• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

8K Display by LG

I don't think a vidcard that can drive Crysis 3 on that at 60fps min exists yet, not even if you Crossfired / SLIed 4x of them 😱
 
This is getting ridiculous. Do cameras even record @ 8k? You'd just be watching 4k movies on an 8k display. Still waiting for 4k OLED to drop in price....thats more than enough for me.
 
poohbear said:
This is getting ridiculous. Do cameras even record @ 8k? You'd just be watching 4k movies on an 8k display. Still waiting for 4k OLED to drop in price....thats more than enough for me.
Click to expand...


This is precisely the kind of innovation that should lead to a price decrease for 4k though, so cheer up tiger.
 
poohbear said:
This is getting ridiculous.
Click to expand...

No.

We need 8K at the very minimum, preferably up to 16K. Why? VR. If 8K is being developed for TVs, that means that we can expect it to come to monitors in the future and hopefully someone will shrink it to the size that's required for VR.

Of course, to actually run 8K at 90 fps is a long, long way off, but you need an ambitious target. That's essentially what we'd need for a really good VR experience, until then we will only get a bunch of software hacks that barely patch over the reality that the current resolution is inadequate, by a long shot.

Also, 8K TVs are not entirely new. We've seen it before on last year's CES(Sharp had one).

Nordic Hardware, a Swedish tech site, compared the 4K and 8K TV's(of equal size) and said that there was a difference that was apparent and that the 8K TV looked better with 8K content on(Sharp had their own custom stuff).

All these higher resolutions just prove that the historic roles of resolutions of GPU power have been reversed. Now it is the GPUs who are trailing behind the resolutions and not vice versa and this is a kick in the ass to both AMD and Nvidia to accelerate.
 
No doubt makes some sense at 55" big 🙂

Maybe it won't ever make it down to small monitors, but there's people using 40" 4k tv things instead of dedicated monitors and I imagine an 8k resolution version with pixel doubling would still make sense.
 
Mondozei said:
No.

We need 8K at the very minimum, preferably up to 16K. Why? VR. If 8K is being developed for TVs, that means that we can expect it to come to monitors in the future and hopefully someone will shrink it to the size that's required for VR.

Of course, to actually run 8K at 90 fps is a long, long way off, but you need an ambitious target. That's essentially what we'd need for a really good VR experience, until then we will only get a bunch of software hacks that barely patch over the reality that the current resolution is inadequate, by a long shot.

Also, 8K TVs are not entirely new. We've seen it before on last year's CES(Sharp had one).

Nordic Hardware, a Swedish tech site, compared the 4K and 8K TV's(of equal size) and said that there was a difference that was apparent and that the 8K TV looked better with 8K content on(Sharp had their own custom stuff).

All these higher resolutions just prove that the historic roles of resolutions of GPU power have been reversed. Now it is the GPUs who are trailing behind the resolutions and not vice versa and this is a kick in the ass to both AMD and Nvidia to accelerate.
Click to expand...

Why do we need 8k resolution for VR?
 
8K120 Super Hi-Vision, here we come!

You realize that Sharp and Panasonic both showed off 8K TVs back in 2011, so this isn't really groundbreaking. Cameras and content already exist. Japan's NHK actually broadcast the London Olympic games in 8K as a test run.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1315414379

GPU makers need this push to start making more powerful GPUs more mainstream. The faster we get mainstream 4K and high-end 8K displays, the faster we'll get better GPUs.
 
therealnickdanger said:
8K120 Super Hi-Vision, here we come!

You realize that Sharp and Panasonic both showed off 8K TVs back in 2011, so this isn't really groundbreaking. Cameras and content already exist. Japan's NHK actually broadcast the London Olympic games in 8K as a test run.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1315414379

GPU makers need this push to start making more powerful GPUs more mainstream. The faster we get mainstream 4K and high-end 8K displays, the faster we'll get better GPUs.
Click to expand...

I was hoping someone would make a post like this. It's an unbelievable mega-bonus for me that the poster references one of my favorite Firesign Theater bits.
 
poohbear said:
This is getting ridiculous. Do cameras even record @ 8k? You'd just be watching 4k movies on an 8k display. Still waiting for 4k OLED to drop in price....thats more than enough for me.
Click to expand...
Nikon D810 is 7360x4912, so this TV is near that.

Pentax 645z is 8256x6192.

Those are both still resolutions tho



Mondozei said:
All these higher resolutions just prove that the historic roles of resolutions of GPU power have been reversed. Now it is the GPUs who are trailing behind the resolutions and not vice versa and this is a kick in the ass to both AMD and Nvidia to accelerate.
Click to expand...

The long pause in resolution increase that happened after we hit 1080p is what allowed GPUs to catch up. 1080p is barely any more pixels than 1600x1200, and is much lower than the next logical 4:3 resolution of 2048x1536.
 
Last edited:
I think it will still present lousy graphics if the games don't get up their game. For example new games like The Crew are still going to look outdated whether on 1080p or 8k right?, because a lot of dev simply aren't pushing boundaries of PC hardware for graphics. I'd prefer to have graphics pushed in games before we start getting crazy on resolutions. I'd like to see Crysis 3 very high at 4k though, particularly Psycho on a 65".


Is anyone gaming on 4k HDTV@4k res from 8ft+ away with a personal comparison vs 1080P?
 
Mondozei said:
No.

We need 8K at the very minimum, preferably up to 16K. Why? VR. If 8K is being developed for TVs, that means that we can expect it to come to monitors in the future and hopefully someone will shrink it to the size that's required for VR.

Of course, to actually run 8K at 90 fps is a long, long way off, but you need an ambitious target. That's essentially what we'd need for a really good VR experience, until then we will only get a bunch of software hacks that barely patch over the reality that the current resolution is inadequate, by a long shot.

Also, 8K TVs are not entirely new. We've seen it before on last year's CES(Sharp had one).

Nordic Hardware, a Swedish tech site, compared the 4K and 8K TV's(of equal size) and said that there was a difference that was apparent and that the 8K TV looked better with 8K content on(Sharp had their own custom stuff).

All these higher resolutions just prove that the historic roles of resolutions of GPU power have been reversed. Now it is the GPUs who are trailing behind the resolutions and not vice versa and this is a kick in the ass to both AMD and Nvidia to accelerate.
Click to expand...


Lol... no, not quite.

Temporal resolution is a thousand times more relevant to VR than spatial resolution. A lot of people wear glasses and still don't have 20/20 vision, but no matter how bad your eyes are, their exposure sensitivity to light is measured in femtoseconds. That's not to say you need a billion FPS to achieve VR, but you need way more temporal resolution than what we have today.
 
JAG87 said:
Lol... no, not quite.

Temporal resolution is a thousand times more relevant to VR than spatial resolution. A lot of people wear glasses and still don't have 20/20 vision, but no matter how bad your eyes are, their exposure sensitivity to light is measured in femtoseconds. That's not to say you need a billion FPS to achieve VR, but you need way more temporal resolution than what we have today.
Click to expand...

Why can't we have both? 8K120 Super Hi-Vision!
 
I guess I'll put off picking up a new phone until they come with 8k displays. 4k is so out of fashion now.
 
how are we supposed to do something better than GDDR5? You can't just wave your hands and make technology appear, GDDR5 is already fantastically efficient. I don't see us pushing much higher bus rates honestly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top