Quantcast
I am underwhelmed by my 4K TV and maybe X1X already has the GPU power for 9th gen.

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I am underwhelmed by my 4K TV and maybe X1X already has the GPU power for 9th gen.

Wait 'till you try VR. Maybe that'll get you to buy into next gen.



 
I WON A BET AGAINST AZUREN! WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:3

Around the Network
d21lewis said:

This is exactly why I haven't been over hyping the Xbox One X or even the PS4 Pro. I have several models of Xbox and both models of PS4 as we speak. I also have 4K and 1080p TVs and I consider myself a person who knows his tech and how to fine tune an image. While you can see the improvements, for me, it just isn't as "night and day" as some would lead you to believe.

Even watching and enjoying tons of Digital Foundry videos, I find myself just not seeing the differences that they highlight. There's a bit of "The Emperor is wearing new clothes" going on. I hop between my Xbox One X in 4K and standard Xbox on a 1080p set all the time. I never find myself saying "This one looks like crap" or 'This one looks incredible".

And yeah, I also google searched the ideal settings and then played with it to get the image that is best for my personal tastes.

Yea, personally I really like being able to spot details/enemies in the far distance, so I'm very much in favor of higher rendering resolutions, but even for me the difference between 1080p with super sampling and 4k is subtle (and between checkerboard 4k and native 4k it's even less obvious). I kinda get the impression that ppl feel they have to emphasize the differences soo much, because they are so minor.



DonFerrari said:
Sixteenvolt420 said:
I definitely notice a difference on my LG 4K OLED, curved screen. I don't have the required distance for a flat panel screen, so i got curved, as it requires less distance to be away from the tv to view.

Someone likely lied to you.

The "recommended distance" is a type of lie. It is actually reverse.

It is more like the closer you are to the TV the more resolution or smaller screen you need. The curved screen was a type of marketing stunt with the added down side of being less optimal for people outside of the center of projection of the TV.

I sit very close to my TV (5ft) and it is 65", so less than 4K I can even see "dots" on the image. It is flat and I have no issue, I still have corners on my view and could go for perhaps even 85-100" on same distance on 8k.

For some days when I bought a projector to my condominium I was testing it, and I had full wall (over 200") playing Shadow of Mordor, I was like 8ft away or less and it was just fantastic.

Similarly I use the PSVR to play some non VR game and depending on the game I use small or large screen (one I can see the corners as if watching a 120" screen other it seems like 300" and I lose corners - need small head turns to look there) and my only complain on playing like this is that the resolution is too small so I can see the pixels to clearly, VR will be just fantastic on 8K.

The tv that i'm talking about, is for me and only me, to use. The curve definitely helps me be centered better, to the screen, even more than when i had my previous flat tv, which was 10" smaller.



Lafiel said:
d21lewis said:

This is exactly why I haven't been over hyping the Xbox One X or even the PS4 Pro. I have several models of Xbox and both models of PS4 as we speak. I also have 4K and 1080p TVs and I consider myself a person who knows his tech and how to fine tune an image. While you can see the improvements, for me, it just isn't as "night and day" as some would lead you to believe.

Even watching and enjoying tons of Digital Foundry videos, I find myself just not seeing the differences that they highlight. There's a bit of "The Emperor is wearing new clothes" going on. I hop between my Xbox One X in 4K and standard Xbox on a 1080p set all the time. I never find myself saying "This one looks like crap" or 'This one looks incredible".

And yeah, I also google searched the ideal settings and then played with it to get the image that is best for my personal tastes.

Yea, personally I really like being able to spot details/enemies in the far distance, so I'm very much in favor of higher rendering resolutions, but even for me the difference between 1080p with super sampling and 4k is subtle (and between checkerboard 4k and native 4k it's even less obvious). I kinda get the impression that ppl feel they have to emphasize the differences soo much, because they are so minor.

Even Digital Foundry (or AnandTech) had said checkerboard got it very close to native.

Sixteenvolt420 said:
DonFerrari said:

Someone likely lied to you.

The "recommended distance" is a type of lie. It is actually reverse.

It is more like the closer you are to the TV the more resolution or smaller screen you need. The curved screen was a type of marketing stunt with the added down side of being less optimal for people outside of the center of projection of the TV.

I sit very close to my TV (5ft) and it is 65", so less than 4K I can even see "dots" on the image. It is flat and I have no issue, I still have corners on my view and could go for perhaps even 85-100" on same distance on 8k.

For some days when I bought a projector to my condominium I was testing it, and I had full wall (over 200") playing Shadow of Mordor, I was like 8ft away or less and it was just fantastic.

Similarly I use the PSVR to play some non VR game and depending on the game I use small or large screen (one I can see the corners as if watching a 120" screen other it seems like 300" and I lose corners - need small head turns to look there) and my only complain on playing like this is that the resolution is too small so I can see the pixels to clearly, VR will be just fantastic on 8K.

The tv that i'm talking about, is for me and only me, to use. The curve definitely helps me be centered better, to the screen, even more than when i had my previous flat tv, which was 10" smaller.

If you use it alone perhaps you see some additional benefits then =p



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Diminishing returns. 4 times the resources to split an already small pixel into 4 squares. It does look better. But I don't think it looks 4 times better.

I think we're at a tipping point here now, where the extra power required for these small incremental improvements will be deemed not worth it.



Around the Network

You need next level, 100000000000k then you will start to see a difference.



Pemalite said:
Need more information on panel sizes, panel type, distance from panel, connection method and so on to really make a proper assessment on whether 4k is going to be a decent jump for you.

Xbox One X likely does have the GPU power for a low-end next-gen console, it's the other aspects where it certainly falls short though.

Pretty much this.

 

I feel like next gen we will see a much smaller focus on better visuals than we have been seeing from gen to gen.  I mean people were ready disappointed with 7th gen into 8th gen, so the focus needs a shift to remain relevant.

 

I feel like games will focus more on special effects, AI,  physics , and world immersion.  This means a huge leap in CPU levels compared to the underpowered jumps we have recieved in the past, and the X1X is still lacking in this aspect serverly to be even a low end next gen console.  Like you said, while the GPU is able to get the job done, that is likely not what people are even concerned about.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

I meant to say this yesterday but I respect you, op. A lot of people buy new hardware and they feel they HAVE to justify their purchase by bragging about how much better their experience is. They have little concern that somebody may be reading their exaggerated experience and will spend hundreds on a disappointment.

Yeah, I love my PS4 Pro and my Xbox One X. I like the peace of mind that I'm having the best possible experience I can have (this side of the PC). I don't want others jumping in thinking it's going to be something it's not.
Anyway, again let me say, respect.



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

Xbox One X does indeed have the GPU power for an entry level next-gen console, it's only the ancient Jaguar CPU that is holding it back. In fact, rumor has it that MS will have 2 consoles on launch, codenamed Lockhart and Anaconda. Lockhart is said to be a successor to Xbox One S, and will release at a lower price point possibly $300-350), specs are rumored to be a small upgrade over Xbox One X (which probably means the same GPU with a small overclock, and the same high speed GDDR5 memory, but paired with a newer Ryzen CPU), while Anaconda is said to replace Xbox One X with a likely $500 price point and rumored specs on par with current mid-high end PC's. In theory, Lockhart should have the power to play next-gen games at 1080p, while Anaconda and PS5 aim for higher resolutions, either native 4K or checkerboard 4k.



The X One X might has the GPU power to render in native 4K, yet not to actually render 4K games. What you get now is games made for 1080p rendered at a higher resolution. It will look a bit better, just like rendering last gen 720p games on a 1080p screen. The assets, geometry, textures are still last gen. Same for games today rendered in 4K. There is no level of detail jump to go with the 1080p to 4K switch as there is between last gen and current gen games.

I have a 65" 4K HDR tv. HDR is what makes it worth it. 4K, I can see the difference when I stand at 5ft in front of the tv, can't tell the difference from the couch at 11ft. At 5ft 1080p still looks good, the only really noticeable difference is lack of or bad HDR.

Recommended max distance to benefit from 4K is at a 40 degree viewing angle, which is 1.2 x diagonal screen size, max 6.5ft from a 65" tv to be able to tell the difference. Basically diagonal size in inches divided by 10, that's how many feet you can sit away.

You can sit closer. A 40 degree viewing angle for 4K corresponds to about 100 pixels per degree. For 1080p the recommendation was to view the content at 60 pixels per degree or 1.5 x diagonal screen size for a 30 degree viewing angle. (To be exact 1.56 x diagonal size and 31.2 fov) To get close enough to a 4K screen for the same pixel density you have to sit at 0.78 x diagonal size for a 58.4 degree fov. That's 4.2ft from a 65" 4K screen. That's where you get max benefits. Of course since the screen is flat sitting that close is not ideal.