________________

OS X: 27" iMac Core i7 870 | 13" MacBook Pro C2D 2.26 P8400 + SSD | 13" MacBook C2D 2.4 T8300 + SSD
iOS: iPad 2 | iPhone 5s
Windows: X3400 Athlon II X3 435 | 11.6" 1810TZ Pentium SU4100 + SSD | Revo R3610 Atom 330 + SSD
Android: Nexus 7 (2012)

Last edited by Eug; 02-13-2013 at 01:19 PM.
Eug is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:21 PM   #57
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
The SMALLEST rear projection set you could get back then was 40".

60" sets were quite common.
CRT tubes were "common" back then, not 50" or 60" projection TVs. Were there quite a few rear projection TV's sold? Yes. Did the majority of the people have them? No. Again, if you had a 50"+ set (rear projection or otherwise) it was considered a "big screen TV" back then. Now, not so big.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds


Last edited by JackBurton; 02-13-2013 at 01:56 PM.
JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:30 PM   #58
Railgun
Senior Member
 
Railgun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ORD-->LHR
Posts: 986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
That's the problem. The answer is most likely, yes. HDMI 1.4 will most likely NOT be the standard for 4K. The is one of the MAIN problems with buying a 4K set now. They haven't really agreed on a standard yet, and that goes for the connector AND media.
No. It's already supported.

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/4K.aspx
Railgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:51 PM   #59
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
You are in the 0.001%, at least in terms of TV purchases then. Not a good recipe for TV tech adoption to depend on the 0.001%.
I acknowledge that. However, when it comes to 70"+ sets, I think there is quite a big demand for them. As for the tech (4K), your arguments against 4K are the same as with 1080p vs 720p in the past. Initially 1080p came at a premium, now it's common. There was always a WANT for 1080p, some just couldn't afford or justify it. But once you had it, you couldn't go back. The same will be with 4K. Early adopter will pay the price to have it first, while others will have to wait.

I wouldn't consider myself an early adopter though. I'll wait until everything is settled, and then I'll jump in. I can't see investing big money on a format that doesn't have a standard yet. Once a standard is reached though, I'm all over it.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds


Last edited by JackBurton; 02-13-2013 at 01:59 PM.
JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:56 PM   #60
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Railgun View Post
Oh, it's supported, but they haven't agreed that will be the standard for 4K media. HDMI 1.4 is what component was back when HD was made available. Technically it could handle the HD bandwidth, but you see how well that worked out. HDMI became the standard despite component being supported early on.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 02:13 PM   #61
Railgun
Senior Member
 
Railgun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ORD-->LHR
Posts: 986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
Oh, it's supported, but they haven't agreed that will be the standard for 4K media.
Why woudn't it be? There's no need to change it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
HDMI 1.4 is what component was back when HD was made available.
I don't follow. 1.4 was brought to standards in 2009, well after the official death of component connections.
Railgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:05 PM   #62
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Railgun View Post
Why woudn't it be? There's no need to change it.
HDMI 1.3 had the bandwidth to support 3D, but they changed it anyway.

Quote:
I don't follow. 1.4 was brought to standards in 2009, well after the official death of component connections.
Component had the bandwidth to support HD 1080p video however they chose to use a different standard (HDMI). There were several reasons for the change, but bandwidth wasn't one of them. Same with HDMI 1.4. It has the bandwidth to support 4K, but that doesn't necessarily mean that will become the standard for 4K.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:38 PM   #63
Railgun
Senior Member
 
Railgun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ORD-->LHR
Posts: 986
Default

Meh, it's still a cable. The spec is a bit of a minor issue.

And I know it's not bandwidth. It was HDCP. But kind of a moot point. HDMI came around in 2002. While I agree that component was good, it was still analog.
Railgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:44 PM   #64
Eug
Lifer
 
Eug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,863
Default

I still use component for some stuff, even with my projector and HDTV, but yeah, HDMI was a major step forward.

Ghosting is something we'll never have to deal with anymore... unless you're like me and still sometimes use component.
__________________

OS X: 27" iMac Core i7 870 | 13" MacBook Pro C2D 2.26 P8400 + SSD | 13" MacBook C2D 2.4 T8300 + SSD
iOS: iPad 2 | iPhone 5s
Windows: X3400 Athlon II X3 435 | 11.6" 1810TZ Pentium SU4100 + SSD | Revo R3610 Atom 330 + SSD
Android: Nexus 7 (2012)
Eug is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:48 PM   #65
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Railgun View Post
Meh, it's still a cable. The spec is a bit of a minor issue.

And I know it's not bandwidth. It was HDCP. But kind of a moot point. HDMI came around in 2002. While I agree that component was good, it was still analog.
Listen, I'm hoping they stick with HDMI 1.4a as I can't see a reason to move on to something else. But that is the big question looming over Sony's 84" 4K set which comes in at a hefty $25K. And until the powers that be finally announce that going forward all 4K players will use a 1.4a connection, early adopters run a big risk of being left out in the cold with a very expensive set.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds


Last edited by JackBurton; 02-13-2013 at 04:04 PM.
JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 04:46 PM   #66
Railgun
Senior Member
 
Railgun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: ORD-->LHR
Posts: 986
Default

There's no other input on that tv so what else would it be? I think it's not a point worth arguing as its not going to change.
Railgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 05:54 PM   #67
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Railgun View Post
There's no other input on that tv so what else would it be? I think it's not a point worth arguing as its not going to change.
I think you are missing the point. The TV uses HDMI 1.4, however the industry hasn't agreed on a standard for 4K yet. If next year they decide HDMI 1.5 will be used for 4K players (let's say they decide on purple-ray as the next media format for 4K), you're screwed.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 07:46 PM   #68
purbeast0
Lifer
 
purbeast0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 37,033
Default

anyone remember hd-dvd's?
purbeast0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:00 PM   #69
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 54,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by purbeast0 View Post
anyone remember hd-dvd's?
I still have them
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:09 PM   #70
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
I still have them
Same here. I have 2 players. The cool thing is, I have some HD movies that still aren't available on BD.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:20 PM   #71
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 54,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
Same here. I have 2 players. The cool thing is, I have some HD movies that still aren't available on BD.
I ought to rip them.... I have like 60 hd-dvds. I think.
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca

Last edited by sdifox; 02-13-2013 at 08:28 PM.
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:22 PM   #72
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
I aught to rip them.... I have like 60 hd-dvds. I think.
Yeah, I need to do that too. These things are taking up valuable HDMI ports. I've converted most to BD, but I still have a few left.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:30 PM   #73
Anteaus
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackBurton View Post
I think you are missing the point. The TV uses HDMI 1.4, however the industry hasn't agreed on a standard for 4K yet. If next year they decide HDMI 1.5 will be used for 4K players (let's say they decide on purple-ray as the next media format for 4K), you're screwed.
HDMI 2.0 was announced in January and expected to be released early this year. Myself, I'd avoid buying anything related to 4K until the interface is in the hardware.

Key features:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

Based on HDMI Forum meetings it is expected that HDMI 2.0 will increase the maximum TMDS per channel throughput from 3.4 Gbit/s to 6 Gbit/s which would allow a maximum total TMDS throughput of 18 Gbit/s. This will allow HDMI 2.0 to support 4K resolution at 60 frames per second (fps).[154] Other features that are expected for HDMI 2.0 include support for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, support for 25 fps 3D formats, improved 3D capability, support for more than 8 channels of audio, support for the HE-AAC and DRA audio standards, dynamic auto lip-sync, and additional CEC functions.
Anteaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:41 PM   #74
JackBurton
Lifer
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,424
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anteaus View Post
HDMI 2.0 was announced in January and expected to be released early this year. Myself, I'd avoid buying anything related to 4K until the interface is in the hardware.

Key features:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

Based on HDMI Forum meetings it is expected that HDMI 2.0 will increase the maximum TMDS per channel throughput from 3.4 Gbit/s to 6 Gbit/s which would allow a maximum total TMDS throughput of 18 Gbit/s. This will allow HDMI 2.0 to support 4K resolution at 60 frames per second (fps).[154] Other features that are expected for HDMI 2.0 include support for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, support for 25 fps 3D formats, improved 3D capability, support for more than 8 channels of audio, support for the HE-AAC and DRA audio standards, dynamic auto lip-sync, and additional CEC functions.
Bingo. Thanks Anteaus.
__________________
No thank you. I don't believe in invisible magic people that live in the clouds

JackBurton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 10:10 AM   #75
A5
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 4,730
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
H.265 will enable TV providers to give us even more crappy channels, both SD and HD. There really isn't any incentive for them to use it to provide us 4K, because it still uses too much bandwidth, and the only people asking for it are a few geeks at AnandTech and stuff.
A 4K/H.265 stream would be able to fit inside the standard channel bandwidth (6MHz * X bps depending on the level of QAM encoding used) if they wanted it to. They won't, but they could.

I wouldn't be shocked to see someone like HBO try to launch a 4K channel during the back half of the decade, though. It's not like I think it's going to be fast, but it will happen eventually.
A5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.