4k screen for $11k

Yeah it's the next thing since the Red and other new digital cameras shoot at 4K already. Super expensive TV right now but they'll be mainstream in a few years. I think once the new consoles come out, hopefully with 4k support, they'll become pretty popular.
 
Have to wonder if consoles can even keep up, with there already 6-7 year release timeline now days. No one likes upconverted non-native resolution gaming.
 
Really this only matters for HUGE TVs or projectors. Most people already sit too far away from their moderately sized HDTVs to even benefit from 1080p.
 
Big D. said:
Yeah it's the next thing since the Red and other new digital cameras shoot at 4K already. Super expensive TV right now but they'll be mainstream in a few years. I think once the new consoles come out, hopefully with 4k support, they'll become pretty popular.
Click to expand...

PCs can barely handle 4K.

The next-gen console will likely remain 1080p.
 
There won't be any content to make quadHD even remotely useful as a TV within 2 years, probably not even within 5. And even then, at living room viewing distances, quad HD displays would need to be over, say 80 inches, to be noticably better than 1080p. Panels that large seem unlikely. QuadHD projectors could be very nice though, oh wait, those have already existed for years. Or maybe roll-up OLED displays. I can dream.

It could make an awesome computer display. Though for computer use, 55" is too large/blocky. Around 40-45" would be optimal. Or smaller for super high DPI. Again, I dream.

Also no mention of the interconnect. The only standards I'm aware of that can handle quadHD at 60 Hz are displayport and Thunderbolt. So no way to take full advantage of the res with anything other than a computer at the moment. And by the time something does show up, the standards will probably have changed again.

In short, nice to see someone making/releasing a quadHD display, but it's not very useful for it's intended purpose. Shrink it, lose the "TV" features, and then we're talking something worth buying, even at a large price premium.
 
stewartjm said:
There won't be any content to make quadHD even remotely useful as a TV within 2 years, probably not even within 5. And even then, at living room viewing distances, quad HD displays would need to be over, say 80 inches, to be noticably better than 1080p. Panels that large seem unlikely. QuadHD projectors could be very nice though, oh wait, those have already existed for years. Or maybe roll-up OLED displays. I can dream.

It could make an awesome computer display. Though for computer use, 55" is too large/blocky. Around 40-45" would be optimal. Or smaller for super high DPI. Again, I dream.

Also no mention of the interconnect. The only standards I'm aware of that can handle quadHD at 60 Hz are displayport and Thunderbolt. So no way to take full advantage of the res with anything other than a computer at the moment. And by the time something does show up, the standards will probably have changed again.

In short, nice to see someone making/releasing a quadHD display, but it's not very useful for it's intended purpose. Shrink it, lose the "TV" features, and then we're talking something worth buying, even at a large price premium.
Click to expand...

HDMI 1.4 also supports 4K resolution.
 
This other similar Toshiba is already available to preorder in Europe for ~6500 USD. It was listed as November delivery, but now that's slipped to the middle of January.

Someone pointed out though, whether you can actually drive the thing at that res from a PC depends quite heavily on what ports it includes.. the above model didn't have displayport from what I remember.. 24hz gaming over HDMI doesn't really appeal.

Just the fact that the panels are real, and out there is definitely encouraging though. Need to get mass production up past 1080p, for all our sakes.
 
I have a feeling all of these Quad-HD TV's only accept 60Hz 1080P input. They just upscale... :(
 
The article also mentions glasses-free 3d? Wouldn't that be a pretty significant advantage?
 
Now this would be perfect for a computer monitor. Just think, since the resolution is greater than 3x24" in portrait, Eyefinity without bezels. :D
 
siliconnerd said:
Now this would be perfect for a computer monitor. Just think, since the resolution is greater than 3x24" in portrait, Eyefinity without bezels. :D
Click to expand...

It's too big to sit on a desk and use comfortably, especially as a single monitor for gaming.

The software would need to put all of the important bits in the center of the display, and leave the rest of the screen for your peripheral vision. Some current software can somewhat manage to properly do so when it detects eyefinity like aspect ratios. No current software would do anything with this display other than use it as a 16:9 display, displaying the exact same scene as a 1080p display, only with greater resolution.

In a typical FPS, it'd provide a slight advantage for long range sniping, and add significant disadvantage for everything else. Might have some use for Starcraft 2 though...
 
Pointless for consoles. The next gen will manage 1080p at 60fps or 3D. The gen after that, some 6-8 years off, will be just shy of 4k ability at 3D (48fps) imo. So you're looking at 10-15 years before a console can make use of the display.

Pointless as a TV. So called HD channels are so compressed you may as well be watching SD. I can just imagine the bitrates used in future 4k channels.

Pointless for HD films. The cameras are too expensive. There is zero content and unlikely to be enough to justify a purchase for at least 10 years.
 
sadbuttrue said:
Pointless for consoles. The next gen will manage 1080p at 60fps or 3D. The gen after that, some 6-8 years off, will be just shy of 4k ability at 3D (48fps) imo. So you're looking at 10-15 years before a console can make use of the display.

Pointless as a TV. So called HD channels are so compressed you may as well be watching SD. I can just imagine the bitrates used in future 4k channels.

Pointless for HD films. The cameras are too expensive. There is zero content and unlikely to be enough to justify a purchase for at least 10 years.
Click to expand...

True but 4K is better than 1080p, bragging rights baby.
 
siliconnerd said:
Now this would be perfect for a computer monitor. Just think, since the resolution is greater than 3x24" in portrait, Eyefinity without bezels. :D
Click to expand...

but its still just 16:9 in high res
the point of eyefinity usually is going wider for a more natural and immersive view

i don't really see much use for it besides displaying large images
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top