Will CES 2023 Have 8K 60Hz+ Monitors? OLED etc.?

[LukeTbk]

I can definitely tell the difference between 4K and 8K...

Are they at the same bandwith, I mean you will be able to tell the difference between 100mbs and 30 mbs content, that would tell us nothing about telling the difference in the resolution.

A giant amount of talk about 4k vs 1080p is people often seeing higher bandwith content when it is called 4K, would Netflix stream people 40mbs 1080p content or 40mbs 4K content, the story would be all about that it change nothing.

 

[frisbfreek]

Are they at the same bandwith, I mean you will be able to tell the difference between 100mbs and 30 mbs content, that would tell us nothing about telling the difference in the resolution.

A giant amount of talk about 4k vs 1080p is people often seeing higher bandwith content when it is called 4K, would Netflix stream people 40mbs 1080p content or 40mbs 4K content, the story would be all about that it change nothing.

Youtube is definitely not using the same bandwidth for 4K and 8K videos. I don't think there is any expectation that 8K would use the same amount of bandwidth as 4K. Similarly, Netflix uses higher bandwidth for 4K over 1080p. Sorry to be blunt but if you don't have 50-100 Mbps down, then don't try to stream 8K. Similarly, if you don't have all of the right gear (camera, lenses, powerful editing machine) then don't produce 8K content. Otherwise 8K won't be any better than 4K for you, but that's your fault.

 

[LukeTbk]

Sorry to be blunt but if you don't have 50-100 Mbps down, then don't try to stream 8K.

In blind test under 50mbps going over 1080p didn't change much (sometime worst to go above it), maybe it will change with AV1

I don't think there is any expectation that 8K would use the same amount of bandwidth as 4K.

Yes obviously we can predict that the industry will try to sell 8K to people so they will use the same trick that they did with 4k streaming.

It is much easier to sell an extra to people if you change the resolution number than just the bandwith.

Any comparison made at different bandwith will tend to say to us, more video look better, not if it was wise or that it has anything to do with the resolution being higher.

 

[elvn]

For desktop monitor and pc gaming use, 8k has a lot more appreciable benefits in desktop real-estate and graphics/imagery/text fidelity. We can benefit a lot from higher PPD and larger desktop real-estate on larger screens. Compressed streaming formats for "streaming TV use" are a different issue and it obviously muddies the benefits of 8k, pretty literally fidelity wise. While you might roll your eyes at marketing 8k TVs to people for streaming videos, 8k for computer monitors/"pc gaming TVs" would have huge gains.

. . . . . . . .

 

[LukeTbk]

For desktop monitor and pc gaming use, 8k has a lot more appreciable benefits in desktop real-estate and graphics/imagery/text fidelity

yes that was the premise:
https://hardforum.com/threads/will-ces-2023-have-8k-60hz-monitors-oled-etc.2022782/post-1045506093
One issue is that outside reading text and some other work related application, 8K over 4k seem to be at a whole a big negative format.

I am sure 8K like ppd in VR in the small section of the screen our eyes are currently looking at will have benefit and for some workload, with loosless signal it is possible (even thought blindtess with people looking for it, giant monitor, sitting really close were not able to tell in a video game with a GUI, so it could be really diminishing benefit).

In streaming it could leave to worst result like it often do with making a 4k signal instead of a 2k signal right now.

 

[elvn]

VR has a Lonnnnnnnnnng way to go PPD wise heh. It's like a 100" low ppd screen at 5' view distance or something.. that's why most games look like they are in the gamecube era. There is foveated rendering + eye tracking , and soon varifocal lenses but VR has a very long way to go to get very small perceived pixel sizes in VR space. It's probably a decade or more away from where you could look at a 4k screen in VR space, let's say AR space, next to a real 4k screen at the same ordinary viewing distance and it would be 1:1 pixel size and resulting fine picture quality in relation to each other. Let alone a 8k one.

For a larger (e.g. 48" to 55") screen, increased PPD will be very visible in 8k. For example at the focal point of a 1000R curve at ~ 40" view distance. Moreso if you sat closer at a flat screen for some reason. As it is now, we barely compensate enough for more visible pixelization at 60PPD and only when using aggressive graphics Anti-alasing and heavily massaged text sub-sampling or alternative sub-sampling methods. The 2D desktop remains uncompensated for too outside of the viewports of some cgi authoring apps, etc. No AA at all there so the pixelization is worse in 2D desktop graphics and imagery.

When people cram a 42" to 48" oled screen onto a traditionally small desk at 24" view or so, they end up getting poor PPD beneath 60PPD more like a 1500p screen. So they will see text fringing and graphics aliasing. Therfore they often use windows scaling to help improve the text clarity, filling the text with more pixels at the cost of losing desktop real-estate (down to near 1500p like desktop real-estate). This is especially a compensatory move with WOLED subpixels. So you trade off desktop real-estate there or see text fringing. You can't scale your games in the same way so you'll still get graphics aliasing in games and in the no-AA 2D desktop graphics and imagery. On my 48" OLED, the fidelity increases noticeably at 70PPD plus and as I near a 48" view distance (essentially shrinking the pixels to my perspective). Approaching 48" view distance on a 48" 4k gets up to 77PPD compared to 60 PPD or less. The fidelity/pixel-finery increase is noticeable in graphics, 2-D desktop, and text. 8k would double the PPD compared to 4k obviously which would remove all of these limitations (though your optimal viewing angles still come into play regardless of screen resolution).

Comparing something like a 55" 4k where you might be getting 61 PPD at 40" view distance (or less when sitting closer), an 8k would give you around 122PPD. The downside in gaming is that you'd have to rely on upscaling of 4k to 8k in most cases because otherwise the frame rate would take a huge hit, but modern AI (quality) upscaling is very good, especially on a 4k source to begin with. There is also the option to run 32:10 or 21:10 uw resolutions on a 8k screen for higher frame rate, even if upscaled from 4k based uw resolutions. The end result would be for example a 7680x2400 rez 32:10 uw rather than a measely 1200 high on a 4k screen so that would be another huge benefit in gaming. You could prob also run any rez between 5120x1440 and 7680x2400 in a window, (shortening the width a bit depending on the rez you chose). Also the immersion factor of a larger screen without suffering poorer PPD.

On larger screens the PPD gains would be huge. We lean heavily on "fogged edge hacks" of *aggressive* AA in games (at a performance hit !) and massaged text subsampling due to poor PPD of screens as it is now, masking how pixelated the screen is, and will prob have to until 160PPD or more. And recall that the 2D desktop has no anti aliasing outside of text sub sampling so remains even more pixelated as it's uncompensated for. The vertical rez gains in extreme uw 32:10 resolutions would also be greatly appreciated. Having 4 quadrants of 4k desktop-realestate at 4k fidelity and the capability to run 4k content in any quad 1:1px would also be huge in replacing multi-monitor setups in a much better fashion. It would provide you a lot more freedom in your layout, and even your gaming screen resolutions as long as the game supported it (e.g. 5k, 6k window, or even a 4k one with other windows around it.).