| JRPGfan said: The madness about resolution needs to stop. |
It really doesn't.
| JRPGfan said: Deminishing returns (visually) |
There is diminishing returns on smaller displays. On larger ones? There is a ton of room for improvement.
| caffeinade said: Does anyone here already have a 4k panel, and if so what have been your impressions on the increased pixel count. |
I used to run 7680x1440 over 3 panels which is more than 4k. (And before that, 5760x1080)
It was glorious. The reason for the downgrade to a single 2560x1440 panel was due to the hardware required to push such insane pixels and I got tired of constantly upgrading hardware.
| caffeinade said:
|
Which is why I am content sitting at 2560x1440 for the immediate future. Scaling.
| bananaking21 said: is there really a need to upgrade from 4k? which is really crisp and clear. i think resources would be much better off put into other things than 8k. |
The larger your screen, the larger the pixels.
Someone using a 32" TV from a few meters away will likely not benefit moving from 1080P to 4k.
But someone with a 70" display and sits at the same distance would see massive gains.
| JRPGfan said: Next gen it ll be 4k, and the one after that too. |
That all comes down to the PC.
If the PC doesn't have the hardware to drive 4k (It doesn't yet) in the mid range, then don't expect a console to do it.
| Alby_da_Wolf said: I switched from 1440x900 to 1080p a few years ago on PC (and I still miss, if not 4:3 anymore, 16:10 aspect ratio, it's a lot better for everything but games and more than good enough for games), and on TV I did it from SD to 768p even later, and just last year to 1080p, I'm fine with 1080p for the next few years. |
Dell still sells 2560x1600 panels if you are still keen on 16:10. It's also an upgrade from the pesantry 1080P and lower resolutions. ;)
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
