SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
The race for 4K gaming has begun. PlayStation 4 Pro is in the marketplace, and while success in supporting ultra HD gaming varies dramatically between releases, an established series of techniques is in place that is already capable of effectively servicing a 4K resolution with a comparatively modest level of GPU power. In the wake of its E3 2016 reveal for the new Project Scorpio console, Microsoft began to share details with developers on how they expect to see 4K supported on its new hardware. A whitepaper was released on its development portal, entitled 'Reaching 4K and GPU Scaling Across Multiple Xbox Devices'. It's a fascinating outlook on Microsoft's ultra HD plans - and it also reveals more about the Scorpio hardware itself. For starters, Xbox One's contentious ESRAM is gone.
No link provided to the whitepaper referred to in the article.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday January 29 2017, @09:43PM
Google image search for something like monitor size vs resolution. You'll get the same endlessly stolen copyrighted graph.
I'm not a big TV watcher, my living room TV is small and the room is normal size so 480p content looks the same as 4K, until people start getting bionic eyeballs it won't matter. Color rendition and black level is way more important for quality viewing at my house. Glare reduction with a nice matte finish would help a lot more than higher res.
For your 55 inch 4K example, the graph shows that the window would be 3 to 7 feet. More than 7 feet with 55 inches and unless you have bionic eyes you won't be able to see the difference between 480 and 4k and closer than 7 feet and 4K would look better than 1080. If you stood 3 feet away from the five foot display then you'd start being able to see 4K pixels and presumably some kind of 8k or 16k would look better.
WRT visual retina resolution there is more to life than just seeing a pixel or whatever and staring into an emacs screen of text my eyes hurt from anti-aliasing (something to do with tricking the focusing algorithm in my eyes) so I prefer all the artistic fuzzing and blurring technologies be shut off with the result that higher res means better font quality. All of which boils down to crappy action movie has much lower eyeball performance requirements than a screen full of emacs and source code. Going the other direction my sight is 20/20 but frankly most people are not and 4K is less important for them, my MiL may as well just stare into a one pixel flashlight for all it matters. So the "4K size graphs" are fine for relative comparison but using a ruler is probably excessive precision.
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Monday January 30 2017, @02:08AM
Well at work, we're looking at 55in/4K screens for viz, since they have chromecast built in. Good for phones and tablets etc...
At home, until I get some decent BW, I'm not so bothered but tempted by chromecast and upscaled DVD's....
(Score: 2) by Celestial on Monday January 30 2017, @09:09PM
I regularly re-watch "Babylon 5." It is my favorite non-Star Trek television show. Unfortunately, it is stuck in 480i Hell as Warner Bros. sees no point in spending the money remastering it to 1080p or Heaven forbid 4K Ultra HD. On a 46" 1080p television, the close-up shots look fine, but on shots where the camera is scanned back and there's a lot going on, it looks really fuzzy. On a 60" 4K Ultra HD television, forget it. The close-up shots look fuzzy, and the scanned back camera shots look like a smear. It's pretty much unwatchable.