• TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Ehhh I mean… outside of up close, high res gaming? 4k doesn’t matter, it’s an excuse to add an extra 1k onto the price tag of a tv or monitor. Refresh rate is way more important.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      My TV is 4K and I wouldn’t know if I’m watching something in 4K or not unless I was scrutinising it. Especially the attrocious bitrates services stream their 4K at. I do notice 720 is a bit “fuzzy”, but that’s about it.

      • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yeah 720 vs 1080 is very noticeable. I will say even 1440 has its place for specific types of displays.

        But it all comes down to distance I think, the closer you are to the display the more the pixel density influences your experience; refresh rate is impactful at any distance and resolution

      • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Maybe because your TV is too small?

        4k is not about a sharper picture, neither was 1080p. The sharpness was already good enough. The point of the increase in resolution is larger TVs at the same sharpness. Back when I had an SD TV it was 576p on a 28” screen. When I moved on to 1080p I got a 50” TV. Notice how the size and the resolution increase are in the same ballpark. Now with 2160p I have a 77” TV, so there is still a little wiggle room. I could get to 100” at 4k before I would have to consider 8k.

        TVs got larger over the years, and that was made possible by the increase in resolution. There is still some room for growth in 4k.

      • Séra Balázs@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I always use the resolution above my screen’s on youtube, because the bitrate’s so bad, and the difference is very very noticable on monitors

    • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      As a person who stares at a lot of text up close, 4k makes a difference. I don’t notice antialiasing pixels anymore, my eyes finally see it as a smooth blend and it looks like I’m reading actual print.

    • Séra Balázs@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      You can get a new 4K TV for ~200€, and most phones come with a camera greater than 8.3MP, but there’s almost no 4K content available outside of Netfilx shows and tech youtubers

    • SternburgExport@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Depends. I never noticed it on streaming services (that might just be because they suck tho so idk) but once I tried it on a game on my PC it did look different. But the amount of added GPU power I‘d need is just not worth it imo.

        • TheControlled@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s your opinion? Your opinion is incorrect. It’s an objective fact that 4K, not to mention HDR, matters.

          • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I mean, that’s subjective. If it’s impactful for you? Then sure, it matters for you. It isn’t for me, therefore doesn’t

            The more important question, is why are you being so hostile over…. video resolution?