/4K/

4K is pointless when framerates are still so low. Let's see 120fps as standard before chasing higher spatial resolution.

I'd rather have 720p120 than 4Kp30.

Did you just take some fucking speed or something?

It's just more pixels. It looks prettier because of more detail. That's it.

Also, the red and blue pill analogy comes from a movie written by two trannies, just FYI.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5QP8KsSWXM

What's all this about?

4K at the typical 7-10 foot living room viewing distance is only marginally better than 1080p, if at all.

For desktop monitors, though, 4K is fucking awesome. At that distance you can clearly see the difference from lower resolutions.

The real advantages of the 4K standard are Rec. 2020 color range and HDR.

>>56535726

I see what you mean. Do you see a big difference with 60 vs 120 fps? I'd like to experience what that feels like.

>>56535747

Hey figure of speech, besides technology has no gender (unless we talking cable endings)

>>56535726
because everyone is a gaymen faggot, right?

Who the fuck buys a TV in this day and age?

>>56535801
>Do you see a big difference with 60 vs 120 fps?
The only native 120fps/144fps content is games, and yes it is highly noticeable, especially with fast paced games (eg. Quake series).

Sports and action movies would also benefit from it but they are not available.

>>56535806

So where does it make sense to invest in 4K technology?

>>56535829

When broadband infrastructure improves and when GPUs which can do 4K comfortably become available and not too expensive.

So basically the consensus is that 4k is pretty much not worth talking about until 2-5 years from now. Gotcha

It's just the next step from HD

why is this such a hard concept to understand?

There is literally no reason to not get 4k now that even intel fucking integrated graphics can do 4k60hz and 27 inch IPS 4K monitors are only $400.

What's the point in 4k TVs? I'm pretty sure it's only good for monitors because you're sitting up close to them and could notice the pixels in a lower resolution monitor. If you're sitting way back you might as well just get a 1080p TV because you can't tell the difference anyways.

>>56536168

Replace "4k" with "literally all technology" and you are now a smart consumer

I still remember retards on /v/ from almost ten years ago saying that the $599 PS3 was a great deal because Bluray players were not going to drop that much.

>>56535726

Get a load of this gaymer

>>56536992
To be fair, the PS3 was a way better Blu-Ray player than game console.

>>56535819
people who have friends with whom to watch things

>>56535691
First latest look at 4K which stands for 4000! This is number of bi-polar semi-plated transiting conductors. 1080p televisions only have slightly over 1000. TV stations can't broadcast anything over 1367 due to technological limitations but this will no doubt change within a decade or so.
So, as you can see, 4K really comes alive on PC's strong enough to support it, a good graphics card like Intel's latest nvidia range has native support for 4k and even upscales 4K on 1080p monitors, it's very impressive and gives the playstation 3 a run for its money.

>>56537343
WTF is this? Automated shitposting?

>>56535691
4K! Haha we have 120ko/s as max download speed on my country so we can avoid this shit to become popular, 360p forever!

>>56535691
Got a 65" 4K TV for the bedroom. Only got a computer connected too it but 4K netflix is OK. I use it for netflix, /g/ browsing and twitch before going to sleep. Happy with it except the start menu and shit is too fucking small even with scaling.