Do you think they'll keep increasing resolution on phones or give up? 8K phones and such?
I think after 4K they'll give up on resolution and focus more on the technical specs of the display.
4K on a ~5 inches is plain retarded
>>51952823
This. I wanted to buy a 4K phone until I realised you actually don't see any difference.
Search it on youtube. there are some videos who prove you can't actually tell if a video on a smartphone is 4K or 1080p. It's just a selling bullet point for phone makers.
>>51952823
I just want the res bumping to end, 1080p is the sweet spot honestly.
>>51952823
I feel like a kek buying a 4k 48inch TV.
Shit is pointless
>>51952823
>what is VR
>>51953141
Depends what you use it for?
OTA TV? kek
Blu Ray? kek for now, until 4K BD hits harder
Consoles? kek
Use as a PC monitor/PC gaming? You good.
>>51953233
>using a TV as a PC monitor
>especially for gaming
Kek.
>>51952754
>>51952823
But that's what they originally said about 720p and 1080p.
>>51953327
Comfy couch gaming is nice.
>>51953354
No it's not.
No one said that.
Anything higher than 1080p is indistinguishable on a mobile phone to the human eye, we have literally reach the limits of our eyes when it comes to mobiles.
>>51952754
Until regular people stop throwing resolution around as a way to say their phone is better than yours then no. And once that does happen they'll just move onto some other number that means pretty much nothing.
I can see the pixels on my 1080p phone because im not a neet with crap eyesight from sitting on a computer in a dark room all day
>>51953406
>And once that does happen they'll just move onto some other number that means pretty much nothing.
I'd rather than go into a CPU/GPU war, the Snapdragon 820 is better than the Tegra X1 which can emulate Gamecube/Wii
We even have an alpha PS2 emulator now.
>>51953382
>Anything higher than 1080p is indistinguishable on a mobile phone to the human eye
There are some pretty big phones. Anyways, resolution is a terrible measure of this, DPI is what matters.
>>51953023
I think anything with a DPI between 500 and 600 is fine. On the OnePlus One I could clearly see pixels from a typical using distance (and as such diagonal lines and circles weren't smooth) but on my 6P everything is fine.
>>51953023
Went from 1080 to 1440 on my phone
imo 1440 is much better than 1080 for phones
4k sounds really stupid tho
>>51953599
I think everyone can agree with the 4K thing.
Should be fine for 10in tablets I guess though.
2k is ok for me, i see the difference between 2k and 1080p...but im very nitpicking
>>51953358
>20 ms is nice
>50hz is nice
>3% color gamut is nice
>>51953477
tfw using a nvidia shield tablet
>>51954382
Not all TVs are cheapo shit.
Also not everyone is a retarded Euro with a 50hz set.
>>51952823
Tell that to Sony.
>>51953382
If you have shit eyesight, yeah. There is clearly a small difference between 1080p and 1440p if you focus enough. 1440p also means anti-ailasing can be thrown in the trash which will help performance on mobile devices.
I'm not sure about 1440p vs 4K though.
We don't need 4k on any phone/tablet unless it is for VR.
>>51954946
No but most companies are assholes. When 1080p was the shit sometime ago, like 4k is now. My dad bought a so-called hd-ready 60hz tv. It was 1080i, and it was 50hz but it had a 60hz mode which was basically ghosting-mode. Since then I've never trusted tvs anymore, and only bought two, one with a 30% discount and the other for half the price because one of it's built-in speakers was dead (I had some fairly decent bookshelf speakers laying around so I just hooked them up to it, and they sounded a lot better than the tvs remaining speaker (and the tv only had one speaker so the sound only came from the right which was a weird experience))
>>51955282
>Since then I've never trusted tvs anymore,
You could try RESEARCHING sets before buying them?
There are even some true 120hz TVs, gotta be careful though are they're rare.
>>51955282
>want to buy tv
>don't want to get jewed
>read specs, aggressively price match, buy what I know I want
>still was a consumer so I got jewed regardless
Anyway I think I messed up I sit kind of close to it and 1080p looks fuzzy sometimes. Games work but it seems like Windows isn't good on a large display at that resolution.
>>51955321
Yeah I've seen a few true* 120hz** tvs. Turns out they just take two frames blend them and put the blended frame in between them or they use some other way of making up extra frames, which in some cases makes it look smoother but in others just messes everything up. And even though these aren't that important for most but let's not forget about backlight bleed/screen uniformity, tvs are mostly bigger than monitors (duh) and that makes them very susceptible to both of those.
>>51955570
>true* 120hz** tvs
I mean TRUE 120hs not the frame interpolation you're mentioning.
I mean TVs that can render 120fps in PC games.
They exist but are rare and not cheap.
You could stop trying to shit on TVs and realize high end sets exist.
>>51955641
Yes but that's a whole other thing. There are high end huge monitors too. Why not use a huge 4k monitor as a tv?
>>51955694
Because Monitors are small.
Give me a 55 inch 4K monitor please.
>>51955715
Well okay 55 inch monitors aren't common. I did find one but it's a commercial monitor (not made to be used at home, comes with android and other unusual stuff like only wall-mountable).
Resolution is the new MEGAPIXELS
