I guess the problem will be that 1080p was driven forward by blu-ray.
There is no new standard coming out with 4k to push people into upgrading
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
future 4k tv/monitor with current GPUs
- Thread starter delpy8
- Start date
I guess the problem will be that 1080p was driven forward by blu-ray.
There is no new standard coming out with 4k to push people into upgrading
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 2,727
- Location
- Gillingham, Kent
I remember when I bought the 6450 for my HTPC, the packaging said it was ready for 4k resolution screens. Remember wondering how well it would cope with BF3 at that res! 
What do we think - 1 frame per month?
What do we think - 1 frame per month?I remember when I bought the 6450 for my HTPC, the packaging said it was ready for 4k resolution screens. Remember wondering how well it would cope with BF3 at that res!
Ready to run 4k for word and powerpoint
Yes this is a great point about blu-ray driving 1080p.
It will probably be around 5 years until I am tempted to upgrade to a TV/monitor and the GPU's needed to push that many pixels I think. It would take a monstrous computer with £1k+ of GPU's to drive this resolution with decent frame rates with current GPU's.
well i think its closer than some of you think, 2 years probably, you can already get 4k camcorders, albeit expensive, film producers are already filming in 4k, and there are already a very small amount of films ready, probably in china though, and i have heard of some broadcasts due out in 4k too but they too are eastern channels. and as for the graphics horsepower, well some people are getting 60-100 fps on triple monitors @ 1080p which is just over 6 million pixels and 4k is just over 8 million so sli setups should cope, as for 3d well that's another story, they cant get 2560 x 1600 @ 120 mhz yet so i think thats a long way off
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
The Toshiba is £6500, which is bordering on consumer pricing (compared with 20-35k atleast)
Judging by what happened with 720/1080 I'd say sub-£2000 screens within 2 years
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2012/6/18/the-4k-graphics-card-shootout.aspx
From that article, at the moment Nvidia have a little bit of work to do regarding high res-not from a gaming performance pov as they are performing almost the same, but more on buffing up the problems and getting the kinks out, but I'm sure they will get there.
From that article, at the moment Nvidia have a little bit of work to do regarding high res-not from a gaming performance pov as they are performing almost the same, but more on buffing up the problems and getting the kinks out, but I'm sure they will get there.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,353
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Looking at the specs of these 4K monitors there not really meant for us gamers. It's bad enough we can't get regular PLS/IPS panels above 60hz so who the hell wants to be capped at 25 fps on a 4k display? I'll get excited once there's a 1440 PLS/IPS @ 120hz, you can keep your 4K displays for the time being.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
lol, tv pushed 1080, 100mil's of people had 1080p tv's before they had bluray players. I only got a bluray player last year and we've had a high def tv for, god knows how long or how many.
The simple and biggest push for 1080p tv's was.... they were available. Who was buying a old cathode ray tv when LCD's were available? No one, almost everyone I can name that I know had a 1080p screen before they had a bluray. Most because bluray players were expensive to start with and disc's were stupidly priced.
There was LOADS of hd content on tv, okay states got it straight away and Sky HD had what, 3-4 channels of mostly repeated content for ages, then they had 7-8 channels. Now its loads more but the key channels were pretty early, Sky sports HD was huge for HD package uptake in the UK, pretty much the main reason people got it for ages.
4k tv's will go the same way, when they are available and considered top end, people who want the best buy the best. Same way guys who only play a few games, most get an i5, some still get a hex core £700 chip that they don't even use.
In terms of bluray, its a medium and expandable, 4 layer jump will be easy to make, 8 layer is possible but would cost a stupid amount, its designed as a standard to eventually go 8 layer though.
Personally I'd take content in X264/mkv'd format at 40gb a film and 4k(assuming I had a screen) than a 40gb 1080p normal bluray disc.
Either way its not particularly there, they won't be standard £400 4k tv's for 4-5 years, and even then there might not be blurays.... people will still buy the screens.... because that is what people do.
As said though, these aren't aimed at gamers yet, I wouldn't take a 24fps screen for gaming if you had a gun to my head, literally, really low refresh rates cause me migraines(or I should say overly stuttery or blurry images ).
For my comp I don't care about 4k, I just want something above 1080p at something below 27" with 120hz and preferably not a TN panel(though newer TN's make older ones look like dog turd and are far more livable with these days).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,167
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
I bought my first 1080p screen back in november 2006 and there was naff all 1080p content available then. The ps3 was released (in europe, anyway) in march '07 so during that time we had no affordable 1080p players at all. When the ps3 was released, it was the cheapest player by a country mile @ £425 or so and that was still very expensive especially given the lack of content at the time. The screens themselves were also not cheap at all - my 40" 40w2000 was £1800 and generally was one of the cheapest available at that point, and so at that point the uptake of 1080p was pretty slow to be honest. availability may have started the uptake, but it was the ps3 and bluray that really gave it a kick up the arse, IMO.
Last edited:
Also, it may not 100% be blu-ray but the fact that it went from massive boxes to something nice & sleek helped. 1080p - 4k is the same look. The average person will not upgrade the TV for the hell of it, especially if the new TV looks the same as the old one, unlike massive to slim & sleek where people who know nothing at all still wanted to upgrade 
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 1,921
- Location
- Leeds
But isn't SkyHD 720P/1080i...they're not even pushing 1080P content yet? Not sure what they're doing on Anytime+ now, but initially that was all SD as well.
Yeah max is 1080i on Sky.
i got mine in sept that year, i was the first to have 1080p KDS 55A 2000 in the UK, there was no need to have 1080p tv back then, i've only ever gamed on 1080P, i've never seen HD tv image on mine
, only on our Panny at this house.4K tv ? forget it for now, not worth it for another 3 years, you'd have to win an FA cup bet at 100 : 1 and i cant ever see Chelsea or Arsenal loosing to Airbus U.K can you !!!!
but that aint 1080p, it's interlaced from 720p, it's not nearly as good.... you'll never see 4k normal BBC TV in your lifetime, no way; it's far too large a filesize to transmit, far too great an investment.... the BBC wont go near it, i very much doubt you'll even see 1080p tv either.
gaming?.... yea that's ok, but who cares because i never watch tv that much anyway
Last edited:
Last edited: