Why are so many people falling for the 4K meme? Unless you're

>>52353514
Because it's sharper?
Because all new TVs are made in 4k?
Because all the new TV technology is focused into 4k displays because theres' no reason to bother with shitty 1080p anymore?
Because people don't like 50 ppi on their 40"+ tvs?
Because people like more screen real estate when used with computers?

So tell me OP, how poor are you?

i don't care about 4K tv's but i sure do care about a 4K monitor for my PC

looks great, can't wait until they're just a little more affordable

Someone once said never underestimate the stupidity of the American consumer. Is there anything Samsung doesn't make? I think they can afford a lost leader or try to force a technology once in awhile where the application does not yet exist. Personally, I haven't had a TV or cable subscription for more than 10 years, it's a continuous commercial you pay for as far as I can tell.

>>52353514

4k content will be delivered on demand - not through traditional media. So who cares if 4k bluray is shit?

>Netflix / Amazon are already heavily invested in it.
>Current-gen consoles all support it
>1080p isn't crisp AT ALL at 50+ inches
>Lots of these new sets have other benefits besides 4k

If you're in the market for a new TV I don't know why you wouldn't buy 4k unless you're on a tight budget.

I want to buy a panel with 4k resolution. To play my 980ti and 4690k on. Still haven't tho cause a good one is too expensive

>>52353628
>>Netflix / Amazon are already heavily invested in it.
Unless they magically convince Comcast to upgrade everyone to gigabit speeds 4k is FUCKING USELESS since the bitrate will be lower than good 1080p bitrate anyways.

>>52353610
>Buying a 4k tv monitor to play WoW

>>52353514
At least 4K was a 2015 meme and died with it.
Just like 3D died.

For 2016 the meme is HDR.
HDR actually does make a difference.

Because we have a large low- information populace and technology illiterate people.

>2 feet away from an 80" screen

you fucking nerds need better glasses

>>52353707
>At least 4K was a 2015 meme and died with it.
The majority of televisions sold now are 2160p screens, try again.

>>52353661
>what is HEVC

Everybody literally said the same thing when 720p was standard and 1080p came out

>>52353514
Why waste money making a 1080p TV when the cost of making a 4k is negligible and benefits the costumer?

>>52353729
I don't mean we'll go back to 1080p.
Sure it's here to stay.

But it's no longer what advertisers will focus on.
4K is standard.
HDR is the new thing you have to dump your old shitty non-HDR 4K dinosaur for.

>>52353661

Neither of those companies have had issues taking Comcast to court over access issues.

When a significant portion of their customer base is screaming for 4k content and the networks refuse to oblige shit will get messy - both are filming all their original content in 4k, pretty sure they're ready for a fight if needed.

>>52353740
I agree with you, if you're in the market for a TV you might as well get a 4K one.

But if you have a 1080p TV already, you are better off waiting for content and for prices to drop.

>streaming 4K content chews up 20-30GB an hour
>Comcast preparing to go full jew and implement a 300GB cap

this going to b good

Resolution is only a tiny piece of the puzzle. Things like the source capture and the bitrate are far more important than what resolution is used.

e.g, the 720p DIMENSION rips of "Mad Men" look better than most BluRay movies. Despite the low resolution, they had the raw capture to work with and it was shot with a very good camera. I guarantee that those episodes, even at 720p, would look better scaled up to 4K than Hulu's "native" 4K content.

File: 1422568957042.jpg (40KB, 493x248px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 493x248px

>>52353514
>falling for the X meme
When will newfags stop using this gay phrase?
Do you even know what a meme is?

>>52353628
None of this matters when a good chunk of content is 2k or less.

> 4k Monitor
> almost no content
> not into gaming

into the trash it goes

>>52353792
>>52353661
Sounds like the USA is holding back technology as it tries to hang onto its low bandwidth lines while the rest of the world standardized bandwidths that are 10 times greater at the same cost or less.

>>52353772
>filming all their original content in 4k

The point was always to be able to crop without losing quality on 1080p.

To make a decent 4K movie you need a 6K or 8K camera.

File: 1402967552180.jpg (37KB, 320x287px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 320x287px

http://www.techspot.com/article/1113-4k-monitor-see-difference/

4K Monitors: Can you actually see the difference?

For desktop monitors, the answer is very clear: yes! Even a person with just 20/20 vision should be able to see the difference on any monitor larger than just 20 inches in size and the difference becomes greater and greater for larger monitors. Laptops with much smaller screens are a bit less clear-cut but the answer is still a firm "yes". For the average healthy adult with 20/15 vision, you should be able to easily tell the difference between a 2K and 4K 15.6" screen at a distance of 22 inches. And if the choice is between a 1080p screen and a 4K screen (which are usually the two resolutions found on current laptops), 4K will be noticeably better at a viewing distance of 32.5 inches or closer. If you have 20/20 or worse vision the difference might not as noticeable unless you sit closer to the laptop, but in general the math says that there is definitely a benefit to having a 4K screen even in a laptop.

>>52353707
>>52353729
He's not wrong about HDR making a more noticeable difference though.

>>52353661
Getting a bunch of big players invested in 4k is the best thing you could ask for in terms of the market bullying tyrant ISPs like comcast into providing sane service levels to customers.

>>52353814
>I hate real estate

it's okay to be retarded

>>52353815
>tries to hang onto its low bandwidth lines
>tries to
Don't worry, Comcast is set up pretty well from a legal standpoint to do nothing for the next decade. Competition is illegal when you throw money at politicians.

>>52353792

>40mbs unlimited fibre (yes, unlimited) for £20 a month in a student flat in the UK.
>4g on phone, also with unlimited data, used 200gb last month, £30 per month w/ device

Must really suck to be American when it comes to data.

>>52353814
As far as I'm concerned, there is basically zero 4K content.

To me, for content to truly be 4K, that would mean that if the 4K source is compressed to 1920x1080 but still maintains the same bitrate, but lost significant picture quality when scaled back up to 4K, it is true 4K.

I don't know if any actual content falls into these requirements.

>>52353563
>it's sharper
yeah he just said you won't notice it while being far away
>all new tvs are 4k
no, they are not
>all new tv tech is focused on 4k
no, it's not
>50ppi on 40"tv
you just repeated your 2nd line idiot
>more real estate
it's just a higher resolution

idiot

>>52353828

Should of said FOR 4k, not IN 4k. My bad.

>Higher resolutions are a meme
>More than two cores is a meme
>SSDs are a meme

You'd think people on /g/ would care about technology but every time one of these threads pops up it's some poorfag trying desperately to make older hardware seem better.

>>52353628
>>Current-gen consoles support it.
This level of autism is unbearable.

>>52353880
higher resolution is more screen real estate unless you're an idiot who buys a 13" 4k display and scales it back to be some 720p shitter.

op you know you can get glasses or contacts or whatever to fix your shitty vision right?

File: 1361978928592.jpg (22KB, 230x219px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 230x219px

>>52353862
it sucks to be in America in general. People still believe that our democracy works, even when the democracy part is nothing more than a cloak that hides the oligarchy underneath

>>52353772
>screaming for 4k content
said nobody ever

> Unless you're sitting 2 feet away or have an 80" tv, it's humanly impossible to see any difference from 1080p

Nigga, this is the meme

4k TVs are a "meme" yes, but monitors can definitely use higher resolutions.

>>52353920
>tfw living in canadian multiparty system

>>52353912
It is a fucking tv, not a monitor. You don't really need estate

>>52353892
/g/ is against quad cores now?

I'm waiting for the T460p just to have 4 cores and 8 threads.

"Moar coars" is great for programming.

>>52353957
Hello you are on a technology board. There's nothing stopping you from using a cheap 4k TV as a monitor.

what's the point of 4k anyway?
Making everything high res where it's not needed?
> Ehrmagerd hi-res icons (more than 3 MB)
Websites with high-res images are loading fucking slow? (Nah! Not our problem get a better Internet connection you pleb.)

No!
Use high res where it reasonable!
Photos for example, but user interfaces, text (Fuck you Windows clear type), programs DO NOT NEED an exorbitant resolution!

4k Movies, at home?
No!
You can't even SEE the details when the camera is moving, because >motion< ?
Why would anyone want to see the faces of actors at the highest level of detail that is possible, why, why, why?

In addition higher res. means higher processing power, means higher power consumption, means electricity bill will explode!


Can't there be a movement for economical computing / entertainment, by NOT using "oh my god so fancy" high resolutions?

>>52353987
is that good tho? seems like it wouldn't be good

>>52353828
>To make a decent 4K movie you need a 6K or 8K camera.
wtf are you talking about ??

Most of RED cameras are 4-6K
fucking nonsense about needing an 8K camera..

>>52353514
>no, they are not
Yes they are all the new tvs in 2016 are 4k

>>52354003
you don't even NEED a computer
you can live in a mud hut if you want to, there's literally nothing stopping you
but in case you didn't notice this is the fucking TECHNOLOGY board, some of us would rather live in the future rather than the past

>>52353987
>There's nothing stopping you from using a cheap 4k TV as a monitor

The 40ms+ input lag would be a pretty good reason. TVs usually have much slower response timing than monitors.

>>52354010
For competitive gaymen? No

For productivity, sure.

The input lag is not that bad on Samsung/Sony.

>>52353801
> JIMMY YOU STUPID FUCK!

>>52354003
Looks like we found the pleb without a 4K monitor

>>52354044
Maybe if you buy LG, sure. In reality that's only going to matter if you're a gaymer.

Sony and Samsung have input lag that's close to or under 10ms

>>52353987
>There's nothing stopping you from using a cheap 4k TV as a monitor.

Sitting too close to a TV fucks up your eyes.

>>52354070
>>52354046
>10ms

You fucking wish.

http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-test-results/input-lag

>>52354046
I mean it doesn't need to be competitive gaming to be a strike against that idea does it? i feel like the input lag would be at least somewhat annoying no matter what you are playing and how casual you are, and you have to weigh that vs the benefit of the higher resolution.

>>52353987
that is a terrible idea

>>52354073
You already wear cm thick glasses, who cares.

>>52354089
input lag is a meme

>>52354089
http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/

They aren't that bad. It's an extremely cheap way to get 4k until you can afford a nice "Monitor" that's 4k and good dimensions.

File: subpQuA.gif (2MB, 390x277px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 390x277px

>>52354070
>under 10ms

>>52354152
Nope, when I got my 70 inch tv I looked for the lowest input lag I could, only 7ms, and since its sitting next to my monitor when I am mirroring the screen there is a very noticeable lag on the tv.

>>52354073
>Sitting too close to a TV fucks up your eyes.
Only if you're using a CRT television.

man also i gotta say, even just the user interface looks so fucking nice on higher resolutions

im not one to judge people for being poor and i'd definitely want to upgrade other parts of my computer first (solid state is I think the absolute biggest quality of life upgrade to a computer) but man what a joke it is to pretend that higher resolutions are a meme...

although I'd rather have a monitor than a tv hooked up to my computer any day. that's definitely more important than having 4k, no question about it.

>>52353987
You can't use a 60'' tv on your desk, come on. And if you use it in the living room, you would not see the text.
4k tvs are good tho, because monitor 's panels will get cheaper.

>>52354042
But what about a future with high prices for resources?
Using a low power device can be better for your wallet? Why not?
For text lower resolution is better, because if it's crisp an clear (black letters on white ground without "Windows Clear Type"), you still can read it.
Disable anti-aliasing --> Sharp lines, because the letters fit exactly into the pixel pattern of the screen!
Why would you need additional pixels only to make the text look as if it was text in a book?
It's not a book, it's a computer screen and it should look different (for everything else (if you REALLY want to read text as if it was a book) there's E-paper (consumes no energy to display text, only to change the display --> extremely efficient))

=>
[ ] = Blank pixel
[X] = Black pixel

Example:
[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
[ ][ ][X][ ][ ]
[ ][X][ ][X][ ]
[X][ ][ ][ ][X]
[ ][X][ ][X][ ]
[ ][ ][X][ ][ ]

>>52354177
>70 inch monitor
holy shit why?

>>52354177
>confusing input lag with response time

>>52354177
you need to put the tv into game mode or whatever it has, that turns off the processing and will take the input lag down to basically unnoticed.

>>52354184
enjoy your burnt retinas kid

>>52354195
TVs are as small as 32"

>>52354212

[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
[ ][ ][X][ ][ ]
[ ][X][ ][X][ ]
[X][ ][ ][ ][X]
[ ][X][ ][X][ ]
[ ][ ][X][ ][ ]

As long as you can only get shitty 30hz pannels with retardly high input lag, they are worthless. I bought a nice 1080p last year and have no intention of replacing it till I can get at least 120hz so I can upgrade my computer at the same time.

>>52354155

According to that the absolute lowest input lag on an HDTV is still a whopping 17ms, and the TV costs $2,200.

4K TVs are significantly more expensive than 4K monitors, but they're meant for different purposes. You buy a TV to watch video. You buy a monitor for comfortable computer usage.

>>52354184
Every TV is too bright to use up close.

They are *shock* designed to be viewed from across the living room.

>>52354212
>Why would you need additional pixels only to make the text look as if it was text in a book?
Maybe because the clarity of printed text in a book is makes it much easier to read than a low resolution computer display?

>>52354223
>you need to put the tv into game mode or whatever it has, that turns off the processing and will take the input lag down to basically unnoticed.
Decent TVs don't need game mode to take advantage of their full capabilities. With big TVs you wont do better than 5-7ms of input lag unless you pay a retarded ammount.

>>52353987

Hello you are on a technology board. Most of us aren't retarded enough to accept 30+ms input lag when we use a fucking computer.

>>52354260
> *shock*
lel

>>52354254
>You buy a TV to watch video. You buy a monitor for comfortable computer usage.
Cant say I know anyone who dosent have a TV and a monitor hooked up to their PC. People watch video on the PCs now, not to mention doing all your computer stuff from your couch is super comfy.

>>52354276
did you even read the entire text?

> E-paper
yes of course that's it!

Use the right tool for the right job!
Computer screen =/= book
E-reader =very-close= book!

>>52354283
Hello, what's it like living in the past?

File: WP_20131127_18_04_13_Pro.jpg (88KB, 700x394px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 700x394px

>not realizing how retarded this is

the autism is strong here

I was recently visiting some friends who have a CRT TV. It was one of the nice ones and the picture was really good.
Compared to the shitty screen I have at my own house, this was a lot better although it is obviously a lot older than the one I have.
Resolution is not that big of a deal. On computers you have to implement scaling because it is too small, on TVs you have to upgrade the communication in order to deliver and it is not worth it.
What we need to increase is color depth.

>>52354177
If you hooked up directly and only to the tv would you even notice this alleged input lag ?

>i doubt it

I feel this input lag non sense is just another way to justify spending globs on money on bullshit that probably doesn't help you at all.
if input lag is such a big deal, then we should be hearing many many complaints about it, but we really dont.
Even with the explosion of Halo and COD console players, its barely a peep..

Maybe the same people who insist on lowering input lag are the ones that also buy gunnar eyewear.
>Wow, its like im viewing my computer monitor through my piss bottles!

File: scrot.gif (585B, 77x67px) Image search: [Google]

585B, 77x67px

>>52354276
erm, what's wrong with pic related

>>52354363
>fox and grapes

I bet you think multiple 20" monitors are okay instead.

>>52354335
>>52354335

better than being a poorfag in the future I suppose

>>52354318
>I choose to view the world in black and white

>>52354392
Well for one I can't tell what the fuck I'm looking at.

>>52354400
> world in bw
> books in bw

books =|= world

there will be rgb E-paper

>>52354392
yes, it's zomed in!

>>52354422
It's only an example of low-res text looking good.

It's zoomed in!

>>52354214
Just have a big den and after trying projectors felt they were lacking compared to just using a TV.

>>52354222
Seems you are the confused one, I stand behind what I said.

>>52354388
>If you hooked up directly and only to the tv would you even notice this alleged input lag ?
What are you even talking about? Its connected directly to my computer, there is no way to connect it indirectly.

>>52354388
He's just a retard.

Many TV's buffer several frames and process them.
That's where the "input lag" comes from.

If you disable such features it should be pretty much instant.

Still a terrible idea to sit so close to a TV.
But fine for gaming from your couch.

>>52354440
rgb e paper does exist!

>>52353640
>980ti and 4690k
>4K
>gaming

pick two

>>52354392
>literally doesn't even resemble latin characters

>>52354488
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_lag
Read it, you sound confused.

>>52354503
font of your choice?

>>52354440
>there will be rgb E-paper

Will there?

e-paper works by flipping over little balls that are black on one size and white on the other.
Can't really have more than 2 colors so you have to dither and shit.

>>52354363
each their own, but from my experience a display can be too big.
Just like sitting in the front row at the movie theater sucks and not just because of the neckstrain.
Periphiral vision sucks on humans, and with a huge ass display you just make shit way worse and at any given time you're probably only viewing the equivalent of a 27" display comfortably on such a huge display for close.

>>52354539
You get the display size that is appropriate for how far you are sitting from it. Its not rocket science, there are even calculators online.

>>52354527
google it, it exists!
It's da fewtr (future)

>>52354518
That directly has to do with how fast the frame buffers are switched, which has to deal with how long the post-processing takes.

What's your point?

>>52354564
You get that in the picture its a huge ass tv + keyboard right under it, right ?

>>52353903
I think (hope) he means streaming and not games.
>plugs HDMI into 4k TV
>plays shitty console game
>"omg console is best! games at 4k perfectly"

>>52354819
Yea, that's not how it should be and not how I do it. I am almost 10 feet from my screen.

A big problem though is console gaming is still not 4k yet

>>52353680
Do you have it in metric

File: screenshot-102-cockpit.jpg (330KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 800x600px

>>52353514
>Why are so many people falling for the 4K meme?
Because they fell for the HD smartphone maymay.

Wing Commander: Privateer is in lower resolution. But because the screen is larger and the graphics have a higher resolution, the player can process more information quicker.

>>52354527
It already exists.
The newest Pebble watch uses coloured eInk.
It's very dull colours and I'm not sure on the variety of the palette, but it's real.

>>52355447
Hello, the 1970s called and theyw ant your game and screen res back.

>>52353514
im pretty comfy with DSR

>>52353514
>Is the american consumer really this fucking stupid?
generally, to most they think new is better.

>>52353514
I have a 55" 4k tv and I sit 2 feet away from it

>>52355535
They are better than TVs from previous year.

what's your point?

Who tf can find a cool desktop background at 4k

In the future there will be no difference between pc monitor and tv.

In fact the content will be streamed right into your head

Yall niggas are weird and need to get a life, 4k looks better to me.

>>52354840
Since he said Consoles, he is wrong because Consoles never display ANYTJING above 1080p, it's capped.

>>52353628
>Current-gen consoles all support it
My sides, they can barely do 1080p and often go lower. There's no graphically intensive 4k console games.

wow, televisions have almost the same resolution as phones.

>>52353880
You say this but the Original xbox could run 1080p. On very few games tho.

>>52355663
im happy with my 60 inch 1080p tv, i sit far enough back so i dont see the pixels when watching movies and playing vidya.

im also happy with my 27 inch 1080p monitor where i also cant see the pixels because im blind as fuck anyway at close range

>>52355040
is it that hard to google a converter?

>>52353987
>cheap
>4K
Pick one

>>52355597
enjoy your 30hz 4k

>>52353514
4k works as a meme because it's based on a number.
to the average tech consumer bigger numbers = better.
they actually have no idea about what makes ones TV better than another, which is also why they think bigger is better.

>>52355810
>look at me guys, i'm so smart!

File: 1412978761802.jpg (63KB, 257x257px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 257x257px

>>52353514
Feel bad for you anon, you are retarded
Are you really that autistic to not notice the UHD res?
Damn, I bet you must also believe the xbone looks identical to the PS4

>>52353680
This seems to be bullshit. I can tell the difference on a 42" 720 Vs a 42" 1080p well over 10 feet. And my eyes are awful.

>>52355806
>Hello i'm retarded

thanks man

>>52355897
That's because there's many different factors to a TV's image that the image doesn't account for.

Contrast, Gamma, etc.

There should be no surprise that a newer 1080p that's a company makes with their best tech is better than some cheap 720p that they are mass producing for idiots.

>tfw i have a 50" TV sitting in my living room with a wiiu/ps4 that i haven't touched in a year.

>>52353514
>Why are so many people falling for the 4K meme? Unless you're sitting 2 feet away or have an 80" tv, it's humanly impossible to see any difference from 1080p.
This is not true for most people. (It's true for me, because I'm slightly nearsighted but wouldn't want to wear glasses to watch TV- and maybe it's true for you too- but it's not true for most of the population.)

>>52353514

everything you stated is actually false

have you seen how these devices work in best buy -- they're pretty impressive when the source is high quality

File: 2390DE3C00000578-2852585-Yet_another_shopper_leaves_Asda_happy_to_have_got_his_hands_on_o-46_1417169503340[1].jpg (155KB, 962x707px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 962x707px

Why are so many people falling for the HD meme? Unless you're sitting 2 feet away or have an 40" tv, it's humanly impossible to see any difference from 480p. And now we're 2 years into HDTV's being on the market and there's still a total of 8 movies available in that resolution. Is the american consumer really this fucking stupid?

>>52353514
I'm sorry you couldn't buy one on Black Friday OP. Maybe next time wrassle with the crowd and rise to the top.

>>52353514
Not worth it yet ill wait 5 years till a backlog of 4k content exists it will be dirt cheap by then

>>52353514
>Why are so many people falling for the HD Ready/FULL HD/4K/8K/16K meme?

>>52356109
>wait 5 years
>16k is already a thing
>you're using 4k

being poor must suck

>>52353801
Jimmy is dumb because he is a nigger

File: 1452463475177.jpg (49KB, 500x308px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x308px

>>52356122
it's pretty good never get jewed for the lastest memes

>>52353880
>[citation needed] :The Post

>>52353680
You can change it to "where every fucking pixel is visible"

The point of 4k is that the picture is supposed to be so smooth so that you can't see the pixels the way you do when you sit close to a 1080p screen.

Will there be an actual reason to upgrade any of my devices to something higher than 1080p any time soon?

>>52356447
Yes.
So that you can see black cocks at 4k

>>52356447
Do you actually use your computer for work? If yes then yes.

>>52356245
>it's good always living like shit compared to everyone else

so what you're saying is that you'd happily use a brick 1 minute slower than anyone else's phone because "it was cheap." retard.

>>52356545
Calm down shill you can stop reading your script your aren't selling anything to /g/tards with thinkpads

>>52356690
sure thing p oorfag

>>52353514
gtfo of /g/, grandpa

>>52353514
Because it's so cheap that it will cost you more to buy a 1080p TV in the long run

>>52353740
And its true on screens smaller than 30in's.

Today though since 1080p screens are dirt cheap there is no point in getting a 720p screen when the cost difference is ~$20.

4k on the other hand is still insanely high and unless you sit two feet away, or are extremely anal about "pixels" you won't notice a difference between 1080p and 4k on a 30in screen.

At those resolutions if you "do" notice its most likely quality of gama, the screen type, refresh rate and such. Straight color accuracy.

50+ yes you will but your typical 30in and below? No.

>>52357109
>4k
>insanely high
>$500

>>52357109
>unless you sit two feet away, or are extremely anal about "pixels" you won't notice a difference between 1080p and 4k on a 30in screen.

What kind of idiot buys a 30 in TV?


They don't even make shit that small.

>>52353514
>or have an 80" tv

You realize this is attainable for any poorfag in 5 years right?

>>52353610
I recommend BenQ.

>>52357874
By then 180" will be the norm

poorfags will always be behind the norm, just ignore them and their cries for attention.

File: Viewing Angle.png (158KB, 1070x974px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1070x974px

>>52353680
Another infographic

4K is great for home theater, but you still need really big screens to see the detail. For 9 feet, you need a 80 inch screen for 36 degrees and an 100 inch screen for 45 degrees. With a 65 inch TV, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 4k and 1080p at that distance.

What we need more than 4k though is better bit rates for broadcasted TV, 1080p doesn't even look its best right now. Japan is broadcasting 8k, why?

>>52358050
>Japan is broadcasting 8k, why?

because they aren't a bunch of cucks held by by aging technology like you americans have.

People laugh at how far America is behind, especially with the internet.

>>52356154
>4chan is a place for the free exchange of information where who you are does not matter so much as what you have to say

>>52358171
Hello SJW

>>52358143
Technology? Like bionic eyes? To see the difference between 4 and 8k is like sitting in the front row of a cinema. You're better off increasing the bit rate.

>>52353792
Cumcast has already rolled the 300GB cap is some areas.

i say give it 2 more years until 4k is worth it

by then we will have good enough encoders and hardware support that you'll see a legit difference between 1080p h264 and 2160p h265/vp9 ..

>>52358143

US is faster than most EU countries in terms of internet speeds. Fact. Speedtest and other sites literally showed the entire US (including Hawaii/Alaska/flyover states) being faster than many EU countries.

>>52358298
Now look at Japan, Korea

>>52358322
Don't they have that because their governments budgeting for it forever ago?

I really don't want the United States congress in charge of that shit. And we can't add good internet to our national debt.

>>52354388
>Even with the explosion of Halo and COD console players, its barely a peep..
you're kidding, right? your ability to notice input lag on a slow console FPS is about the same as if you were playing monopoly or some shit on it.

>>52358405
Keeping in line with your owners is more important than watching your debt that you owe them.

File: widescreen.jpg (57KB, 750x480px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 750x480px

Why are so many people failling for the widescreen meme? There are literally no reason to buy a 34" 21:9 when you can get a 40" 4k and put a custom resolution.

>>52358672
I agree. ultrawide is like the same if not more cost than 4k monitors at 40".

Only gaymers and movie watchers love ultrawide since they give no fucks at all about virtual space.

>>52358829
Hold up a second. I already got two 4k displays, but what fucking 8 movies are available in 4k already?

File: 12308589_10156323673005078_494135161039941812_n.jpg (150KB, 960x555px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 960x555px

I just got a 4k curved TV and it's pretty nice. I always thought curved was a really dumb gimmick. After staring at the same model, curved and flat side by side, I could notice a big difference. Curved feels so much nicer and enhances the immersion. I don't think I can ever go back to a flat screen again.

>>52358672
>>52358829
Yeah would just like to confirm this is the way to go. I use 3840x1620/1440 on some games when I can't quite reach a solid 60fps, or just want to make it wider.

>>52358939
Its the same reason for while people tilt their monitors inward towards them when they have 2+

>>52353610
This, 4K on tvs is retarded but a great improvement on computers where you can actually make good use of the extra pixels, tv is shit anyway, Id rather have better stories than muh super hd effects.

>>52358910
there's always 4k porn.

The biggest problem with 4k is actually how much detail it shows. Porn is a great example. People who you might have thought were hot as fuck are pretty fucking ugly.

Same goes for hollywood celebs. The cost of making a film in 4k is not just the equipment but the absurd amount of makeup/plastic surgery/etc that's needed for the actors.

>>52358405
The US government literally invented the Internet. Why do you think companies like fuckcast and jewrizon should have more control over it than the government?

>>52359016
>Same goes for hollywood celebs. The cost of making a film in 4k is not just the equipment but the absurd amount of makeup/plastic surgery/etc that's needed for the actors.

Ummmm people have been using film with higher quality than 4k for over 60 years now.

>>52359073
Then where are all the films in 4k?

>>52358322
Japan and Korea don't have rural communities like we do.
Their idea of "rural" is several villages in the middle of a mountain, our idea of rural is one family per 20 miles or more.
We have magnitudes more rural than their flimsy idea of rural.
To compare a continent sized country to a country smaller than California is butt-fucking stupid.
Compare cities to cities if you want a correct estimate.

Fuck 4K. How will I be able to stream 4K media when COMCAST has a 300GB data cap.

>>52353880
Wanna know how he owned you? Easy.

You didn't answer: how poor are you?

Why is there people making cars out of solid gold and buying pet tigers? Easy.

Because mad cash.

Now go study and become rich so you can buy your 4k TV and shut the fuck up.

I have a 22 inch 3840x2400 monitor that I sit 3 feet from and see pixelation quite easily. I have very good eyes, so I might not be normal, but I can't imagine not being able to see the difference.

But with video, like a TV normally does, its less noticeable.

>>52359483
Looking at poor quality images still are poor quality.

4k isn't magic.

Also at that small of a screen the most difference you'll see is in font sharpness and 4k content when it does come.

>>52359500
Absolutey. Sharpness isn't the only thing in the world. I'm fully aware. I'm just saying its one thing that is improving.

Luckly other areas are being improved with OLED even though its got bad reliability as of now.

>>52355701
Just because a piece of shit can run something g a X resolution doesn't make that resolution shit.

>>52359524
I don't expect to see cheap OLED for another 2 years unfortunately.

>>52353514
4k is affordable now so people buy them when they get new tvs. Don't be so whiny.

>>52359403
>study and become rich
this is the real meme

>comfily using an 11 year old panny plasma with slightly tuned voltages for deeper black and brighter, perfectly uniform white levels
>28,000+ hours and 10,000 plus switch ons and counting
>with memeplayerv display-sync and 3/4 lobe elliptical windowed-Jinc sampling it absolutely slaughters the 4k meme tvs

feels good man, brand new this tv cost less than some of the latest memeshit while having a much higher shipping weight and bill of materials, in the meantime most people have upgraded two or three or more times with worse results

>>52359602
>plasma
enjoy your burned-in gay porn

>>52359602
>11 year old plasma

top kek, yeah you're beating us alright. Be sure to never go out of that rock you're in.

I recently (~5 months ago) bought a 1080p 50" Sony but I recognize the value in 4K TVs. They're just a little too pricey for me at the moment; I'll wait until their prices hit the point of normalcy that 1080s sat at for so long.

One thing I notice though is that 4K TVs routinely perform better in the realms of color, viewing angle, contrast, etc which is good reason for buying them even if the resolution increase isn't readily apparent in your home theater setup.

Just bought a new 70" tv for the living room.
Went with a 1080p.
Don't feel like watching up-scaled shit for the next few years and pretending it looks better than content in it's native resolution un-stretched.
If you are getting a new tv definitely try to go with a something above 60HZ though.
Everything in motion looks more realistic and seems like it has better depth, it's almost disturbing at first. Everything kind of looks like a high quality Spanish soap opera.

>>52359016
I have to agree with this. I use a 1080p projector to make a 95" 16:9 image with my bed 9' away from the screen.

Unless the porn is very well shot, lit and good makeup used I prefer to stream it at 720p.

...and the obligatory man arse and balls bouncing up and down in every clip isn't pretty when it's 5' tall.