They might look better but they’re too fucking expensive
Even if they were priced the same as 4K they would still be a bad value. Computers and consoles struggle with 4K 120Hz so 4 times the resolution is too much to ask.
I wouldn’t dream of gaming on one at native res, idk if that was even a selling point but obviously something wasn’t working
8k is such a waste. Most content people watch isn’t even 4k
For a lot of people most of their content isn’t even 1080p. Plenty of people watching DVDs and many TV channels only broadcast in SD.
Display technology has long outpaced content delivery.
Yeah, surprisingly DVD is still heavily outselling 4K bluray. Seems weird to me but I guess the players are ubiquitous.
When 4K players cost $500 to get something considered “good but not great”… yeah no wonder no ones buying
That is not what they cost. Mine was 180 euro. It has HDR support and plays everything I throw at it.
HDR, or Dolby Vision? From my research, anything less than the Panasonic UB820 either has missing features, or longevity issues.
Even still, 180 euro is well above the under $40 you can lots of DVD and even Standard Blu Ray
Personally, I grabbed a MakeMKV compatible UHD optical drive from eBay for $150, and just remux my discs to Plex… and then use CoreELEC on the Ugoos AM6B+ to ensure proper Dolby Vision and Lossless Audio support…. but I know that’s not exactly a mainstream option.
I still watch most streaming like YouTube and twitch on 720p because I really don’t see nor care about the difference to 1080p.
It’s crazy how different people experience things. I find it annoying and less pleasant to watch YouTube at 1080p since they downgraded the bitrate and locked it behind premium. I actually almost always watch at 4k or 1440p60 even on a phone screen just because of the bitrate.
I watch YouTube on a HP pavilion CRT, weirdly enough it almost requires me to watch with the improved bitrate due to weird artifacting. But I have premium regardless due to shitty work reasons, I drive for work so yeah.
and a lot of movies aren’t even sharper in 4k. Since for a long time movies used a 2k intermediary format for post production, even if the movie was shot with a 4k camera.
Early 2000s to mid 2010s movies shot digitally? Sure. Film shot movies, especially on 35mm or larger, absolutely look better in 4k. Especially when they’ve been restored from the negative and converted to HDR for a 4k release.
There’s a lot of older movies out there where the UHD Blu Ray is the definitive version to own, looking significantly better than any prior version (and will likely never look better).
Not on desktop use. Which is a market segment that is under served.
Would love to replace my 4x 1440p monitor setup with a 50 inch 8k TV setup.
8k gaming? In this economy? That’s a niche that less than 0.1% of people can even afford
Gaming would be done at 4k. It’s 8k for productivity.
The only market for 8k is movie theaters and megatrons. It’s absolutely not necessary to have it in your tv in your house. And it’s also insanely expensive to get the proper hardware to drive it at full resolution.
Most cinemas are 2k as well I think
IMAX has a laser thing that renders in 4K, but the point still stands. 1080p is good enough for me, and cinema once a year to have fun with friends.
The automatic HDR on my TV was a revolution because it changed the picture. 4K changes nothing.
It’s not like we went from black-and-white to color TV, it’s like “here are way more pixels but most people don’t care because they talk and drink during the movie.” Movie nerds may care and it’s fine, but I can’t justify buying a new TV for that.
I’ve never seen an 8k TV but ignorance is bliss as I’m still rocking 1080 and happy. I do see the difference at 4k when at friends houses but 1080 still looks good in my living room.
Obviously they should have worked on upgrading our eyes before doing that /s
actually true, there are people with above 20/20 vision and 8k tv would be like us going from 1080p to 4k to them. We should upgrade everyone’s vision to beyond 20/20 that would be a net benefit for everyone! Then we can all enjoy 8k tv. But honestly as a glasses wearer, the main benefit of 8k tvs are that you can go up to the tv to see way more details. It’s quite amazing and underrated, if you do the same to a same size 4k tv you can notice the pixels like a 1080p tv.
I’m more than content with 1080p @ 60Hz
I bought my 1080p LED backlit 60" Vizio panel back in early 2015 and it’s still going strong!
We still have a 55” Vizio LED/LCD 1080p from 2012? Going strong as our living room tv.
Not upgrading till the panel literally dies.
Rock on, dude. I do almost all of my gaming from the couch so 1080p looks fine to me and my GPU doesn’t have to crank out 4K worth of pixels to drag down my FPS.
You walk uphill both ways to work?
I used to. Then I moved to Kansas. No hills here!
It’s the next 3D.
They try to expand in all dimensions. Bigger panels. Higher res. Higher bit depth. Increased contrast ratios. Stereoscopics. Higher refresh rates.
Yet to find a real world use for anything over a 65" QHD at 60Hz 8bpp.
Look, you’re happy with a mid-range setup, good for you.
But sticking your head in the sand pretending that there aren’t affordable features that improve the experience is Fedora wearing nerd shit.
The fedora-wearing nerds are ones with 244Hz ultrawide 4k HDR monitors.
What you’re describing is everyone who just wants to watch a TV show comfortably on their sofa. You could swap any TV for a base-model TCL the same size and they won’t notice.
Even the gamers won’t want 8K. You’d notice the drop on FPS more than the increase in quality.
The human eye can’t perceive beyond 60fps. Fackt.
It’s very different. 3D TVs actually had a difference in viewing experience
It actually made it worse.
I watched only one movie in home 3d, but I liked it.
60Hz ewwww
8bpp ewwww too
I got a 1440p monitor, it’s 32 inches, and predominately use the bigger area for coding
ITT: Poors acting like there is no in-between 720@59 and 8k@240.
Guyuyyyzzzz achktually 1080p is all you need 🙄
