Did NVIDIA play off TV companies to make all TVs only support HDMI 2.0 so that AMD users couldn't buy large UHD TVs to use as monitors?
>>51967930
Why don't you get a proper PC MONITOR then and not a TV?
TVs are made with inferior technology and have horrible ppi also so i don't know why you would want that.
>>51968089
Hello friend 4k is here now. And 40" 4k has the same pixel density as a standard 20 inch 1080p displays and usually has better colour accuracy. So what is your point again?
>>51968089
>PPI
Just sit further away.
>>51968736
That's a great argument for actual TV users, not when you're trying to use it for actual PC work unless you scale it up 200% which at that point defeats the entire purpose
>>51968702
Are you trying to claim a 20 inch 1080p was a good choice either?
>>51968702
>40" 4k has the same pixel density as a standard 20 inch 1080p
>4k TV only as good as 1080p monitor
Sees no problem with this.
I guess for a living room set up this slightly makes sense, but outside of that I can't imagine why you'd shell out the money for an inferior product.
>>51968702
>40" display
>better color accuracy than 20" display
u wot m8
>>51968788
>That's a great argument for actual TV users, not when you're trying to use it for actual PC work unless you scale it up 200% which at that point defeats the entire purpose
Eh? You dont need to scale up anything, your monitor is bigger.
>>51968791
I've just set up a 1080p projector that spreads over 82" area. It looks fucking incredible. Sitting on a sofa around 12' away and it's sharper than I both expected and really required. Films and games look brilliant. Anyone looking at tiny tiny 4K screens and sitting a long distance away are getting ripped off unless they have fucking 40/20 vision
>>51968702
So If I have a 20 inch 1080p monitor right now and I buy a 40" 4k monitor the 40k monitor will essentially look like 4 1080p monitors put together without the bezel?
Wouldn't it just be cheaper to buy 4 1080p monitors at that point?
>>51968874
>26 ppi
that can't look good at all m8
>>51968935
Depends how far away you sit.
>>51968873
Windows doesn't do DPI scaling very well.
>>51968892
>Wouldn't it just be cheaper to buy 4 1080p monitors at that point?
I dont think so. And wont get rid of the bezels.
>>51968961
I can live with bezels if it'll be cheaper.
So far the only 40" 4k tvs i've found with display port input are like $700-800 at the cheapest range.
>>51968961
>>51968874
What model do you have?
>$33 65" curved 4k TV
Why haven't you bought one yet?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Samsung-UN65JU6700-Curved-65-Inch-4K-Ultra-HD-Smart-LED-TV-2015-Model-/221973907226
>>51968791
Unless you are inches away from your TV you're never going to realize the difference between 4k and 1080p.
And a 40" 4k is better than a 40" 1080p which is the entire point of 4k+.
>>51968702
TV's are still terrible for closeup viewing.
Way too bright.
That said, I've hooked my TV up to my PC as a 2nd screen, to watch movies.
I would be very mad if that were no longer possible.
>>51969090
Because it's a scam
>Positive Feedback (last 12 months): 0%
>>51969101
>a 40" 4k is better than a 40" 1080p which is the entire point of 4k+.
Not if the 1080p has more contrast and better color accuracy.
4K is just a sales gimmick.
It's the same as selling cameras by emphasizing megapixels and zoom range, instead of things that matter.
>>51969090
>curved.
nope.jpg
>>51969174
Sorry to break it to you bud but almost every 4k 40" beats 1080p 40" in color accuracy and contrast.
No, Nvidia has nothing to do with it. It's the HDMI group that lobbies for manufactures to use it. They also have support for thing like bitstreaming Dolby audio and HDMI-CEC which Displayport doesn't have.
>>51967930
Why not just use a DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0?
>>51969347
Needs an active adapter which is a little more costly
>AMD refuses to jump to todays standards
NVIDIA MUST BE PAYING SOMEBODY OFF
you know there is a reason why AMD is going out of business right?
>>51968089
because i sure like to shove my face into my 60 inch tv.
it looks just as good as my pc monitor because i sit 6 feet away from it.
>also implying im going to watch movies on a fucking 23 inch monitor
>>51969380
>>51969380
>AMD is going out of business
Still shilling this horrible idea that can't actually happen?
>>51969375
Active adapters are like $25 at worst. If you're spending the kind of money you are for a decent monitor/TV $25 is a drop in the bucket.
>>51969399
>sitting 6 feet away for PC work
What's it like having to look through magnifying glasses just to do things?
outside of movies you just wasted your money.
>>51969405
yeah no AMD is doing totally fine, didnt you hear, they just had a (marginally) successful quarter!
>>51969425
hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
when you do pc work you sit at a fucking monitor you pleb.
hell my tv is even good for gaming since its only 30ms of input lag.
which i mostly use it for movies and shows that i pirate
>>51969443
Are you 12? Or is this your first year actually following tech companies?
Idiots like you have been shilling the idea of AMD dying for years now and it never will happen for a whole slew of reasons, some of which are legal reasons.
>>51969420
Hmm, I guess the 3D Club one is actually pretty cheap.
Wasn't always that way for active adapters though. Even the DP to DVI I bought that only supports 2560x1600 costs like $80, so no at it's worst it can be a bit pricy.
>>51969485
>Even the DP to DVI I bought that only supports 2560x1600 costs like $80
Why would you pay that much? Was this years ago or is it some "gaming" active adapter? I suppose yeah, there's always an extremely overpriced version of something cheap, but no real reason to pay more for it.
>>51969477
theres a reason why their stock is 2.44 right now dude, i know you're clutching your 290x right now and telling it that its mother company is totally ok right now but its not.
>Idiots like you have been shilling the idea of AMD dying for years now
(you actually know what shilling is right?)
*looks at amd vs nvidia quarterly earnings over the past 7 years*
yeah those people were totally wrong AMD is doing a great job keeping up with nvidia and intel!
I know you like them because they're the underdog, but you're an idiot if you cant see that they're fucking hemorrhaging money and doing all they can to stay relevant
OLED > IPS shit
>>51968892
Yes, you don't need any scaling either.
Scaling is only needed when you try to do 4k on screens that are tiny as fuck.
Everyone's talking about 4k and I'm just sitting here with my 720p plasma.
>>51969477
wait wait, let me guess the legal reasons are because you believe that if radeon goes out of business then nvidia will be holding a monopoly over the gpu industry, right?
>>51969514
No, look up what's available and that's what you'll find. I didn't pay that much though, I got lucky on a used on on eBay.
http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-DP2DVIS-DisplayPort-Active-Adapter/dp/B004SUO1GM
http://www.amazon.com/Accell-UltraAV-B087B-002B-DisplayPort-Dual-Link/dp/B002ISVI3U
>>51969601
>radeon
Is not a company and AMDs gpu division is doing perfectly fine.
If you actually think AMD is just going to magically disappear one day you are retarded.
>>51969553
enjoy your windows bar burn in
>>51969632
>On September 11, 2015, AMD's GPU business was split into a separate unit known as Radeon Technologies Group, with Raja Koduri as Senior Vice President and chief architect.
> AMDs gpu division is doing perfectly fine.
oh honey, http://www.anandtech.com/show/9722/amd-announces-fy-2015-q3-results-decreased-computing-and-graphics-sales-hurt-bottom-line
>If you actually think AMD is just going to magically disappear one day you are retarded
no one in this thread said they would die in a day, quit grasping for straws. Its very apparent in the data collected over that past years that AMD is dying, just accept it.
>>51969725
Enjoy living in your delusional world where you hype AMDs death for another decade.
>>51969632
Companies don't disappear because they go bankrupt, they disappear because they get bought out. I.e how Office Depot bought OfficeMax and tried to buy Staples. If AMD shares get low enough you can bet that another company, if not Nvidia, will try to buy them out.
Rarely do multimillion dollar companies simply disappear due to under-performance.
>>51969758
hahahah, yeah, I'm the delusional one.
if youre so confident, go buy some shares, I'm certain it will be a great investment with great returns!
>>51969761
Microsoft already owns 25% of AMD
>>51969787
Right now is the best time to invest in AMD. Thanks for showing your ignorance, kid.
Even if your dream comes true and they get bought it would be the best thing that could happen for investors.
>>51969761
If and gets bought they lose their amd 64 license, they aren't worth buying.
>>51969813
Why couldn't they keep it as a subsidiary of another company? We're not talking dissolution or a merger.
>>51969813
>lose their amd 64 license
what does this mean for intel?
>>51969812
then go do it:)
>even if youre dreams come true
this is the funny part, because I use amd gpus with no interest in nvidia gpus, Im just not blind to the fact that this company is dying
shit maybe your right, maybe I do want them to get bought out because its clear ass day that the people running AMD are far too incompetent to be running a business on this scale
>>51969915
>Implying I didn't already invest when they were under $2 a share
It's good to know idiots like you try to make financial statements yet don't even track them clearly.
If you think $2.44 a share is bad now then you clearly we're around before.
Nvidia shipped HDMI 2.0 support back in Sept 2014
AMD can't even ship HDMI 2.0 until 2016, AMD only has themselves to blame for incompetence
>>51970036
so have you made money off it yet?
>>51970036
>he bought AMD shares under $2 expecting a good return
>calls other people idiots
wew
>>51970069
Yes, when I needed money irl for financial reasons I have sold off some of my shares, and in every case it's been for profit compared to when i got them.
The vast majority of my shares are still there and I don't plan to sell unless i really need to.
>>51970096
I bet you think buying high is a smart idea.
>>51970121
I bet you think buying low from a company that has no place to go but down is a good idea
>durr buy low and sell high
yeah that only applies to when a company is projected to do well in the future
>>51970155
> that has no place to go but down
You clearly don't follow AMD stocks, as I already stated.
It's okay if you're going to be ignorant, but atleast do your research if you're going to try and act smart about it.
>>51970177
you clearly dont follow amd stocks otherwise you wouldnt have bought them in the first place, this isnt 2004 anymore man
>>51970301
kek
>thinking 2004 was a good year to buy or sell
Are you just trying to prove you don't even know AMDs history?
>>51968954
Which you don't need to do because your monitor Is bigger?
>>51970316
>1080 lines
>1080 lines be it 22", be it 42"
Can't you see the difference? Pixels will basically be bigger.
>>51970155
Zen is going to prop the stock right back up into $5+. everytime AMD launches a new series its stock has risen.
Only recently when they've done nothing by stretch out the lifetime of shitdozer has it stagnated. It also doesn't help that most AMD GPUs are just rebranded older series.
Zen is basically the first actual "innovation" from AMD since bulldozer, which I might add was when the company had way better stocks than now. Even if you buy now at $2.5 and you buy enough of them if that price goes up to $5 with Zen which is almost likely will you're going to make good profit unless you're through a broker that has huge fees.
>>51970348
Which is why your 42" is 4k which has the same size pixels as your 22" 1080p
So that settles that, 4k 40" TVs are not a meme?
>>51969226
>implying screen size is the only directly related factor affecting contrast/color quality
>>51970425
Go ahead and find me a better quality 1080p anywhere from 40-55" that has better contrast and color quality than LG's 55 4k OLED.
>>51969300
>seriously lobbying by a connector/protocol standard
Cuck techy companies. What's the deal anyway? Ethernet through a video cable? Seriously? Who's gonna buy an adapter to add internet through HDMI? Who's gonna care if the Smart TV internet connection is shared with the fucking Bluray player?
Most end-users don't even know how to silence smartphone notifications and most end-users don't even care about the standard, as far as it just werks.
>>51970488
Literally who cares, unless you are right in front of your screen you won't see the difference.
The only good argument for 4k is if you want more screen space for productivity, but that can be done cheaper with multiple 1080p displays.
>>51970488
LCD backlight is just horrible compared to LED technology. It's just a whole other level.
And the screen size is again not related.
>>51970533
Movie theaters also.
>>51970533
b-b-but muh no bezel
>>51970617
Fun fact, most movie theaters are 2k. You sit far enough away there too unless you're in the front seat which is uncomfortable
>>51970599
Aren't all TVs LED by now? Everytime I look for one I see "LED" in every title. Also what contrast ratio should I be looking for? What elsE?
>>51970656
I'm not saying they actually use it, just stating they might be benefited. 4k @ home is mostly useless unless you stand too close to the TV.
>>51970404
Depends on what you want to use them for. If you want a "monitor" and you're going to be sitting <1m away, it would have appropriate pixel density. If you want it as an actual TV and are sitting 3m away, 4K is probably overkill and you won't see any difference.
>>51970686
What if you use it as a monitor? Surely you're close enough then.
>>51970668
they are LCD with LED backlight
look for OLED displays
>>51970668
It depends, LCD LED is basically LCD technology using LED backlight. I suppose the LED backlight stays on all the time, although I might be wrong. OLED TVs have singular points that emit light, which means if your screen is black you'll have no sign of the TV being ON. In LCD LED TVs you can generally see light on the borders.
>>51970686
Everyone's home is different but most of the time you're sitting in the same standards as the THX or SMPTE guidelines.
Also it isn't mostly useless, unless you don't care about picture quality, it just has greater diminishing returns the higher in resolution you go.
>>51970705
I don't have that kind of money
I guess i'll wait till after CES to see if prices come down.
>>51970699
Only if the monitor is big as fuck, and you would need a giant FOV adjustment in fps games for example. I would personally not use 4k on PC gaming. Multimedia-like shit could benefit also, cause you would have a bigger working area.
>>51970777
Well I figured I'd use the 4k for doing work/viewing videos and then my smaller 1080p monitor for gaming
>>51970795
Just buy a VA Panel.
>>51970777
>I would personally not use 4k on PC gaming
You'd be missing out, you have no idea how beautifully sharp games look on a 4K high DPI screen.
>>51971093
I can't wait for my 20fps 4k gaming!
>>51971110
>20fps
Maybe you should upgrade from your 650Ti.
>>51971143
I'll pass on spending $1000 just to get acceptable fps for 4k
AMD = Modern Cyrix
>>51971152
That's fine, it's your choice anon, you don't have to if you don't want to.
>>51969592
>tfw they dont produce plasma screens anymore
