New HDMI 2.1 specification brings support for 4K at 120Hz, 8K, 10K resolutions

Comments

• Reply 1 of 19

  noicc1138 Posts: 55member

  January 4, 2017 10:12PM

  8k at 60hz isn't good enough for me. I'm looking for 10k at 240hz.

  
• Reply 2 of 19

  rob53 Posts: 3,281member

  January 4, 2017 10:40PM

  For all those who are ready to blame Apple for needing another new cable and/or adapter, this spec means new cables and I can bet they won't be inexpensive (although plenty of the cheap kind will be made and will fail and it will always be Apple's fault).

  
• Reply 3 of 19

  r00fus1 Posts: 65member

  January 4, 2017 10:41PM

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?
• Reply 4 of 19

  dysamoria Posts: 3,430member

  January 4, 2017 11:05PM

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  Probably me. Sadly I have none of these because I'm poor.

  
• Reply 5 of 19

  Soli Posts: 10,038member

  January 4, 2017 11:25PM

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  If you have anything close to normal or better than normal vision, it's very easy to tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p "at standard TV viewing distances." Could you tell the difference between 720p and 1080p or pre-Retina and Retina displays from Apple "at standard […] viewing distances"? Most people can.
  
  TVs are getting larger and living rooms aren't being elongated to force you sit further away so the pixels would just continue to get larger and more noticeable if you kept them at the same resolution, hence the benefit of doubling the resolution/quadrupling the number of pixels to be displayed.
  
  Case in point, running Netflx on a 4th gen Apple TV which only outputs 1080p doesn't look as good as Netflix via an 75" 2160p TV with HDR10 when the content is available in UHD+HDR. Even unconverted 1080p looks better. While UHD is still limited, it's offered on pretty much every new series from both Netflix and Amazon. Super cars on Grand Tour via Prime Video looks amazing.

  edited January 2017
• Reply 6 of 19

  boltsfan17 Posts: 2,294member

  January 4, 2017 11:25PM

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  There is a huge difference, especially if you are watching something in native 4K. On DirecTV, they have been broadcasting some NBA games in 4K as well as all the home Notre Dame football games. The difference is huge. 

  
• Reply 7 of 19

  rezwits Posts: 895member

  January 5, 2017 1:26AM

  About time! Gees...after tons of 4K Displays have been out already for over 3 years!
• Reply 8 of 19

  ireland Posts: 17,799member

  January 5, 2017 1:27AM

  I remember when I bought my used 9th generation Kuro three years ago and figured it was sensible to invest in the latest hdmi cables with a host of features and "gold plating" only to find out no picture would show on my new TV with them. I sent them back and bought two bottom of the barrel hdmi cables for €5 each and my blu-rays popped off the display. Learned a valuable lesson that day.

  edited January 2017
• Reply 9 of 19

  netrox Posts: 1,472member

  January 5, 2017 2:57AM

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  It also depends on the size of a TV. The bigger the TV, the more difference it becomes as pixels also get bigger. 
  
  If you are watching a 23" TV with a normal viewing distance, then you wouldn't see much difference between those resolutions.
  
   
  
  
  

  
• Reply 10 of 19

  Soli Posts: 10,038member

  January 5, 2017 3:10AM

  netrox said:

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  It also depends on the size of a TV. The bigger the TV, the more difference it becomes as pixels also get bigger. 
  
  If you are watching a 23" TV with a normal viewing distance, then you wouldn't see much difference between those resolutions.
  

  At 23" would 720p and 1080p look any difference from a typical distance in a living room.
• Reply 11 of 19

  mike1 Posts: 3,374member

  January 5, 2017 3:40AM

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  Umm, anybody with a 4K source, a good TV/display and two working eyes. 

  
• Reply 12 of 19

  1983 Posts: 1,225member

  January 5, 2017 8:04AM

  10K! Why? Still nice to have I suppose...
• Reply 13 of 19

  foggyhill Posts: 4,767member

  January 5, 2017 8:31AM

  Soli said:

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  If you have anything close to normal or better than normal vision, it's very easy to tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p "at standard TV viewing distances." Could you tell the difference between 720p and 1080p or pre-Retina and Retina displays from Apple "at standard […] viewing distances"? Most people can.
  
  TVs are getting larger and living rooms aren't being elongated to force you sit further away so the pixels would just continue to get larger and more noticeable if you kept them at the same resolution, hence the benefit of doubling the resolution/quadrupling the number of pixels to be displayed.
  
  Case in point, running Netflx on a 4th gen Apple TV which only outputs 1080p doesn't look as good as Netflix via an 75" 2160p TV with HDR10 when the content is available in UHD+HDR. Even unconverted 1080p looks better. While UHD is still limited, it's offered on pretty much every new series from both Netflix and Amazon. Super cars on Grand Tour via Prime Video looks amazing.

  You're conflating content/delivery mechanism and projection mechanism; OTA 1080P or Blue Ray 1080P creams 4K netflix.
   
  As for upconverted 1080P looks better, which upconverted content? Streamed one. Are you inventing information that's not there to get to this!
  
  1080P streams are crappier than 4K streams but that's because bitrates for them are generally much lower.
  Can blame the very low standards of the population for that, same thing with 4K native vs 4K streams.
  
  4K HDR native OLED can be extraordinary on a 70 inch+ TV if you're sitting 10 feet from of it, but that's not what your talking about and most
  people won't get this kind of experience anytime soon. And people have the crazy happy of sitting real far from their TV, so far they'd need a 70 inch minimum
  to see any difference unless the 4K TV is HDR too.
  
  4K tvs are pretty much all crappy, much crappier than a top end plasma of 5 years back, except at the top end.
  
  And yes, I've seen just about every variant of TV tech out there.
  
  
  
  
  
• Reply 14 of 19

  foggyhill Posts: 4,767member

  January 5, 2017 8:33AM

  ireland said:

  I remember when I bought my used 9th generation Kuro three years ago and figured it was sensible to invest in the latest hdmi cables with a host of features and "gold plating" only to find out no picture would show on my new TV with them. I sent them back and bought two bottom of the barrel hdmi cables for €5 each and my blu-rays popped off the display. Learned a valuable lesson that day.

  Kuro's are plasma I think.... affordable 4K still looks like shit compared to plasma, even those that were cheap.
  Waiting for OLED 4K HDR (or maybe even one day microled) to become affordable before moving away from my top end 2012 Samsung Plasma.
  
• Reply 15 of 19

  misa Posts: 827member

  January 5, 2017 1:11PM

  noicc1138 said:

  8k at 60hz isn't good enough for me. I'm looking for 10k at 240hz.

  It's not likely there will be a 10K. The viewing distance for 720p is already sufficient for living rooms, and 1080p for computer screens. 4K monitors are overkill at the same physical sizes (I have a 4K 23.8" monitor) and I will readily admit that I like SOME of the 4K improvements like seeing the full resolution of photos, but video games don't look any better, and will not, at least not without an increase to the color gamut.
  
  The top-out will be 8K at 60hz for film/TV, and 120fps for "3D" (that after all is the point) stereographic films and video games, and 240fps for "VR" (120fps per eye at 8K per eye.) Eyes definitely perceive 75hz+ refresh rates on CRT's, LCD's not so much. It's mostly a matter of screen tearing that requires variable frame rate control.
  
  
• Reply 16 of 19

  Eric_in_CT Posts: 105member

  January 5, 2017 5:17PM

  I still laugh at myself at my own foolishness when DVD came out.
  
  I "authoritatively" told my friends that DVD couldn't be better than VHS since the (tube) TV was "the same".
  
  Then I saw a DVD played on my own TV.
  
  It was a Warner Bros. DVD.  The splash-screen with the gold WB floating in over the clouds was enough for me to instantaneously say:
  
  "Wow that's way better".
  
  Wasn't feeling smart that day.
  

  
• Reply 17 of 19

  StrangeDays Posts: 13,005member

  January 5, 2017 7:16PM

  foggyhill said:

  ireland said:

  I remember when I bought my used 9th generation Kuro three years ago and figured it was sensible to invest in the latest hdmi cables with a host of features and "gold plating" only to find out no picture would show on my new TV with them. I sent them back and bought two bottom of the barrel hdmi cables for €5 each and my blu-rays popped off the display. Learned a valuable lesson that day.

  Kuro's are plasma I think.... affordable 4K still looks like shit compared to plasma, even those that were cheap.
  Waiting for OLED 4K HDR (or maybe even one day microled) to become affordable before moving away from my top end 2012 Samsung Plasma.
  

  Likewise, I'm hanging onto my Pansonic 1080p plasma for the near future.
• Reply 18 of 19

  thedba Posts: 774member

  January 5, 2017 8:58PM

  foggyhill said:

  Soli said:

  r00fus1 said:

  Jeebus, I'm happy to get 1080p at over 30hz framerates. Who can actually tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p (4K) at standard TV viewing distances?

  If you have anything close to normal or better than normal vision, it's very easy to tell the difference between 1080p and 2160p "at standard TV viewing distances." Could you tell the difference between 720p and 1080p or pre-Retina and Retina displays from Apple "at standard […] viewing distances"? Most people can.
  
  TVs are getting larger and living rooms aren't being elongated to force you sit further away so the pixels would just continue to get larger and more noticeable if you kept them at the same resolution, hence the benefit of doubling the resolution/quadrupling the number of pixels to be displayed.
  
  Case in point, running Netflx on a 4th gen Apple TV which only outputs 1080p doesn't look as good as Netflix via an 75" 2160p TV with HDR10 when the content is available in UHD+HDR. Even unconverted 1080p looks better. While UHD is still limited, it's offered on pretty much every new series from both Netflix and Amazon. Super cars on Grand Tour via Prime Video looks amazing.

  You're conflating content/delivery mechanism and projection mechanism; OTA 1080P or Blue Ray 1080P creams 4K netflix.
   
  As for upconverted 1080P looks better, which upconverted content? Streamed one. Are you inventing information that's not there to get to this!
  
  1080P streams are crappier than 4K streams but that's because bitrates for them are generally much lower.
  Can blame the very low standards of the population for that, same thing with 4K native vs 4K streams.
  
  4K HDR native OLED can be extraordinary on a 70 inch+ TV if you're sitting 10 feet from of it, but that's not what your talking about and most
  people won't get this kind of experience anytime soon. And people have the crazy happy of sitting real far from their TV, so far they'd need a 70 inch minimum
  to see any difference unless the 4K TV is HDR too.
  
  4K tvs are pretty much all crappy, much crappier than a top end plasma of 5 years back, except at the top end.
  
  And yes, I've seen just about every variant of TV tech out there.
  
  
  
  
  

  My Pioneer Elite 50" Plasma is older than 5 years and it's not even 1080p (It's 1365x768 so technically it's 768p). 
  The beauty of those TV's was their contrast ratio. 
  Number of pixels is the easiest spec to sell to the mostly ignorant public. Contrast ratio, color saturation, color accuracy are much more difficult.  

  
• Reply 19 of 19

  tallest skil Posts: 43,388member

  January 5, 2017 9:07PM

  thedba said:
  Number of pixels is the easiest spec to sell to the mostly ignorant public. Contrast ratio, color saturation, color accuracy are much more difficult.  

  Exactly. It’s hard to show the difference in quality of your product vs. existing ones when people are viewing said comparison on an existing one. Numbers, however, are universal.