Corsair H170i Elite Capellix XT review
Forspoken: PC performance graphics benchmarks
ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
F1 2022: PC graphics performance benchmark review
LG Gets Ready for 8K Quad UHD
And we say, not even in ten years it will reach the consumer market. LG is carefully pushing 8K Quad Ultra HD display technology, or is warming us up for it. 8K Quad Ultra HD will get a 7680 x 4320 pixels native resolution which is sixteen times your Full HF telly.
Since Japanese engineers first demonstrated high-resolution at the International Television Engineers Conference in 1981, the demand for high-quality content has continued to grow. The high-resolution display trend has already begun with Full-HD TVs being commonplace in homes and QHD (Quad High Definition) quality panels being adopted in smartphones with screens that are the size of the palm a person’s hand. The high-resolution contents that provide realistic images and a true sense of immersion have now moved beyond 4K and the focus has now turned to super-high-resolution 8K.
The World is Turning to 8K
It is not difficult to hear the call for bigger and clearer images from everywhere around the world. When the BBC took on the broadcasting of the 2012 Olympics, they said, ‘Since 8K resolution is the highest resolution that the human eye is capable of seeing, it will put an end to the resolution discussion,’ predicting that ‘ultimately, 8K images will overtake the market.’
It has become clear that Japan is planning to launch an 8K SHV test broadcast and then promptly restructure the UHD service. Apple has also announced that they will release the ‘iMac 8K’ with a super-high resolution display later this year. Korea is also preparing to offer an 8K service demonstration at the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympics. LG Display displayed a new beacon of the 8K era by revealing their 98-inch 8K Color Prime Ultra HDTV at CES 2015.
The Resolution and Pixels of 8K
How will 8K improve image quality over what we are already experiencing? Let’s take a closer look through resolution which is used as the concept to explain image quality.
The screen depicted in the image above is a 7,680 x 4,320 resolution screen. It is 2 times the resolution of a 4K screen but in actuality, the number of pixels is 4 times that of 4K which is 16 times more than Full HD. But what is the correlation between resolution and pixels? In short, by increasing the number of pixels on a screen, the viewer can enjoy a clearer picture.
For example, a 5-inch HD resolution smartphone screen with 900,000 pixels boasts higher image quality than a 5-inch SD resolution smartphone screen with 340,000 pixels. Likewise, FHD (1,920×1,080) provides clearer image than HD, and resolution continues to increase with QHD (3,840×2,160) and UHD (4,096×2,160). PPI (Pixel per Inch) is a term used to describe how many pixels are in an inch of screen and also represents the density of pixels. In order to increase the size of a display while maintaining the same resolution, the PPI must also be increased.
LG Display, Preparing for the 8K Era
LG Display has already succeeded in making super-high resolution a reality with the revealing of their 98-inch 8K UHD display at CES 2015. LG Display managed to improve the brightness of its 55-inch 8K UHD panel with 7,680×4320 resolution and 500nit by implementing M+ panel technology, which adds a white pixel to the existing RGB sub-pixel structure. IPS technology was also applied to make an impressive panel that has the advantage of high resolution and a wide viewing angle even on large scale screens.
With these developments, LG Display has expanded the Ultra-HD (UHD) lineup and is showing off diverse range of screen sizes with super-high resolution displays such as 8K. There are also high expectations in the commercial signage market as there is a need for clear large-scale high resolution screens. Look for great strides to be made by LG Display in the super-high resolution display era.
Extraordinary
Senior Member
Posts: 19558
Joined: 2010-04-21
Senior Member
Posts: 19558
Joined: 2010-04-21
#5042647 Posted on: 04/02/2015 10:58 AM
Isn't it that the human eye stops being able to see individual frames above 30-40fps?
We all know we can see the difference between 40 and 60fps gaming, so that's not the issue, but once you pass 30-40fps, you can't see flickering so to speak, but the frame rate difference is still easily noticable
Hard to explain what I mean, below 30fps = slideshow individual frames, above 30fps = motion
For example some people think the human eye can't see above 40FPS. I just feel the urge to beat those said people to death with a chair.
Isn't it that the human eye stops being able to see individual frames above 30-40fps?
We all know we can see the difference between 40 and 60fps gaming, so that's not the issue, but once you pass 30-40fps, you can't see flickering so to speak, but the frame rate difference is still easily noticable
Hard to explain what I mean, below 30fps = slideshow individual frames, above 30fps = motion
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 14157
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 14157
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5042648 Posted on: 04/02/2015 10:58 AM
Tech needs to evolve and sitting still waiting for everybody else to catch-up won't exactly do them any good.
However as long as they use correct sizes (4k,8k,16k) for scaler mappings then playing upscaled native 1080p material should not be a problem. The prices need to be in check also otherwise they are beating a dead horse with all these extra pixels.
Of course you're right from a technical point of view, but it's just annoying that the marketing clerks try to sell us every small improvement as the best thing ever created, although there is barely any use for it. It's like their patting their shoulders for working on 8K TVs like they just won a marathon run, and trying to sell it to us as we are handicapped sitting in wheelchairs, and we're already 'top notch' with our 1440p and 4K games.
Tech needs to evolve and sitting still waiting for everybody else to catch-up won't exactly do them any good.
However as long as they use correct sizes (4k,8k,16k) for scaler mappings then playing upscaled native 1080p material should not be a problem. The prices need to be in check also otherwise they are beating a dead horse with all these extra pixels.
Of course you're right from a technical point of view, but it's just annoying that the marketing clerks try to sell us every small improvement as the best thing ever created, although there is barely any use for it. It's like their patting their shoulders for working on 8K TVs like they just won a marathon run, and trying to sell it to us as we are handicapped sitting in wheelchairs, and we're already 'top notch' with our 1440p and 4K games.
Mannerheim
Senior Member
Posts: 4902
Joined: 2004-01-24
Senior Member
Posts: 4902
Joined: 2004-01-24
#5042651 Posted on: 04/02/2015 11:06 AM
we dont even have real 1080p yet in Finland....
4K might come in 2030 and 3D, maybe 2025 =( ???
internet TV and torrents are life savier =)
we dont even have real 1080p yet in Finland....
4K might come in 2030 and 3D, maybe 2025 =( ???
internet TV and torrents are life savier =)
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5042653 Posted on: 04/02/2015 11:06 AM
Anyone who have seen 4k TV with proper content knows that 4k is stunningly more detail rich than 1080p.
8k will give same jump in available detail, but what kind of performance will be needed to feed it even with video content?
We do not even have proper encoders for such resolution to keep file sizes reasonable (data storage price correlation).
4k passive 3D TVs will have its place as it is 3840x1080 per eye. And single GPUs will soon be able to render that at good enough frame rate.
But I think 2560x1440 passive 3D (2560x720 per eye) is more reasonable and cost effective for this year purchases.
Anyone who have seen 4k TV with proper content knows that 4k is stunningly more detail rich than 1080p.
8k will give same jump in available detail, but what kind of performance will be needed to feed it even with video content?
We do not even have proper encoders for such resolution to keep file sizes reasonable (data storage price correlation).
4k passive 3D TVs will have its place as it is 3840x1080 per eye. And single GPUs will soon be able to render that at good enough frame rate.
But I think 2560x1440 passive 3D (2560x720 per eye) is more reasonable and cost effective for this year purchases.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 989
Joined: 2010-08-24
PPI is vastly overrated on TVs imo. What are you viewing mostly on your TV? Games and movies and things in motion? These things don't even need 8k resolution. Film itself doesn't even have close to that resolution inherent to its source much less with all the digital tampering and motion resolution going on with fast action films. I am not even sure I WANT to see all the imperfections and such in 4K with film unless they treat the elements with great care. It is nice we are seeing 4K restorations because they are NEEDED but in reality I don't even actually need the 4K source material for a 42 inch. It would be nice but yet again the differences from DVD to Bluray were much much much greater.
380PPI is insane for a TV you sit 5 or more feet away from. Great to have it and I will eventually get one, but it isn't something I really honestly care about and nor do many other people.
For TVs I agree but for monitors eeeh not so sure. I sit quite close to my 24" monitor.
It's a generalization, like how the human ear could perceive only between 20 Hz and 20 kHz.
I'm afraid that it might be a false generalization. For example some people think the human eye can't see above 40FPS. I just feel the urge to beat those said people to death with a chair.