Where are the 8K Monitors?

[Armenius]

http://www.hometheaterengineering.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

According to this the recommended THX viewing distance for 77 inches is 8.5 feet, not 12. 8-8.5 been consistent with my preference of getting to a 35-40 degree viewing angle.

At that distance it's very easy to spot a 4k versus 8k difference side by side if they're both playing native content for their respective resolution. I could personally see a difference back to about 11-12 feet as I had this exact scenario in a Best Buy. I'd say for most people it may be that 8-9 foot range.

People always put these supposedly scientific statements about what PPI can be perceived according to some chart a guy did from a one time vision study, and to me, they're BS and rarely align with real world experience.

I was going by SMPTE, not THX, but I entered 88" instead of 77". SMPTE 30 for a 77" screen is 10.4'.

 

[DrekkenRidge]

To each his own. I definitely prefer the closer THX recommendation.

 

[sharknice]

http://www.hometheaterengineering.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

According to this the recommended THX viewing distance for 77 inches is 8.5 feet, not 12. 8-8.5 been consistent with my preference of getting to a 35-40 degree viewing angle.

At that distance it's very easy to spot a 4k versus 8k difference side by side if they're both playing native content for their respective resolution. I could personally see a difference back to about 11-12 feet as I had this exact scenario in a Best Buy. I'd say for most people it may be that 8-9 foot range.

People always put these supposedly scientific statements about what PPI can be perceived according to some chart a guy did from a one time vision study, and to me, they're BS and rarely align with real world experience.

They are BS. The most referenced thing I've seen is a paper where they came up with a calculation based on rod/cone density, but they didn't do any real tests with people. Sharp actually did a real experiment with people and higher resolution was discernable.

Using a cone density arc calculation calculation is oversimplification. We have 2 eyes, AND they are looking from different angles, AND our eyes are not stationary. They're gathering much more information than that oversimplified algorithm.

I don't think we're anywhere close to resolution being indiscernible from real life. There are diminishing returns though, IMO we're at a point where things like contrast and brightness have a lot more impact. I wouldn't pick an 8k LCD over a 4k OLED for movie watching, but if the bump from 4k to 8k comes with no compromises it's going to be noticable.

 

[DrekkenRidge]

They are BS. The most referenced thing I've seen is a paper where they came up with a calculation based on rod/cone density, but they didn't do any real tests with people. Sharp actually did a real experiment with people and higher resolution was discernable.

Using a cone density arc calculation calculation is oversimplification. We have 2 eyes, AND they are looking from different angles, AND our eyes are not stationary. They're gathering much more information than that oversimplified algorithm.

I don't think we're anywhere close to resolution being indiscernible from real life. There are diminishing returns though, IMO we're at a point where things like contrast and brightness have a lot more impact. I wouldn't pick an 8k LCD over a 4k OLED for movie watching, but if the bump from 4k to 8k comes with no compromises it's going to be noticable.

To that point, I love both higher res and better contrast seen with OLEDs and "needed" 2 tvs anyway. So i got the 77 a95l and 85 qn900c.

My holy grail would be this:

--90 inches +
--8k
--QD Oled
--Improved reflection handling tech for QD OLED
--Even more advanced upscaling/image processing
--Under $10,000
--All in one TV

Maybe by 2030-2035? Lmao.

 

[elvn]

My holy grail would be this:

--90 inches +
--8k
--QD Oled
--Improved reflection handling tech for QD OLED
--Even more advanced upscaling/image processing
--Under $10,000
--All in one TV

Maybe by 2030-2035? Lmao.

I think 2027 and later should have some big advancements in XR glasses. Sunglasses style format lightweight glasses designed to display a screen in real space. There are already micro OLED models on the market that do 600nit but they are only 1080p right now, which is a poor/limited PPD for glasses to make a screen from. The xreal air2 is micro oled and 120hz apparently. Apple pushed their roadmapped lightweight sunglasses format device back to 2027 as of now. Samsung is another big player but there are a lot of other mfgs. Eventually XR glasses should replace staring at a brick in your hand (smartphone, tablet) for most people , but they can also replace using a monitor or tv.

Once they get high enough resolution, those kinds of glasses should be able to provide larger screen experiences and while the best ones will probably be expensive like phones and laptops, macbooks, etc. . they probably won't cost $10,000 + usd like 100 inch high performance TVs do. Just like you can do with VR headsets, you'll be able to place a virtual screen in real space, either tethered to you as you walk around, or pinned in real space somewhere.

Some people are already using the 1080p models on the steam deck or the lenovo legion go handheld gaming devices, etc. with models like the XReal Air, XReal Air2. They connect via usb-C though you can get a "wireless" module transmitter/receiver to keep on your belt or in pocket with the wire still going alongside your neck to the glasses.

I think that is probably going to be a much more accessible and (relatively) affordable way to get a large (to your perspective, viewing angle) high resolution, high performing/spec screens in the long run. And it will probably be the next evolution from the smart phone, though a smart device phone/module will probably still be the device the screen is displaying from when not near a less mobile pc/laptop/console.

The marketing images hype them up a lot as if their resolution was a lot higher already, but I think it shows the way things are probably going to go in the long run - once they get enough resolution that they'll be able to display a virtual 4k (or later 8k) screen in real space. The XReal Air2 pro has Electromagnetic Dimming too, so you can touch the glasses to dim the outer glass by different amounts to get a better isolated, solid and contrasted screen and vice-versa depending on what you are doing. Also worth noting that they can do 3d gaming that provides depth on the virtual flat screen for 3d capable games(or 3d movies). Reflections and light sources shouldn't be a problem where the screen appears in real space as it's not really there at all, its on a display within the glasses' "housing". God rays, etc with lenses themselves could be a minor issue though depending on the tech and advances.

XR glasses are still more or less in their infancy but they will probably advance into a time-frame similar to what you outlined. Might get a big step in. 2027+ to push the envelope if apple releases a model.

 

[Gatecrasher3000]

Some people are already using the 1080p models on the steam deck or the lenovo legion go handheld gaming devices, etc. with models like the XReal Air, XReal Air2. They connect via usb-C though you can get a "wireless" module transmitter/receiver to keep on your belt or in pocket with the wire still going alongside your neck to the glasses

In a recent moore'slawisdead podcast, the VR development reporter Sadly It's Bradley mentioned he has seen some information that suggests the Steam Deck 2 could come with some kind of XR headset implementation.
I think you are right in the sense that looking at small screens (phone, handheld gaming) will be a think of the past once XR headset become truly great.
I have the Xreal Airs gen one, and while I felt there was a long way to go with them, the potential is there.
Lol watch XR glass allow for 3d movies to make a comeback.

 

[elvn]

"Hi, I'm Brad."

I watch his (Brad's) channel pretty regularly, heh. Thanks for the insight on the xreal air. I realize they are still in their infancy but they sound pretty neat for what they can do in a limited fashion already.
Maybe apple will push things forward if they release their sunglass format XR glasses in 2027 with something high end and bling priced along with their marketing and the apparent fashion/pride factor a lot of people get from owning their devices that might increase their glasses' popularity.

. . 3D "holographic" video. . . .

SBS 3d movies are used in VR for some things already if you know what I mean , wink wink.

If/when XR replaces cell phone visual use they could also have small cellphone-like cameras next to each eye/in corners/on end of the arms of the glasses to record things in 3d on the fly. I believe some more bulky VR/MR headsets already can do this with dual forward facing cameras.

There are also lenses for regular cameras that allow you to do it but overall a pricey kit with a mirrorless handheld camera + a ~$1800usd dual lens (e.g. from canon). Canon is supposedly coming out with a hybrid 360/VR180 rumored to be around $1k though eventually.
roadtovr.com/canon-introduces-180-stereoscopic-lens-to-support-a-bright-future-for-vr-content-creation

Potentially, years ahead you might see more people taking 3d photos and posting sbs 3d videos on youtube, etc. maybe even live streaming in 3d. That, depending how things go with XR glasses' (and MR headset/goggle's) cams. Phones also perhaps if the 3d media space takes off, maybe a cam on each end of the back of the phone so you could shoot sideways. You can already take 3d vids with apple phones (since a recent ios update) but it's pretty limited currently to 1080p 30 and idk what the viewing angle and quality is.

One of the big problems with early 3d was that it used either different colored lenses or flickering/shuttering lenses alternating which was eye fatiguing for a lot of people, it had to cut the already limited refresh rate in half usually, and the end result often wasn't all that great besides. Most of the better VR/AR/MR/XR devices have a separate screen for each eye so it forms binocular vision and depth perception just like our eyes do normally seeing things in real life. If XR takes off (maybe 2027+, apple tends to push some techs) . . . perhaps 3d will start making a comeback, yeah. We'll prob get 3d desktop environments and supported apps too at some point in XR (like the home interfaces and huds in VR have already). I'm all for it when done right. The holographic effect in a VR headset's virtual space is really impressive already. The PPD is just hard for me to suffer (something like 24 - 32 PPD even now on popular consumer headsets) along with the bulk (and heat) of the foam shoebox on your head and skin. (They market VR headsets as gaming/media + workout fitness program devices, but when I worked out with quest1 it ended up looking and feeling like I was walking through steamy a carwash on foot). Things will progress though.

 

[improwise]

Being black Friday and all I decided to give the 65" QN900C a chance as a very high rez desktop monitor and.....it's already going back. The experience was awful, mostly as the PQ for whatever reason was really bad. First of the DSE was horrible, probably worse than anything I have seen in at least 10 years. This was combined with horrible blooming/haloing even in "Local Dimming High" and a very noticeable chicken wire on mostly blue backgrounds.

All in all it was noticeable worse than the QN900B I evaluated 6 months ago. This makes me think that I must have received a real lemon, which once again has me thinking about the QC at Samsung. This is supposed to be their ultra high end (at least based on price) and yet no one seem to have bothered testing it before sending it across the world. Alternative is of course that the QN900C, like the QN90C,is a noticeable downgrade to last years TVs, but that seems strange. Did upgrade to latest firmware, multiple resets etc. but no...

There is of course also the issue about the One Connect Box which has obvious problems besides the 40 Gbps limitation, as reported in many places across the Internet (mostly due to the S95C having the same box). 4k@120 hz was completely broken, worked perhaps 1-2 seconds before the whole screen going black / starting to flash.

 

[Xar]

I think 2027 and later should have some big advancements in XR glasses. Sunglasses style format lightweight glasses designed to display a screen in real space. There are already micro OLED models on the market that do 600nit but they are only 1080p right now, which is a poor/limited PPD for glasses to make a screen from. The xreal air2 is micro oled and 120hz apparently. Apple pushed their roadmapped lightweight sunglasses format device back to 2027 as of now. Samsung is another big player but there are a lot of other mfgs. Eventually XR glasses should replace staring at a brick in your hand (smartphone, tablet) for most people , but they can also replace using a monitor or tv.

Once they get high enough resolution, those kinds of glasses should be able to provide larger screen experiences and while the best ones will probably be expensive like phones and laptops, macbooks, etc. . they probably won't cost $10,000 + usd like 100 inch high performance TVs do. Just like you can do with VR headsets, you'll be able to place a virtual screen in real space, either tethered to you as you walk around, or pinned in real space somewhere.

Some people are already using the 1080p models on the steam deck or the lenovo legion go handheld gaming devices, etc. with models like the XReal Air, XReal Air2. They connect via usb-C though you can get a "wireless" module transmitter/receiver to keep on your belt or in pocket with the wire still going alongside your neck to the glasses.

I think that is probably going to be a much more accessible and (relatively) affordable way to get a large (to your perspective, viewing angle) high resolution, high performing/spec screens in the long run. And it will probably be the next evolution from the smart phone, though a smart device phone/module will probably still be the device the screen is displaying from when not near a less mobile pc/laptop/console.

The marketing images hype them up a lot as if their resolution was a lot higher already, but I think it shows the way things are probably going to go in the long run - once they get enough resolution that they'll be able to display a virtual 4k (or later 8k) screen in real space. The XReal Air2 pro has Electromagnetic Dimming too, so you can touch the glasses to dim the outer glass by different amounts to get a better isolated, solid and contrasted screen and vice-versa depending on what you are doing. Also worth noting that they can do 3d gaming that provides depth on the virtual flat screen for 3d capable games(or 3d movies). Reflections and light sources shouldn't be a problem where the screen appears in real space as it's not really there at all, its on a display within the glasses' "housing". God rays, etc with lenses themselves could be a minor issue though depending on the tech and advances.

XR glasses are still more or less in their infancy but they will probably advance into a time-frame similar to what you outlined. Might get a big step in. 2027+ to push the envelope if apple releases a model.

With this XR thing, no longer the need to buy overly expensive monitor just for gaming.

 

[Martha Stewart]

Finally found another Dell 8k UP3218k at a decent price ($1500 new sealed)

I should of never sold the original one I had a few years back. I forgot how much of a GOAT monitor this is: 32", Glossy screen & 8k. Its like looking through a window .

8k IS THE REAL DEAL, don't let anyone tell you "can't see the difference from 4k or you need 100" screen bullshit" lmao . Currently using this Dell 8k next to an 32" 4k ACER X32 FP and LG C2 oled. 8k > 4k and it's not even close

 

[MistaSparkul]

View attachment 620372

Finally found another Dell 8k UP3218k at a decent price ($1500 new sealed)

I should of never sold the original one I had a few years back. I forgot how much of a GOAT monitor this is: 32", Glossy screen & 8k. Its like looking through a window .

8k IS THE REAL DEAL, don't let anyone tell you "can't see the difference from 4k or you need 100" screen bullshit" lmao . Currently using this Dell 8k next to an 32" 4k ACER X32 FP and LG C2 oled. 8k > 4k and it's not even close

Obviously there is a difference, the actual issue was diminishing returns. It would take WAY more GPU power to drive 8K vs 4K but is the improvement in image quality actually worth it? I personally don't think so but whatever to each his own.

 

[ZodaEX]

Obviously there is a difference, the actual issue was diminishing returns. It would take WAY more GPU power to drive 8K vs 4K but is the improvement in image quality actually worth it? I personally don't think so but whatever to each his own.

That depends on the picture quality of the movie you're watching. Movies filmed on better cameras look better on better screens.

 

[MistaSparkul]

That depends on the picture quality of the movie you're watching. Movies filmed on better cameras look better on better screens.

I was referring to gaming hence the mention of GPU power. Everyone knows there will be an increase in image quality if you go from 4K to 8K, there is no doubt about that. But given that if you had the amount of GPU power needed to run a game at 8K 60Hz, you could probably run it at around 240Hz if it was at 4K instead and I would much rather take that all day everyday because I don't feel like the leap to 8K is worth it but again that's nothing more than my own personal opinion.

 

[Happy Hopping]

View attachment 620372

Finally found another Dell 8k UP3218k at a decent price ($1500 new sealed)

I should of never sold the original one I had a few years back. I forgot how much of a GOAT monitor this is: 32", Glossy screen & 8k. Its like looking through a window .

8k IS THE REAL DEAL, don't let anyone tell you "can't see the difference from 4k or you need 100" screen bullshit" lmao . Currently using this Dell 8k next to an 32" 4k ACER X32 FP and LG C2 oled. 8k > 4k and it's not even close

So what's your latest setup looks like?

 

[Hulk]

What kind of GPU you plan on running with a 8K monitor?

 

[GoldenTiger]

What kind of GPU you plan on running with a 8K monitor?

There's only one choice, why do you ask?

 

[Martha Stewart]

What kind of GPU you plan on running with a 8K monitor?

RTX 4090 lol (there's only one choice)

 

[GoldenTiger]

RTX 4090 lol (there's only one choice)

There's only one choice

 

[Happy Hopping]

Go thru CES 2024, not 1 co. bothers fart out the word 8K. Talk about disappointment

 

[elvn]

Liked comment, but dislike the fact.

They can't squeeze money out of people for tv purchases on 8k. 8k on the display side reduces everyone's profits and has to try to lure people into a slightly better than 4k upconvert for a much higher price, where most people are watching compressed streaming / dynamically compressed streaming services that are thinned 4k to begin with. Creators are unwilling to upgrade to expensive 8k cameras and mastering monitors with no real push to do so, where they are even available/viable. The whole chain would eventually have to do upgrades. Much easier, and more profitable, to just milk 4k tech longer.

Still I would have hoped that someone like dell , alienware, apple would come out with an 8k monitor marketed for increased desktop/app real estate and graphics professional image editing clarity, or samsung announce an 8k ark or something but it seems years away now. Apple is supposed to release a 32" imac screen "in 2024 or 2025" though. :b

Even some of the major tv manufacturers are just putting out 4k FALD tvs with a little more brightness and brightness management chips but no drastic increase in the # of backlights (or MLA and fully phosphorescent OLEDs across the board in OLED lines) which would prob cut into profit. A 16" macbook has 10,000 zones so these mfgs are really watering down the zone count on their FALD monitors and especially 42" to 77" tvs. Some outliers to that are TCL 's 115 inch LCD has 20,000 zones and Hisense showed a 110inch tv with 40,000 zones but those are huge expensive tvs most people would never buy. However the TCL QM8 shown at ces available in 65" (to 98") 4k has 5,000 zones, 5,000 nit peak, 120Hz VRR, 240hz game accelerator mode (3840x1080 upscaled gets 240hz).

Not the biggest fan of tom's H but it has some info there. Note that they added anti-glare to this year's model.
https://www.tomsguide.com/reviews/t...24-hands-on-review-brighter-bigger-and-better
.

Edit:

The TCL M8 screens are native 120hz. They use a game accelerator mode to cut the vertical rez in half to hit 240hz.

From a reddit reply on their previous model:

Apparently it doesn't cut the resolution in half, it just cuts the *vertical* resolution in half. So 3840*2160 becomes a very weird 3840*1080.

TCL have implemented this "motion accelerator" on a few of their native 120hz/144hz panels, too (specifically, I'm looking at the TCL 65C745K, which might be EU/UK-exclusive - I know I had trouble finding any retailers carrying 120hz TCL models widely available in America over here when I was making notes of what was available some time last year. This one does 120hz, 144hz and this weird 3840*1080@240hz).

 

[Happy Hopping]

I was going to upgrade to that Asus 4K 48" OLED, but after I went to the store and look at the actual OLED screen, it's bright. But that's my only benefit. I'm using 43" 4K, so it's a waste of $ for me to do that upgrade.

 

[KazeoHin]

I personally think game graphics aren't at the level where even 4k makes them look better at 32" and below. Let alone 8k. SURE, they look 'sharper' but is that always better if theres no detail?


Take an old N64 game and render it at 4k, and the assets just look terrible, instead of being 'blurry, undefined mario' it's 'incredibly sharp, disgusting low-poly Mario'.

Games nowadays just don't have the detail to really take advantage of 8k, in most instances a 'fantastic looking game' at 1440P/QHD will just look sharper at 4k, it won't really bring out any details you couldn't see before, even distant details are reduced because of LODs and draw-distance optimisation.

4K is enough resolution to see the peach-fuzz on a young woman's face at conversation distance. It's enough to see ants crawling on the grouting between bricks in a wall, enough to see an individual loose leaf twisting in the wind on a tree in the mid-range distance.

Yet our developers DO NOT have the horsepower available to render, nor the tools to author such high fidelity content. And that's 4K. Not 8K.

So really, until our graphics horsepower expands 3-4 times what we have now, and assets are worked to take advantage of such high resolution, I don't see 8k being an upgrade IN GAMES. In video, productivity, text clarity sure! But games? Eh I don't think it's going to reveal more detail until we have something like an RTX 9090 Ti.

 

[t1337duder]

There's really not much, if any uncompressed 8k content. 4k gaming already relies on upscaling to hit their normal performance targets, 8k would only rely even further on upscaling.

When it comes down to it, there's so much more to PQ than resolution. Color, contrast, brightness, etc.

Unless an 8k monitor was competitive in regards to all aspects of PQ, then I really don't see the point, particularly when there's practically zero content to make it shine. Of course, some people will always fetishize high resolutions and high DPI as if there's some magic to a super-high resolution.

 

[kasakka]

There's really not much, if any uncompressed 8k content. 4k gaming already relies on upscaling to hit their normal performance targets, 8k would only rely even further on upscaling.

When it comes down to it, there's so much more to PQ than resolution. Color, contrast, brightness, etc.

Unless an 8k monitor was competitive in regards to all aspects of PQ, then I really don't see the point, particularly when there's practically zero content to make it shine. Of course, some people will always fetishize high resolutions and high DPI as if there's some magic to a super-high resolution.

I can totally understand wanting 8K, though 5-6K would be more than enough too if someone bothered to make the panels. 4K is fine for the 27-32" size but past that you start to want more resolution for desktop use in the say 36-48" size range, which has so few offerings anyway. I'd be all over 5-6K options in that size. Just 5K would be pretty decent PPI all the way up to 48".

Funnily enough 8K becomes increasingly irrelevant the larger the screen gets because the viewing distance becomes large enough to negate being able to really see the extra detail offered by 8K, combined with the lack of content you mention.

 

[elvn]

There's really not much, if any uncompressed 8k content. 4k gaming already relies on upscaling to hit their normal performance targets, 8k would only rely even further on upscaling.

When it comes down to it, there's so much more to PQ than resolution. Color, contrast, brightness, etc.

Unless an 8k monitor was competitive in regards to all aspects of PQ, then I really don't see the point, particularly when there's practically zero content to make it shine. Of course, some people will always fetishize high resolutions and high DPI as if there's some magic to a super-high resolution.

https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/

A large 8k would be a multi monitor replacement, and it would have somewhat higher PPD even at that. People cramming larger * 4k * gaming tvs directly onto a desk end up back to perceived pixels sizes that look more like 1440 - 1500p desktop sized monitor's pixel sizes which is not optimal.

Text sub sampling is trying to mask how large the pixel structures really are, and the rest of the 2d desktop apps and imagery get no such masking methods. Text's pixel sizes needing to be masked with massaged text-ss methods shows how large the pixels are on most screen layouts.

I've used a 4k 15.6 " glossy ips laptop for a few years and it looked great for apps and imagery. It was 93 PPD at 18" / 1.5' view distance, and 122PPD whenever I used it as a side screen at 24" / 2'. On my 48cx I usually sit +/- 40 inches away which gets me around 70 PPD.

Someone sitting 24"" away from a 42" 4k on a desk is getting 51 PPD for example. A 27 inch 1440p at 25 inch away gets 51 PPD.

8k screen of the same size at the same distance will have double the PPD of any 4k.

A samsung ark is 55" so it's PPD on a desk is low, and having quads of 1080p real-estate is not a real modern bezel free multi-monitor replacement imo. Quads of 4k would be better. The only thing we have besides a few 8k tvs right now is the 57" 4k 'doublewide' that is 4k+4k rez at 240hz. Think outside of the box. Just think of an over under of one of those without bezel in the middle. The goal would be to play games windowed or 1:1 pixel mapped / letterboxed on the screen when desired, in 4k, 5k, 6k, and various ultrawide resolution spaces - yet have four 4k worth of pixels at fairly high PPD for desktop apps and imagery.

 

[elvn]

. . . .

Depends on your usage scenario.

For me the usage scenario would be as a "command center" or "battlestation" style setup where the screen would be decoupled from the desk in order to allow for increased viewing distance and a more optimal viewing angle for a larger screen.

For a theoretical 8k screen with a similar format to the 1000R curvature of the samsung ark for example , in 55inch or 65 inch size:

..the center point of the circle. 1000R means a 1000mm radius. That's nearly 40 inch view distance for all of the pixels to remain pointed at you, equidistant from your eyes along the curve, remaining on axis in relation to you all the way to the ends of the screen.


..Pixels per degree is a much better measurement of the pixel pixel density you'll be seeinging than just stating ppi alone.

https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/

For reference:

At the human central viewing angle of 60 to 50 degrees, every 8k screen of any size gets around 127 to 154 PPD

..At the human central viewing angle of 60 to 50 degrees, every 4k screen of any size gets around 64 to 77 PPD

..At the human central viewing angle of 60 to 50 degrees, every 2560x1440 screen of any size gets only 43 PPD to 51 PPD

..At the human central viewing angle of 60 to 50 degrees, every 1920x1080 screen of any size gets only 32 PPD to 39 PPD

At longer view distances on larger screens, for example 32inch to 40inches away on a 55inch or 65 inch - you'd benefit from much higher ppi realized as PPD. A 55inch ark gets more like a 1440p desktop screen's pixel sizes to your perspective when sitting even 32 inches away, worse when closer. Even at 38 inch viewing distance its only getting 60ppd, which is ok but not stellar. I use my 48cx at around 65 to 70 PPD, 60deg to 55deg angle viewing distance wise but if it was mounted right on my desk it would be nore like 50 ppd ~ 1500p looking.

2D desktop graphics and imagery have no sub sampling or AA to smooth/smudge/blur the edges so they will remain uncompensated, have no masking.
...
The higher the PPD, the less you have to lean on masking how large the pixel structure appears. Low PPD exacerbates fringing issues in general. High contrast graphics aliasing, (rgb subpixel format) text fringing, frame insertion edge artifacts, DLSS AI upscaling edge artifacts, and non standard pixel structures like pentile and wrgb.
It's probably not a coincidence that the most vocal complaints about wrgb text are often from people cramming a 42", 48", or 55" oled into a near onto a desk setup that results in closer to 50PPD- than 70PPD+. Bigger perceived pixels bigger problems.

.. the desktop/app real-estate estate would be much greater on a larger gaming tv style 8k screen. They promote the 55inch 4k ark as a bezel free multiple monitor setup replacement but it's quads of desktop real estate are only 1080p. Most people using multiple screens are likely using at least 1440 per screen space if not 4k, and many seeking the real estate using at least one 4k screen space in the mix I'd guess. No matter how you look at it, 1080p screen spaces aren't going to cut it imo.

.. for gaming, on a larger format screen like those described, optimally you'd be able to run smaller screen spaces 1:1 pixel when desired for more demanding games, more encompassing field of view and/or when desiring the opposite in an uw format. E.g. 4k at higher hz than 8k native. Also 5k, 6k, x1600, x2160 ultrawide resolutions etc. 1:1 w/o scaling. On a larger screen those smaller portions of the overall screen would still be decent sizes and also in relation to your perspective as you might sit closer to the screen while viewing games in those fields and sit farther when using the rest of the desktop/app/OS real-estate.

Gaming on a large format 8k screen(full screen or in smaller screen spaces 1:1) would be leaning on dlss AI upscaling and frame generation of today but also as it matures along with more powerful 5000 series gpus (2025 most likely, should have better 8k options and competitors by then too) and into the years of gpus and advancements beyond (perhaps eventually more vector informing: game engines,game development, os, drivers/peripherals to allow several frames to be generated more accurately rather than a single "tween" frame - using that kind of actual informed vector system rather than solely guessing what vectors might be between two frames).


.......

"All I'll ever need."

I can understand the sentiment at this stage considering what is available right now. However people said the same things about 1080p vs 1440p. 1440p vs 4k , 60hz vs 120hz, HDR nits, etc.

Right now I'd love a 65" 8k screen that could do 8k 120hz desktop / windowed games, higher hz ( ~ 144hz+) at lower resolutions 1:1 ~ letterboxed and at 4k upscaled full screen. I'm probably going to wait it out until more mfgs come out of the deep freeze they put 8k gaming tvs into though. More competition in pricing, models ,features and 8k a little less green on the vine.

 

[elvn]

Samsung the only horse in the race but at least they are releasing an upgraded model in 2024

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...front-and-center-at-ces-2024/?sh=26a591b273c2

With this in mind, while Samsung’s new Micro LED models might have captured my initial attention during the First Look event, the brand’s relatively mainstream focus this year is on its 8K TVs.

This might seem strange given the oft-reported failure of 8K content to achieve any significant market penetration despite years of trying. Samsung clearly sees 8K as an area of core competency for its TV division, though, particularly now that fewer and fewer rival brands seem to be throwing much effort into developing their own “next gen” 8K TVs.

You don’t have to look too deeply at the story behind Samsung’s new 8K TVs for 2024 to see another reason why Samsung continues to put so much store in them. The big new feature for these new 8K TVs is a new Neo QLED 8 AI Gen3 processor. This inelegantly named system claims to be driven by a neural processing unit that’s twice as fast as the one used in Samsung’s 2023 8K TVs, while the number of neural networks the latest processor can draw on has increased an incredible eight-fold, from 64 in 2023 to 512 for 2024.

The single most important thing about this huge processing leap is that it should deliver yet another leap in the quality of Samsung’s upscaling of 4K, HD and even (shudder) standard definition content to the 8K TVs’ native resolution. I’ve had the chance to see this new upscaler running with both SD and HD content, and can confirm that it’s a big improvement over any previous 8K upscaler I’ve seen, delivering some genuinely remarkable results. Which really matters, as it makes it easier for Samsung to make the case that 8K TVs don’t need to be receiving native 8K images to make a difference to picture quality.

For me, as I've stated before, in a PC command center usage scenario I don't need each type of content to be 8k - I need the ppi --> resulting PPD to be 8k pixel density , with a much higher desktop/app real estate space for multiple windows/tiles/apps instead of using multiple monitors for desktop real-estate. However it would be nice if AI upscaling made some non-gaming media look just as good or better than 4k content full screen.

 

[MistaSparkul]

There's really not much, if any uncompressed 8k content. 4k gaming already relies on upscaling to hit their normal performance targets, 8k would only rely even further on upscaling.

When it comes down to it, there's so much more to PQ than resolution. Color, contrast, brightness, etc.

Unless an 8k monitor was competitive in regards to all aspects of PQ, then I really don't see the point, particularly when there's practically zero content to make it shine. Of course, some people will always fetishize high resolutions and high DPI as if there's some magic to a super-high resolution.

8K will eventually get there for games, but it's still far off. For now all this talk of 8K is for...."work" lol. I have an ipad pro so I know how great high PPI can look for text and all, but IMO it is totally unnecessary and a waste of space just to have a bigass 8K screen only for work.

 

[elvn]

I got away from the up against the wall like a bookshelf/upright piano+sheet music style setup with a smaller screen up close for my main rig. I'm more of a battlestation ~ command center style user for my main rig. I enjoy have the distance from my peripherals and from myself to a larger screen. I went from a single 43" 4k samsung VA alongside my 32" 1600p VA g-sync screen to having a 43" 4k on each end, then a 48" 4k OLED in the middle with the two 43" screens flipped to portrait mode. I view it from around 40" away +/- depending on what I'm doing, using a separate island desk on caster wheels with all of my peripherals on it which is decoupled from the screens. Considering I already have 3x4k in desktop real-estate on relatively large screens, a large 8k with 4x 4k of real-estate as an option would be great to have without bezels. Alternately I've considered a superultrawide beneath a single 4k gaming tv.

However I do have other pc station areas in my house that are still like that smaller "room in minature of a desk surface as the floor" with your giant head near the smaller screen relatively, and I understand if a lot of people prefer that kind of setup. Perceived screen size is relative after all, and PPI vs distance --> PPD.

To be clear I did try a 37" 1080p westinghouse many years ago but I found that a really bad fit due to the low PPD and low desktop real-estate. It also wasn't that great for gaming overall imo. It wasn't until the modern gaming TVs came along with decent 4k rez and higher PPD at the right viewing distance (decoupled from the desk and set back some), with 120hz + VRR (and HDR to boot) that I found it pleasing to do a larger screen, more distant setup.. A large 8k would be a real multi-monitor replacement for those of us using multiple screens in more area based "command center" style setup.

Unnecessary doesn't come into it. Big tvs aren't necessary either, or super ultrawides, super high hz screens in general, etc. It would be fun to use. I use a 15" laptop with a 10" tablet next to it part of the time and I get along fine with that too though.

 

[MistaSparkul]

 

[elvn]

https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-ente...mp-up-style-ai-picture-enhancements-game-bar/

Samsung also says the 900D is the first TV to support a maximum variable refresh rate (VRR) of 240Hz, improving the smoothness of games. Most other TVs max out at 120Hz or 144Hz, although Samsung's step-down 800D 8K TV can go up to 165Hz. Note that these higher refresh rates work only with PCs, not game consoles like Xbox Series X or PlayStation 5, so I don't consider them a big deal for most people.

Idk what rez it gets 240hz on, it could be 4k upscaled or such - but I'll be keeping an eye on it. The 900c could do 144hz at 4k so it's probably a 4k figure but still interesting. Hopefully RTings will get their hands on one eventually to give some finer details.

The 4k+4k, 7680x2160 57" samsung G95nc 57" superultrawide can do 240hz natively (using DSC) - but 8k would be double that screen space at 4x 4k essentially so not expecting that natively. Maybe it'll be able to do 7680 x 2160 at 240hz, with the vertical rez halved and upscaled like the TCL M8 line of 4k TV's do in gaming mode at 3840x1080 to hit 240hz.

 

[elvn]

From what little info I could find, I saw it mentioned that it can do 240Hz at 4k , upscaled to the full 8k screen presumably. They have a new upscaling chip (NQ8 AI Gen3) that is supposed to be more advanced too.

https://www.techhive.com/article/21...ew-tricks-and-music-to-boot-nda-1-7-2024.html

The QN900D series also allows a variable refresh rate of up to 240Hz with 4K material, a feature aimed at gamers.

New features for the QN900D series include 8K AI Upscaling Pro and AI Motion Enhancer Pro. The former promises an even better viewing experience with lower-resolution material than you’ll get on 4K UHD TVs. I can attest from my own testing that 4K material looks better on 8K TVs.

Prev reply CNET article:

AI Motion Enhancer Pro is said to improve the clarity of fast-moving objects, such as a ball during a sports contest. And AI Upscaling Pro can upscale even low-resolution, standard-def content to 8K, which Samsung claims is a first. Both features are new for 2024.

.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9539...cessor-first-tv-with-240hz-refresh/index.html

The new Samsung Neo QLED 8K TV uses its new neural processing unit (NPU) that's twice as fast as the previous generation chip, with the number of neural networks increasing 8x from 64 to 512, allowing the new flagship Neo QLED 8K TV to display every single pixel in crisp detail.

Samsung's new flagship QN900D comes in at up to 85 inches, ensuring native 8K and even 4K content upscaled using the new AI processor, look amazing. It's the first TV on the market with a variable refresh rate of up to 240Hz at 4K, which is going to be perfect for gamers with large pockets

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9539...cessor-first-tv-with-240hz-refresh/index.html

 

[Happy Hopping]

supposed we now have 8K monitor for PC. w/ Windows, if your monitor is at 8K, 7680x4320, you open an excel spreadsheet, it will be a 7680x4320. so w/ a game, is it the same? supposedly it should be the same, but does the game manufacturers can actually run a game at 7680x4320 on those 3D animation , at a reasonably good speed?

 

[cjcox]

supposed we now have 8K monitor for PC. w/ Windows, if your monitor is at 8K, 7680x4320, you open an excel spreadsheet, it will be a 7680x4320. so w/ a game, is it the same? supposedly it should be the same, but does the game manufacturers can actually run a game at 7680x4320 on those 3D animation , at a reasonably good speed?

Games in particular often times have their own settings that can be used over any sort of default. Those setting can include size, resolution and other specifics both for running inside of a Window or running at full screen.

And, no, in general, we're not really ready for 8K gaming.

 

[kasakka]

supposed we now have 8K monitor for PC. w/ Windows, if your monitor is at 8K, 7680x4320, you open an excel spreadsheet, it will be a 7680x4320. so w/ a game, is it the same? supposedly it should be the same, but does the game manufacturers can actually run a game at 7680x4320 on those 3D animation , at a reasonably good speed?

Depends on the game. Something light, why not. Realistically, for gaming you would be using DLSS, or just running at 4K with integer scaling.

Some games might throw a fit when trying to launch them at 8K tho because they've never been tested with that res.

 

[elvn]

Games in particular often times have their own settings that can be used over any sort of default. Those setting can include size, resolution and other specifics both for running inside of a Window or running at full screen.

And, no, in general, we're not really ready for 8K gaming.

supposed we now have 8K monitor for PC. w/ Windows, if your monitor is at 8K, 7680x4320, you open an excel spreadsheet, it will be a 7680x4320. so w/ a game, is it the same? supposedly it should be the same, but does the game manufacturers can actually run a game at 7680x4320 on those 3D animation , at a reasonably good speed?

7680 x 2160 is half of an 8k screen. It's a 4k+4k (or 2x 4k), where 8k is quads of 4k, 4x 4k.


. . . . .

I'm interested in seeing how the new AI upscaling chip in the samsung 8k 900D gaming TV performs. For media but especially whether it is applied to game mode and with low input lag. At least in reviews but I haven't seen anything about the 900D yet other than takes on it's CES showcasing since the beginning of january. The asking price of the 65" 900D is probably going to be extra ridiculous for at least 6 months to a year after it's actually available, but that might be ok timing for the nvidia 5000 series to be in full swing and at msrp pricing vs availability on the gpus.

The 900C, (rather than the 900D showcased at CES recently), could do 60hz 8k and 120hz 4k gaming at 6ms input lag. The 900D can do 8k 120hz and 4k 240hz upscaled to full screen but I don't know if the 4k 240Hz will be using that sweet new AI chip with game mode active. Hopefully it will be and at 6ms input lag.

. . . . . . . . .

You might not be able to run a game at less than 8k resolutions natively, 1:1 pixel letterboxed on the 900D with DSC active so being able to do that it might depend on whether samsung includes a separate 60/120 mode in the OSD with DSC disabled. You could still run games windowed on 8k 120hz desktop though I'd think, at whatever windowed resolutions the game allows (or that you mod it too). Otherwise you could send a full 16:9 4k signal to the tv and get 240hz 4k upscaled to the full 8k screen size.

A concern with the 900D's AI upscaling might be whether you are already leaning on DLSS quality mode to get toward the 200fpsHz plus kind of frame rate to make 240hz mode worth it. Because then you'd be upscaling twice essentially. The 5000 series (and onward) will be a more powerful gpu to start with though of course.

I'd be very interested to see reviews of the 900D comparing:

. . games at native 4k 200fps plus at 240hz (even using frame generation but no DLSS) upscaled to 8k by the gaming TV. [Upscaled once by the TV, hopefully via the new AI upscaling chip]

. . games at 1440p upscaled to 4k 240hz using DLSS quality + frame generation, sent to the 8k tv where the TV would then upscale it again to 8k at 240Hz. [Upscaled twice, once by DLSS quality + once by the TV's AI chip]

. . games windowed. You could prob go back to running up to 4k rez, or higher, e.g. ultrawide resolutions windowed on the 8k desktop at 120Hz if you wanted to do that on some games but I don't think that DLSS would work non-full screen exclusive mode windowed like that.

. . A 8k60Hz / 4k 120Hz mode option in the gaming TV's OSD that had DSC disabled, if available, might instead allow you to run lower than 8k resolutions letterboxed with DLSS when you wanted to. The 7680x2160 G95NC has a 240hz mode with DSC and a 120hz mode that I think is no DSC for compatibility reasons so it is probably doable. Just have to see if they chose to allow that option on the 900D. They might not since it's a gaming tv and not a monitor per se.

. . . . . . . . . .

In my opinion we are and I am definitely ready for 8k desktop/app real estate. Anyone who uses multiple 4k monitors could probably utilize the screen space. Gaming is also doable upscaled or windowed. I use three 4k screens already now. I would prefer if there was a screen like the 900D but with a 1000R curve like the G95NC has though. Like an 8k version of the samsung ark. OLED options would be nice too but there is very little competition from other manufacturers in the 8k space so it is what it is for now. Using multiple screens is still an option for me but I'm keeping my eye on the 900D over the year. Similar to a 1000R curved screen at ~40" away, multiple monitors allows you to turn the side monitors inward facing right at you for better viewing angles so there is a tradeoff there. The 8k screens are FALD LCD and probably have some sort of matte abraded out layer too.

. . . . . .

A few 8k desk setups.

.

.

You'd need two g95NC screens to get 8k worth of desktop/app real-estate, but then you'd have those bezels across the middle.

.

.


.

 

[Happy Hopping]

I won't put much hope on AI chip just because it has the word AI in it. R&D takes time, you can't get AI function properly unless there is years of R&D. Don't buy into the stock hype by CNBC

What about older games then? For e.g., say R-Type Final 2 is really designed for HD 1920x1080 in mind. If today's game can't even support 8K, what about these older game then? Windowed in a HD screen? and what if you try to run it say at 4K?

 

[elvn]

Well, I've had AI upscaling to 4k in my nvidia shield since 2019, for shows and movies rather than games. DLSS and frame generation~insertion use AI. It's the way things are going for everything. Of course things will mature over time and generations. In fact, the AI chip in the 900D is a successor already and is supposed to be really good. It's on gen 3. Nvidia puts a ton of money and development into AI compared to most others but samsung is a big player in displays and pushing specs (like Quantum Dot, 240hz, 2x 4k displays, one of the only major 8k display makers). Looking forward to reviews though.


The thing is, if you use DLSS, DLSS is already using AI upscaling but the 8k screen's chip should allow you to send 4k at 240hz using port and cable limitations yet still use AI tech on the gaming tv itself to upscale the 4k 240hz to 8k while the content is still displayed at 240hz. It's a way to bypass or work-around the port/cable spec limitations of hdmi 2.1. The previous gen, 900C, can do 8k 60hz and 4k 120hz at 6ms input lag but it's AI upscaling chip isn't as advanced as the new one.

Each gen should improve the (upscaled) picture to be sharper, with better texture, richer details, finer edges, and less noise.

=====================================================



https://www.avcaesar.com/news/5041/...-learning-modules-for-samsung-8k-neo-qled-tvs

On the program for the new Samsung Ultra HD 8K Neo QLED TVs, the new NQ8 AI Gen3 chip which displays significantly higher performance than the 2023 model Neural Quantum Processor, for example an 8x faster execution speed. Without forgetting artificial intelligence capabilities that are much more developed than in previous years.

The main evolution concerns the Upscaling algorithm: while in 2021, the processor included 16 Deep Learning modules (see screenshot below) to analyze the incoming signal, 20 modules in 2022 and 64 modules in 2023, the specimen embedded in the Samsung 8K 2024 TVs has no less than 512 modules, each specialized in a particular task. Thus, the television applies the best scaling process depending on the nature of the signal, 720p, 1080p or 2160p, compressed signal coming from the Internet, a streaming platform or even a noisy image...

.
The upscaling part is most applicable feature gaming wise, but that along with the other features would be nice for movies and shows, streams.

• 8K AI Upscaling Pro[1]: Leverages NQ8 AI Gen3 for enhanced 8K upscaling, sharpening low resolution content so that it is displayed in ultra-high resolution.
• AI Motion Enhancer Pro: Solves common issues in sporting contents — such as ball distortion — by streaming high-resolution sports matches through this feature[2] powered by NQ8 AI Gen3. The feature automatically detects the sport type and uses deep learning to apply the proper ball detection model.
• Real Depth Enhancer Pro: Adds details to fast-moving scenes using AI to precisely control mini LEDs. By detecting the part of a scene that the human eye would naturally focus on and bringing it to the foreground, images appear more lifelike and three dimensional.

.

.


. . . .

The new Samsung Neo QLED 8K TV uses its new neural processing unit (NPU) that's twice as fast as the previous generation chip, with the number of neural networks increasing 8x from 64 to 512

From what little info I could find, I saw it mentioned that it can do 240Hz at 4k , upscaled to the full 8k screen presumably. They have a new upscaling chip (NQ8 AI Gen3) that is supposed to be more advanced too.

https://www.techhive.com/article/21...ew-tricks-and-music-to-boot-nda-1-7-2024.html

The QN900D series also allows a variable refresh rate of up to 240Hz with 4K material, a feature aimed at gamers.

New features for the QN900D series include 8K AI Upscaling Pro and AI Motion Enhancer Pro. The former promises an even better viewing experience with lower-resolution material than you’ll get on 4K UHD TVs. I can attest from my own testing that 4K material looks better on 8K TVs.

Prev reply CNET article:

AI Motion Enhancer Pro is said to improve the clarity of fast-moving objects, such as a ball during a sports contest. And AI Upscaling Pro can upscale even low-resolution, standard-def content to 8K, which Samsung claims is a first. Both features are new for 2024.

.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9539...cessor-first-tv-with-240hz-refresh/index.html

The new Samsung Neo QLED 8K TV uses its new neural processing unit (NPU) that's twice as fast as the previous generation chip, with the number of neural networks increasing 8x from 64 to 512, allowing the new flagship Neo QLED 8K TV to display every single pixel in crisp detail.

Samsung's new flagship QN900D comes in at up to 85 inches, ensuring native 8K and even 4K content upscaled using the new AI processor, look amazing. It's the first TV on the market with a variable refresh rate of up to 240Hz at 4K, which is going to be perfect for gamers with large pockets

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9539...cessor-first-tv-with-240hz-refresh/index.html

 

[Happy Hopping]

I thought you don't have a 8K monitor. So what's the benefit of upscale to 8K?

and when you said "AI upscaling to 4k in my nvidia shield since 2019, for shows and movies rather than games.", you mean it can upscale a regular HD movie to 4K? a regular HD movie is 1920 x 1080, does the upscale create a resolution of 3840x2160?

 

[improwise]

As I understand it, the QN900D still only has a 144 Hz panel so what is the point of it accepting 240 Hz? And has the one connect box been updated so it can actually handle even 144 Hz which the QN900C couldnt?