If I am remembering correctly it's to avoid the issues with early VR like eye strain, headaches and nausea. I could be misremembering but I'm not sure.

The virtual boy was terrible and there were often vomit buckets beside the hang glider sims at the arcade.

Not bigger, actually in case you'll use regular 55" TV as a monitor with distance of ~80 cm it's already pretty bad with 4K.

And it makes sense in case it's curved

Why is it important an 4K Tv? What does it do that a 1080p doesn't?

Technically for normal TV viewing distance (not computer monitor distance) you can’t even discern the difference between 1080p and 4K even with perfect vision.

So in essence the EU is driving innovation - to manufacture devices that do more, with the same amount of energy. Doing more with less pretty much sounds like a big part of the definition of what innovation should be and honestly feels like the way to go.

The industry's concern is clearly more focused on their ability to milk profits than offering the best product possible for the end consumer. Many may disagree, but I find it rather unfortunate that not all countries have regulatory bodies protecting and driving consumer's best interests (as well as environmental interests). In many places the main concerns seem to be oriented towards the protection of profits and corporate interests.

The current 8k lineup doesn't offer better energy efficiency because it was never high on the priorities list of manufacturers, not because its impossible. The article clearly acknowledges that consumption is high and that there are ways to reduce it and Samsung seems to be saying it is doable.

There are known limitations with the current materials and processes and I guess that is precisely why the drive should've been put towards true innovation.

As a consumer I'm perfectly happy to wait a year or 2 before there are 8k options available with reasonable power consumption - after all it really is in my own best interest to do so.

3 foot, not 3 inch.

For somebody monitor with 50" makes sense, I would buy it as I see it useful.

Thank you! Back in my day, we only has 720p and we called that HD! I remember when they first invented color

I'm using 32" 4K monitor and I use 125% scaling.

I'm drying about 40-50" curved one with 8k, basically somewhat similar pixel density as what I have now, but being much bigger.

Yes it's not going to be usefull full screen, but I can limit game window to reasonable size. But during productive work I wish I had "distant space" like second screen to put windows out of main focus. I can buy second screen now, but I want to have one giant.

[deleted]

[removed]

I don't know, probably. I get a feeling 500+ watt PCs are next

Or someone innovates and manages to design a high pixel density TV that doesn't consume as much power as an oven.

I was comparing the two at store and honestly i couldnt tell the difference

You either have never used a 144hz monitor or you could have an actual eye problem, is pretty much impossible not to notice the difference.

Or be sitting 3 inches away

Manufacturers in China actually look at Kickstarter campaigns for ideas. Stuff like the Fidget Cube was ripped off and manufactured en masse in China and shipped to the US before the legitimate Fidget Cube was able to finish their kickstarter campaign and ship units.

The high rephrase is not for our eyes its to more accurately syncing to what's happened. The game say runs at 300 fps. You get 1 frame ever 60say but if you go to 120 time since last frame is reduced so your display will be more up to date.

120 should be standard. Stop with this blurry shit that Hollywood put on us as 24.

I own a 144 hz monitor and notice when it's not smooth and see the dips to sub 60 when game is stressful to the hardware.

The problem is that the regulations were set and designed around the average 1080p set power draw. 4k requires more power (more pixels, more processing, more power), and many don't fit under the cap. 8k TVs are right out.

So, what's going to end up happening is either

• stagnation of innovation

• 4k and 8k TVs no longer being sold in the EU.

There isn’t even enough 4k content and they are trying to push 8???

I think the only advantage to having an 8k screen is when the screen size starts getting massive. Like bigger then any home tvs. So it'll be good for say, theaters or big signage but totally useless in home.

Yes you can. But you will need a very very large screen to be able to tell.

Yes, this person is just plain wrong - talking out of their ass. There is diminishing returns the higher you get, but 30fps is absolute trash compared to 120 or 144.

This is not true at all - high refresh rates are very easily detectable, and the human eye doesn't operate at any particular "refresh rate". Humans can detect very tiny difference in reaction times (eg. when you move a mouse and seeing that movement reflected on a screen). A 30hz computer monitor is almost unusable with a mouse. 60hz is fine for normal usage, but for eg. gaming you can get a measurable advantage with 144hz instead and feels smoother. There's probably no reason to ever go above 200hz.

Regarding resolution - yeah 8k is pointless for most usecases, but it really depends on how it's going to be viewed. 8k projected on the side of a building could make sense if you expect people to be looking at it up close. Meanwhile anything above 1080p is completely pointless if it's a watch face...

AHAHAHAAHHAHAH

It’s just you who can’t see a difference