8k is unironically the resolution end game

>>58859651
8k will be the first acceptable resolution for phones, m8. Really you'll want 6k though.

We won't have decent resolution on monitors until 64k.

>>58859753
*16k

Ok

File: 1485753710118.png (271KB, 437x575px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 437x575px

>>58859651
>>58859753

>yfw 4k is actually 2k and 8k is actually 4k

Fuck marketing.

>>58859651
Holy shit. An OP in /g/ is actually right? The world has turned upside down.

OP is actually right. I have put down the numbers based on projections and for a 24'' screen at regular eye-monitor distances, yes, above 8K you basically waste money.

Yes, you could in theory stick your nose onto the screen and need 16K but that's stupid, you wouldn't see the whole screen.

>>58859651
1080p is more than enough for everyone ever.

>>58859855
1080p is shit you fucking retard.

>>58859873
Yeah, it's still a waste. I use 720p personally.

>>58859855
It's not completely trash and I don't give much shits to upgrade before I hit the lottery, but we could go to about 1440p in general use, but to be honest after that the majority of humans would just not find much difference.

>>58859651
Don't give a shit.
Still play snes @240p

we need more bandwidth before anything. fuckers did away with physical media so I had to upgrade my internet connection to keep up.

people are still using win 7.
the majority is at 1080p
whats the point if we dont get content. a super crisp desktop and blurry scaled software?

Samsung is already developing 11k.

Is there any reason to buy 1440p@120Hz TN over 4k@60HzIPS now? Is 1440p deprecated/ just stopgap garbage like /g/ says?

>>58859884
>1440p in general use

Nothing runs 1440p native. It's either upscaled 1440 or downscaled 4k. Neither gives an appreciable benefit. It's a meme resolution for people who don't know what they're buying.

>>58859904
>11k
Absolutely worthless. Check some graphical projections. For a regular 24'' screen at regular distances, above 8K it's impossible to notice any aliasing even with absolutely perfect eyesight hence it would be a waste of money to ever have larger resolutions because the only way to see aliasing in those would be to stick your nose onto them which is pointless because then you don't actually use the screen but only part of it, which is never useful.

>>58859926
*meant upscaled 1080p

>>58859855
I have a 1080p projector with a 120" screen. Looks great, no regrets. Would still buy again over a smaller 4k tv.

I'll buy a 4k projector in about 5 years when they are below $1000.

>>58859937
Bigger resolutions haven't had anything to do with logic for a while.
Bigger numbers sell, it doesn't matter if it's useless, it's a status symbol.

>>58859926
In practice? Sure I agree. I really don't want to upgrade my 1080p IPS screen that easily because it would be ruined by upscaling.

It would be an "upgrade" that actually degrades it.

Most of the sources I find are max 1080p.