LG Gets Ready for 8K Quad UHD

[Phixsator]

Personally the only thing right now i would say is a possitive about "8k" is if its affordable, as it "might" push gpu makers to up their came even more.. Just as 4k has or is starting to atleast.

 

[Dark Light]

On field of view, one of the selling points to 8k is having peripheral vision, so it would be like a 5k display with just more on a side and on the top. And if you couldn't distinguish individual pixels at 8k you wouldn't notice scaling artefacts of lower resolutions (presuming good scaling). Also I think 6k might be the sweet spot in a few years, as with 4k you can run at 2k with no artefacts, with 6k you would be able to at 3k or 1080p, so if you can run at 6k then great, if not 3k will do and you still have 1080p to fall back on.

But the main appeal with 8k will be with VR, the Vive has dual displays so you would most definitely notice dual 4096x4096 displays.

 

[Mei]

'8K' is currently a technology designed to make very large screens at 'normal' viewing distances look appealing. On a smaller monitor screen it is far less attractive. Even if they scale it down to around 40", which some people now quite admire as a monitor size, it is completely overkill for a monitor. You would need to sit very close to the screen to actually appreciate the pixel density, save for the decreased need for anti-aliasing when gaming (perhaps not such a plus given how much GPU horsepower is required anyway). It isn't an attractive proposition with the scaling and GPU horsepower where it's at currently.

they are good points but its something they will need to tackle with windows10 and gpu's over the next few years right?
people will always want more & bigger numbers, so there is a market for it

i think 8k is a good thing, if they move their butts could be exciting times <3

 

[PCM2]

On field of view, one of the selling points to 8k is having peripheral vision, so it would be like a 5k display with just more on a side and on the top. And if you couldn't distinguish individual pixels at 8k you wouldn't notice scaling artefacts of lower resolutions (presuming good scaling).

It doesn't work like that. '8K' or 'FUHD' or whatever you want to call it is a resolution of 7680 × 4320. That is 16:9. You therefore get exactly the same Field of View in almost all games as you would on any other 16:9 resolution, as that is how HOR+ scaling works. And the physical size of the display will be the same as any other 16:9 display can be - except of course that much larger displays are far more practical and useable with such a great wealth of pixels.

As for 'scaling artefacts', it isn't really them that are a problem. It is the obvious softening of the image which comes from commonly used interpolation processes which is unappealing. That is just as apparent regardless of pixel density.

'8K' is certainly extremely useful for VR, that is true. But for general use and anything smaller than about 46" it won't be as attractive for most users as higher refresh rate displays with '4K' resolutions, or indeed intermediates like '6K'. When GPUs can make a good go of the resolution and scaling is much better, it is certainly more attractive. But for gaming at least, you would get much more out of the experience on said 'smaller' monitors by using that power to drive a lower resolution with superior refresh rate.

 

[fantasticCG]

What's the future of monitors?
What will the ones in your sig be like?