Have you jumped to 4k yet?

Because it is a meme.

The human eye cannot actually see above 360p. This is why we have two eyes each 360+360 = 720p.

>>58988819
You forgot one eye; the minds eye. Therefore 360+360+360=1080 is best.

When are HDR PC monitors coming? Are operating systems even ready?

>>58988802
Tbh i am still at 768p resolution

>>58988802
Yes.
Still watching the same 1080p content and 720p chinese cartoons on it, still feels great since I made the jump from 42" to 60"

>>58988802
>Hey guys! Look how rich I am! I can afford an *even smaller* GUI!
Let me guess: You're a Mac user.

>>58988802
I'm not looking to start a flame war, this is purely subjective, but I can't tell the difference. 4K just comes off as forced innovation for the sake of getting money from people with disposable income or who need to have the latest tech for their social appearance. I can't tell the difference between 1080p and 4K, so I don't care.

TV: yes
Monitor: no

You can't really even find a decent quality TV these days that doesn't already have 4k and smart features. The content might still be sparse but at this point you're not really paying a premium since it's already the standard.

Monitors are another story. I'm starting to wish mine had higher resolution but 4k is way overkill for ~24". I think a 1440p 27" would do me fine.

>>58989373
ill do you fine

File: dad.png (163KB, 636x511px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 636x511px

>bought ~30" fullHD TV
>can't even really notice the difference between 480p and 720p

File: 4k.png (266KB, 981x787px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 981x787px

>I bought pic related and it was overkill

Returned it 6 months after buying

I actually bought two as the first one had a dead pixel on the middle of the screen, the second one also had a dead pixel, but it was on the far edge of the screen and not view able unless you shifted your perspective.

>DONT BUY 4K FROM AMAZON BUY FROM THE MANUFACTURER

32 inches is too small and I have perfect vision get 40+

>>58988802
I just jumped to 1080p

>>58989543
4k is only worth it on massive 55+ inch displays.

>>58988855
First one is coming out just came out.

Basically wait a year or two for cheap 4K HDR monitors and for the gpu's to be cheap enough to drive it.

>>58988802
I want one for sure. But I'd probably just get another laptop before spending money on a monitor

File: IMG_1026.png (725KB, 1242x2208px) Image search: [Google]

725KB, 1242x2208px

>>58989626
Pic very related

>>58988802
I did two years ago, and will jump the fuck on 8k the moment that a decent 40"+ display drops below $1.5k.

Nice huge screens are only possible with 4k at the moment (5k being stuck on 27" panels for whatever reasons), and I care more about that than anything else at the moment.

Not until I can get it at 144Hz.

File: tv.jpg (447KB, 813x1176px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 813x1176px

>>58988802
no

>>58988802
Why switching to 4k when 21:9 34" 3440x1440 exists

>no scaling needed

>>58988802
I got 2880x2160, does that count?

>>58989373
This desu. 27" 1440p is the sweet spot. 4k ruins gpus, eyes and bank accounts.

>>58988819
lol

Full HD is the best resolution

You can't get better than Full, it's all the way up.

>>58988802
2k is just fine

>>58990329
Pretty much. 24" is around the sweet spot for 1080p

yes but I'll replace it with that hideous 144hz 4K HDR Gsync monitor in a few months

I wonder if any cp is available in 4k.

I'd rather have 60hz>144hz as a standard rather than 1080p>4K

>yet
You say that like at some point I will.

Nope, 720p laptop and 1080p TV

>>58988802
I will when there is a 4K OLED 24 inch monitor that reaches over 200 HZ and offers G-SYNC.

File: 31218729553_372cf5e781_o copy.jpg (2MB, 2542x1907px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2542x1907px

>>58988802
>Have you jumped to 4k yet?
>mfw notebook manufacturers are deliberately switching back to 1366x768

>>58988802
I still have never adopted Blu-ray. But I do have a nice comfy lil Vizio in my room that does the job fine. Nothing fancy but does have some built in apps.

>>58990277
That TV looks nice and comfy for some nice old school gaming with the flat tube. Got any classic systems?

Because 4k is gay.

>>58988802
Yes and it is amazing, there is an incredible amount of detail that you miss out on at 1080p. But don't buy a screen less than 50" or so or you won't be able to notice the difference.

>>58989190

>i cant tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, 1080p is just forced innovation

>>58990277
that poor table

File: 1487035225347.png (171KB, 466x462px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 466x462px

>>58989660
>HDR
>Quantum Dots

>>58990265

This

File: resolution.png (49KB, 547x461px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 547x461px

>>58992079
>50"
lol ew so small and tiny

>>58988802
>4k and 8k

Rock hard meme

>>58988802
My cable provider can only send 720p

text on 4k looks damn good

>>58989373
4k is not overkill for 24" but 28" would be better

>>58992862
40" monitors needing 8k confirmed.

>>58988819
That's the dumbest thing I've read this week

4K NON-ULTRA MEME ULTRASHARPS WHEN

4K 144HZ IPS THIN BEZEL WHEN

MONITOR MARKET IS FUCKING GAY

GIVE US WHAT WE WANT. IF DELL CAME OUT WITH A 144HZ 4K OR EVEN JUST A 144HZ ULTRASHARP 1440P I WOULD BUY 4 OF THEM RIGHT NOW

>GAYMUR BEZELS
>MUH 180HZ
>MUH GAYMUR INSPIRED DESIGN


RRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>58993311
>new

My phone is 4k. Does that count?

>>58993131
rock hard?
rock hard?
rock hard?

did you just say ROCK HARD?
Why is this relevant?

>>58988802
One of these days. I'd like to upgrade my TV on 4k, but I don't think I'll be upgrading the monitor anytime soon. Still waiting for UHD 120Hz+ and a card that can drive it comfortably so that's what, 2 years of waiting?

File: 3602.jpg (463KB, 2321x1547px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 2321x1547px

Got a 4K monitor back in 2014. Upgraded recently to a 4K HDR TV.
Half of this board shitposts about 4K like they know nothing about it. I never got how having more pixels to work with is somehow a meme.

>>58988837
underrated

Nah.

27'' 1440p is the best you'll get.

4k at 27'', the content will be too small..

Anything over 27'' is too uncomfortable and you'll have to move your head to see parts of the screen.

File: l4FjLl8.jpg (29KB, 480x444px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x444px

>>58993688
I'll stick around a bit to answer any questions about 4K if there's any, will answer otherwise when I wake up if this thread is still alive.
By the way, Windows still has bad scaling support, but otherwise works perfectly with it disabled.

>>58989452
Go to the doctor.

>>58993799
144hz 1440p or 60hz 4k for gamin?

>>58993996
Definitely a higher refresh rate if it's something serious and competitive, but otherwise 4K for everything else.

>>58991997
>notebook manufacturers are deliberately switching back to 1366x768
To reduce power consumption?

>>58993749
Scaling becomes a bit of an issue on a 27" at 4K, I've got the monitor set fairly close though so it isn't that much of a problem for me in most applications.

In some video games it is irritating though, since you cannot adjust the UI and changing scaling on windows often breaks things or just don't look right. Some icons End up too small for comfort.

saving up for triple 5k displays tbhwyf

>>58988802
Not really necessary for smaller displays.

>inb4 calling me a 1080i cuck
Law of Diminishing Returns. Look it up.

>>58988802
need 144hz and a decent gpu (>titan X pascal)

so maybe in ~2 years

I have a 4k 24" monitor

Text is crystal clear and easy to read, even compared to my old 1440p monitor

I play games @1080p because i dont play enough to buy a GTX 1080

>>58994422
The backlight's the big power hog when it comes to LCD screens and that remains a constant

#4KNoWay

The only people on this memewagon are purchasing them to replace their 3D HDTVs.

>>58995686
For TVs the view distance is generally larger, as far as 2m+ so the display would have to be large enough to notice a difference in detail.

With monitors the viewing distance is generally much smaller so you will notice a difference much more easily. In my case I am seated very close around 0.3~0.5 m away. I can easily notice a difference between 1080 on a 24" and 4k on a 27".

>barely any 4K media
>most is 1080p upscale or low bitrate garbage
>GPUs not yet truly ready for stable 4K gaming
>UI scaling is awful, can be near unreadable depending on the size of the display
>most 4K panels are powered by recycled hardware that struggles with the signal processing, so real world input latency is comparatively very high

4k is a meme, but 2560x1440, and 2560x1600 are where its at.

>>58988802
I've had a 4k 28inch for a while now, pretty good

>>58994814
>4k 24"
I've got 1080 24". It sits 45-50 centimeters away. That's what I consider being a max display size for 1080. You should have went for 1440p. Max size for that as a monitor should be around 27".
My eyes are a little fucked but even then I can see that you've went a bit tarded with your resolution. But each their own. I will admit that looking at high res images would be good for you, but text renders don't need that much. Unless you're doing split tabs and making your text stupid small but doing that for the general user is a hindrance than an advantage. Much rather get a second display.

I'm waiting for 4K Freesync 2 displays with a GPU that can drive it. I doubt we will see OLED displays and QLED is still somewhat far away (Don't believe Samsungs marketing lies).

>>58988802
Thats a 4k monitor?
I can really see the difference. You have me thinking of upgrading

>>58988802
gimme UHD at 32", VA, and Freesync. 60Hz is all I need. oh and not crazy $1K+ expensive.

Yeah, I love it

Not much content tho

>>58988802

I've got a 27" 2560x1440. Pretty glorious, but it's a bit tough on the eyes. Would be better if it was 30".

4K just is too expensive for what you get out of it at this time. Probably around 2020, maybe for Christmas 2019, I'll take a closer look at what's on the market and compare to cost and what it would be good for.

I don't see anything under 36" for 4K as viable. I have seen some 40" at 4K that I'd consider, if they were affordable.

Assuming 8K isn't The Thing in 2020, I would guess right now that a 40" 21:9 ultra wide for 4K with a proper curve all under $400 is about the spec crossover points that would grab my serious interest. At that time, I'll probably be in the market to put a pair of them up, probably with such a thin bezel that the center seam will make it look like a 42:9 ultimate wide.

>>58998061
>I can really see the difference
>on a lower resolution display

It's like someone showing a side by side comparison video in 60fps and 144fps but you are watching on a display capped at a refresh rate of 60Hz.

>>58988802
nah AdobeRGB is better than rez for me. aint gonna bust two nuts on one monitor until its worth it

who 3440x1440 here?

>>58998548
I'm at 12981298371283x1293192381

get on my level

No, it's too dense for me. I need a pixel density close to 24"/1080p.

>>58998548
That's my next monitor's res, currently using 1680x1050 and 1920x1080

Been at 2560x1440 for 7 years.

>>58998703
Been at 1366x768 for 7 years.

>>58998703
you lie

>>58988802
No currently on 1440p,144hz as im waiting for the PG27UQ 4k 144hz. to come out

>>58989373
>TV: yes
>Monitor: no

this

>>58992028
no

>>58988802
I have an HP ZR30W
There haven't been any monitors out that I've desperately wanted to upgrade to.

When there are 4K 144Hz Freesync 2.0 monitors out, I might upgrade.

>>58992028
HD CRTs are actually generally bad for retro gaming, many have upscaling that you can't disable

>>58993688
nice lamp anon what kind? also digging the keyboard pls share

>>58988802
laptop: yes
gamin rig: no, 1440p 144hz

File: lamp.jpg (331KB, 1145x1717px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1145x1717px

>>58999910
Always the lamp questions. Something from a company called Qazqa.
Keyboard is just a Pok3r with a few keysets mixed together that I had lying around.

>>58988819
(You)

>>58993799
Fucking what? The windows scaling support is even better than it used to be. I have a 24" 4k monitor and I am enjoying all of my 1080p content perfectly scaled or super crisp 4K rendering. The only issue I've had with scaling is when running .jar files, which I haven't had to do in at least 6 months.

>>58993996
Higher refresh is better than number of pixels for gaming. I'd rather a faster 1080p (or 1440p) monitor if I only ever did gaming.

>>59000145
>The windows scaling support is even better than it used to be.
I haven't seen any changes from Windows 8. Windows itself supports scaling fairly decently, the issue lies in that it can't force all other programs to ever support scaling, and I know for a fact many never will. It still sucks. Even PHOTOSHOP can't do scaling properly, still.

>The only issue I've had with scaling is when running .jar files
Oh yeah speaking of which, Minecraft doesn't support any scaling whatsoever either. Great support, huh?

>>58988819
kek

File: Awoo.jpg (201KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1000x1000px

Two 1080s or one 1440p and one 1080p

>>59000916
latter has more pixels so that

>>58994651
>Dude some internet law told me that infinitely sharper text and imperceivable aliasing aren't worth it on smaller displays so now I argue with people about products they own and I don't

File: 1466772497282.jpg (336KB, 719x971px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 719x971px

>>59000950
Any recommendations for a 1440p ?

4K
HDR / Freesync 2
<2ms response time
144hz
27"
<$800

fucking

W
H
E
N

>>58993478
No as they dont do 4k all the time, they revert back to 1080p

>>59001012
I went for the PG278Q. I really like it and havent had any problems with it, also the gsync on it is fantastic.
People will disagree but its all down to personal preference. I spent quite a bit of time looking before I bought

>>58990301

Nice IBM T220

A friend of mine just got a 4k HDR10 television and he was playing on his Bone S and it looked REALLY fucking good. And thats not even native 1080p.

It kind of sold me on the 4k meme. Imagine what actual 4k content would look like.

I don't have one yet but I have my eyes on a couple.

>>59001019
http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/04/rog-pg27uq-intro/

>>59001316
>gsync instead of freesync

thanks but no thanks, I prefer to buy products from companies that don't try to fuck me over and scam me

>>58988837
>not counting the brown eye

>360+360+360+360=1440p

Yea have a KS8000

>>59001349
So you wont be buying from AMD either then.
Are you saying freesync works but gsync is a scam? I fucking really hope not

> Dad comes home from Best buy with a new 4k hdtv
> Dad doesn't watch any 4k content and i tell him the cable box wont do 4k
> Dad makes me set it up anyway
> complains the picture is grainy because 1080i cable box
> tell him if he wants to take advantage of 4k he needs to watch blu ray dvds or the like
> flips shit, blames it all on me

>>59001316
>Q3
>Will cost at least $1k
Wew lad

I'm keeping my 4k60hz display for another 3 years at least

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11011/dell-announces-up3218k-its-first-8k-display-due-in-march

Already on 8K, faggots

>>59001884
Its top of my shopping list.

File: 1459123962133.png (136KB, 325x325px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 325x325px

>>59001723

>>59001886
I know you're meming but 4k is the *actual* ceiling for home media quality content

The only reason for 8k is to have retina tier pixel density combined with 4k real estate on a huge as fuck screen, so if that's what you want fucking go for it

5k is a much more reasonable bar to set since it's just double sharp 1440p

Bought 2 of these for $140 each and they work beautifully. Like most cheap monitors. they have bad onscreen controls and come calibrated completely too bright and blown out, but a couple minutes of playing and they're fine.

The biggest problem is my laptop can't tell them apart so I have to make sure I plug them into the same ports each time or my desktop ends up aligned backwards.

File: upstar4k.jpg (345KB, 3491x2649px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 3491x2649px

>>59001971

forgot pic

File: 1454879349829.png (120KB, 527x499px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 527x499px

>>58988802

>buy nice 4K display
>use it to watch youtube, netflix and hulu filled with artifacts, fixed pattern noise, banding, no true blacks

File: this guy.png (100KB, 244x497px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 244x497px

Acer Predator any good ? For Gayming of course

>>59002114
It's literally the best, of course it's good. That's why it's so expensive

>>59001071
>Buying g stuck monitor.
Retard.

>>59001821
G-sync garbage costs a lot compared to freesynch just because muh shekels!!

>>58988802
No because 1440p

TV is 4K though

>>58988802
Only my TV, which is the only place 16:9 garbage belongs.

File: ASUS-PB287Q.jpg (896KB, 2500x2500px) Image search: [Google]

896KB, 2500x2500px

been with the meme since 2014

i don't understand how people can use 1440p monitors. whenever I have to help my mom with something on her 4 year old 27" imac the pixelation looks like ass.

File: 1485399982254.jpg (10KB, 166x304px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 166x304px

>>58990656
>>>>b

>>58992014
Are you me?

>tfw still using a 1680x1050 22" monitor
How much am I missing out?

27" 1440p at 75+Hz is the optimal monitor right now. I'll move to 4k when A) mid-tier video cards can play games at 4k at 60+ fps B) when they have 75+Hz 4k IPS panels and C) when I can get a 32" IPS 4k at 75+Hz for under $350

File: national_day_of_pizza_2015_pizza_cheese_pastries_100087_3840x2160.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

>>58990656
>>59004498
:O

yes, video games look great on it

>>59004498
>>59005167

It's a valid question. It's human nature to wonder and ponder.

>>58990656

I could only find 1080p Carnival Phantasm torrents:
https://www.nyaa.se/?page=view&tid=550820

File: e.jpg (37KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 450x600px

>>58988819
hi, im replying to bait :D

>>58988802
That's a TV buddy not a monitor

>>58988802
I have, over a year ago. The image is absolutely gorgeous and even at 125% scaling the work area is still huge.

>>58993341
>muh monitor casing I buy peripherals as a fashion statement

>>59005624
No, it's a monitor.

>>59006234
My point exactly

Indistinguishable from a TV, might as well get the cheaper option

>>59006516
Except for the part where TVs fucking suck as monitors

>>59006623
It's 60hz, it's high DPI, it's good color, what more do you want?

>he's not on 15k
Do any of you even have jobs?

>>59006672
A fucking monitor, because that will actually look decent. I've never seen a TV that worked well as a monitor.

>>58988802
No, WQXGA is perfect

>tfw 2560x1600 30in IPS

>>58988802
Not worth the investment, you'll be able to watch shit films and play a few games. And unless you're willing to spend mega-bucks on a computer the consistently plays 4k, you're better of sticking with 1080p. Better yet, how about two or three 1080 monitors?

File: 1485311716166.gif (2MB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x304px

>>58988802

>mfw am still using a 1280x1024
I really like it, its one of those Acer monitors and has lasted me 11 years.

>>58988802
3440x1440 over here. Not 4k, but not 1080p that's for sure.

>>58988819
Top fucking kek

I'm not that rich. My TV is 4k while my monitor is 1440p. I want 4k!

File: mirasol-640x353.jpg (49KB, 640x353px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x353px

Color e-ink monitors fucking when?

LED backlights are a fucking meme that make people go blind, not to mention blue light.

No curved monitor with >100hz.

>>58995930
Pascal is ready ho

>>59010774

fucking this

>>58992028
HD CRTs are terrible for retro gaming.

File: Dwigt..png (549KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 550x550px

>tfw 1080p@240Hz

>>58988802
No. None of my monitors are above 30" diagonal length and the pixel density at that size makes me feel weird. My 50" tv is fine with it but I would prefer 1080 or 1440 for a monitor smaller than 32".

>>58988802
1080p is the shit.

>>59013645
1080p is shit.

>>59002632

And with freesync you get what you pay for

>Don't fall outside this specific range of frame rates or it will stop working!

What a joke, yes let me lose it when I drop under 30, the time that adaptive sync is most needed.

>>58988802
wow now all the artifacts in my shows, shitty font rendering, and shitty textures/models in games are TWICE as apparent!

File: desktop-4M.jpg (4MB, 7680x4320px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 7680x4320px

No I just went straight to 5k.

>>58988802
I don't see the point in making text and other graphical objects even smaller than they already are on standard screen sizes, and scaling looks like shit.

I'd rather migrate to an ultrawide that actually serves a purpose other than making me feel hip with the cool technology the kids are into these days.

If video cards ever came out with VRR support, would you use a TV over a monitor?