next gaming monitor tech?
- Thread starter Shadow Reaper
- Start date
Whoa, I havent moved to 4k yet! Do I just skip it?
I dunno. I think we need to wait and see what the 'puter monitor looks like.
This is too large to sit close to without it being curved. However, Samsung and LG both make large 4K curved monitors, so they're not far from the ideal, single-screen gaming monitor. Would need more curvature than we've seen, but that much detail is enough to make you move your head to glance around, say out the side of your cockpit.
This is so big that if you curved it with a 24" radius (puts your eyes 2' from the screen) it would curve back past your peripheral vision, covering more than half circle. If it were curved vertically as well, you'd have a personal version of the iMAX experience for the home.
This is too large to sit close to without it being curved. However, Samsung and LG both make large 4K curved monitors, so they're not far from the ideal, single-screen gaming monitor. Would need more curvature than we've seen, but that much detail is enough to make you move your head to glance around, say out the side of your cockpit.
This is so big that if you curved it with a 24" radius (puts your eyes 2' from the screen) it would curve back past your peripheral vision, covering more than half circle. If it were curved vertically as well, you'd have a personal version of the iMAX experience for the home.
Curved screens are such a useless gimmick unless you are the only person in the room and sitting directly in front of it.
Radegast74
Space Marshal
My plan is still to go with 3 plain old 1080p monitors, at some point. I think I may do that within about 6 months, inshallah, as they say...
While 8k may eventually become as common place as 1080p is today, I believe that the next great gaming monitor will be 4k with 120-144hz speed & 1ms refresh rate as the great 1080p gaming monitors are today.
I did a bunch of research on resolution when 4k started being a thing. I was curious how it relevant it was when compared to the capabilities of the human eye. I was expecting to end my curiosity with a yes or no answer. Hours later with dozens of articles and scientific papers under my belt, I came to the conclusion "maybe?".
The problem with 4k and 8k is that they might be better than what you can physically see with your eyes. If you are looking at a 27" monitor that is a couple feet from your face, you can likely see the difference between 1k and 4k. Unless you have uncommonly spectacular eyesight though, you probably won't be able to see the difference between 4k and 8k. The answer isn't so simple though. Being able to see the differences between the super high resolutions is a factor of screen size and how far away it is from your face. Depending on the circumstances, you may only be able to discern improvements up to 1080p.
The main reason I dove down this rabbit hole of research, was to decide if I wanted to try for 4k on my gaming rig. At the end, my decision was an easy one. No. It wasn't worth it. While I was doing my research though, I came across several other factors that make much more of an impact on your visual gaming experience. That is the refresh rates, response times, and pixel pitch. Those are much more of a factor than the resolution. This is particularly a problem when, for instance, your computer can crank out 100+fps but your monitor only has a 60hz refresh rate.
Then there is the practical application of 4 and 8k. Our data infrastructure can barely keep up with streaming 720p reliably. Netflix accounts for over 1/3 of all internet traffic (36.5% in 2015). We don't have the bandwidth for what our TV's can do. Streaming 8K would either clog the internet or leave us waiting on a loading symbol.
For us though, it's all about the gaming application. It's even worse there. Most people's computers can barely handle 4K and it's situational at that. If you are in a combative game, most gamers wouldn't dream of running around with the settings cranked that high. They turn it down to guarantee the more important factors to combat, frames per second and lag.
So long story short, 8K is pretty. It really does look amazing if you look closely. The problem is, we're just not ready to put it to work for the every day stuff. At least that's my take on it.
The problem with 4k and 8k is that they might be better than what you can physically see with your eyes. If you are looking at a 27" monitor that is a couple feet from your face, you can likely see the difference between 1k and 4k. Unless you have uncommonly spectacular eyesight though, you probably won't be able to see the difference between 4k and 8k. The answer isn't so simple though. Being able to see the differences between the super high resolutions is a factor of screen size and how far away it is from your face. Depending on the circumstances, you may only be able to discern improvements up to 1080p.
The main reason I dove down this rabbit hole of research, was to decide if I wanted to try for 4k on my gaming rig. At the end, my decision was an easy one. No. It wasn't worth it. While I was doing my research though, I came across several other factors that make much more of an impact on your visual gaming experience. That is the refresh rates, response times, and pixel pitch. Those are much more of a factor than the resolution. This is particularly a problem when, for instance, your computer can crank out 100+fps but your monitor only has a 60hz refresh rate.
Then there is the practical application of 4 and 8k. Our data infrastructure can barely keep up with streaming 720p reliably. Netflix accounts for over 1/3 of all internet traffic (36.5% in 2015). We don't have the bandwidth for what our TV's can do. Streaming 8K would either clog the internet or leave us waiting on a loading symbol.
For us though, it's all about the gaming application. It's even worse there. Most people's computers can barely handle 4K and it's situational at that. If you are in a combative game, most gamers wouldn't dream of running around with the settings cranked that high. They turn it down to guarantee the more important factors to combat, frames per second and lag.
So long story short, 8K is pretty. It really does look amazing if you look closely. The problem is, we're just not ready to put it to work for the every day stuff. At least that's my take on it.
I can see a difference between HD and 4K on a 27 inch monitor about 2-3 feet from my face. Is it really much better? Yes...and no. The quality of the picture is better, but it take a lot more video card to drive it. In fact, current cards like the 1080 can even have issues driving multiple monitors with just a single 4K and the other as HD. It will probably be another generation beyond this one before really good 4K video cards are available.
Now, 8k will shine in the projection screen market and the very large TV market. Note that the screen in the article is 88 inches. That is way more TV than most people have or can even fit in their homes. Man caves, She Sheds, and dedicated home theater rooms that have The Theater Experience will use these. Even as a self admitted audio and videophile and someone who is almost always an early adopter, I am going to pass on this.
The only way I see myself getting one is if I hit the lottery for several hundred million and I build a house with a huge home theater, or if in 5-10 years, I replace my multiple screens with one huge one and I just put a 40-50 inch on the wall behind my desk. Any sooner and I suspect the video card tech won’t be there.
Now, 8k will shine in the projection screen market and the very large TV market. Note that the screen in the article is 88 inches. That is way more TV than most people have or can even fit in their homes. Man caves, She Sheds, and dedicated home theater rooms that have The Theater Experience will use these. Even as a self admitted audio and videophile and someone who is almost always an early adopter, I am going to pass on this.
The only way I see myself getting one is if I hit the lottery for several hundred million and I build a house with a huge home theater, or if in 5-10 years, I replace my multiple screens with one huge one and I just put a 40-50 inch on the wall behind my desk. Any sooner and I suspect the video card tech won’t be there.
Radegast74
Space Marshal
Excellent point--> I think that 120-144hz speed monitors will be a big deal, for gamers at least. For some reason, they keep trying to sell us on higher and higher rez, when refresh rate is more important to us. I guess the marketing people just think that it is an easier sell to say "more pixels is better." I guess people don't think about the speed of the refresh rate as being a thing.
Radegast74
Space Marshal
lol, this was just on reddit:
https://i.imgur.com/DagxkIH.gifv
https://i.imgur.com/DagxkIH.gifv
the difference is apparent when viewing still images
introduce motion, and you don't notice nearly as much
are you a Space Tourist, gazing at the lovely scenery?
or an action-oriented type?
spend or save your money accordingly
introduce motion, and you don't notice nearly as much
are you a Space Tourist, gazing at the lovely scenery?
or an action-oriented type?
spend or save your money accordingly
There is definitly a difference between 4k and 1080p on a normal 30" Monitor noticable (i can compare 1080p 27" and a 30" 4k). Especially when looking at very far small Details you will notice an increased visibility of objects.
In Arma 3 i could spot enemys at 4k who where not spotable at 1080p. Also i didn't notice a big difference with diffferent AA settings.
But the noticable difference for 90%-95% of the situations is very small. Also most textures are still made for 1080p so you won't notice a big difference for objects very close. (but objects very far away look much nicer)
8k: Imho without curved design 8k as a gaming display won't make any sense anymore where you're sitting 60 cm in front of the display.
The newest high end gpu will start to run 4k at 60fps or above (and max Details) well i don't think we will have the processing power for the next couple of years. So i think 4k 144hz will become the new high end gaming standard in the near future. But 8k is probably very far away from that (at least 5-10 years).
My suggestion is:
4k: if you plan on upgrading to the newest gpu probably yes. Also notice that most cheaper 4k displays are only running at 60Hz. (Not a big deal for me but for competitive gamers it still might be an issue)
8k: Probably not worth buying in the next 10 years (for gaming)
In Arma 3 i could spot enemys at 4k who where not spotable at 1080p. Also i didn't notice a big difference with diffferent AA settings.
But the noticable difference for 90%-95% of the situations is very small. Also most textures are still made for 1080p so you won't notice a big difference for objects very close. (but objects very far away look much nicer)
8k: Imho without curved design 8k as a gaming display won't make any sense anymore where you're sitting 60 cm in front of the display.
The newest high end gpu will start to run 4k at 60fps or above (and max Details) well i don't think we will have the processing power for the next couple of years. So i think 4k 144hz will become the new high end gaming standard in the near future. But 8k is probably very far away from that (at least 5-10 years).
My suggestion is:
4k: if you plan on upgrading to the newest gpu probably yes. Also notice that most cheaper 4k displays are only running at 60Hz. (Not a big deal for me but for competitive gamers it still might be an issue)
8k: Probably not worth buying in the next 10 years (for gaming)
I don't think we will be moving past 4k for quite a while. Streaming proper 4k content takes up 60 mbps, an internet connection not many people have. Something like 8k will be insane both on bandwidth and decoder.
Takeiteasy
Space Marshal
I got a 4k HDR TV and I bought a copy of I don't know some 4k nature thing and the colours impressed me more than the definition, the HDR component is just amazing.
I will get a 4k monitor next but waiting for prices to come down. I ain't getting 8k it just seems ... unneccessary(?).
I'll pass on this unless it's like £300 a few years from now.
I will get a 4k monitor next but waiting for prices to come down. I ain't getting 8k it just seems ... unneccessary(?).
I'll pass on this unless it's like £300 a few years from now.
I think you misunderstand. With such a large screen at close distance, the difference in distance between your eye and the screen, at center and at the sides is so large, that your eye needs to refocus when you move your eyes about. For an instant, you can't see, and that instant is much longer than the refresh rate of the screen so it becomes the limiting factor. Curving the screen does actually make a difference. It's why the original iMAX screen developed the curve--same issue.
wonder what bandwidth we will need to watch netflicks at 8k.... I can't even watch it at 4k...
https://www.engadget.com/2018/08/15/nvidia-turing-quadro-8k-video-playback/
See also the other thread on the new 2080i
I have to revise my statement
I was curious what the maximum viewable ppi for a gaming display is and came up with ~300ppi at 0.6m / 2ft:
http://resources.printhandbook.com/pages/viewing-distance-dpi.php
A current 30inch 4k display has around 128 ppi so there is definitly place for 8k wich would have around 256 ppi. (And should be close to the maxiumum percepitble resolution.
https://www.sven.de/dpi/
a curved 10k display with an estimated size of 34 inch (4320x10240) will have around 326 ppi and should achieve the maxiumum perceptible resolution (at 60cm/2 ft).
I don't think sitting much closer is making any sense. Also on your smartphone you might notice up to 720 ppi (at much closer distance)
I was curious what the maximum viewable ppi for a gaming display is and came up with ~300ppi at 0.6m / 2ft:
http://resources.printhandbook.com/pages/viewing-distance-dpi.php
A current 30inch 4k display has around 128 ppi so there is definitly place for 8k wich would have around 256 ppi. (And should be close to the maxiumum percepitble resolution.
https://www.sven.de/dpi/
a curved 10k display with an estimated size of 34 inch (4320x10240) will have around 326 ppi and should achieve the maxiumum perceptible resolution (at 60cm/2 ft).
I don't think sitting much closer is making any sense. Also on your smartphone you might notice up to 720 ppi (at much closer distance)