I think 8K is useful but only big format displays and VR you can see individual pixels in even the newest oculus so shrink the panels for vr please, sony made a 4k phone so that shouldnt be too difficult.
Linus 2019: Don't buy 8k Linus 2020: OMG 8K IS THE HIGHEST FIDELITY GAMING I HAVE EVER EXPERIENCED! THIS IS SO AMAZING, THIS BRINGS A NEW LEVEL OF IMMERSION OMG!
LOL that comment made me actually giggle. But still... better God Howard than Pete Hines. Pete would say 8k is not paid mods, while grabbing your wallet and giving you absolute junk.
@@OkesTreeProductions I notice when it drops below 90 fps immediately and younger eyes than mine are probably more sensitive so 120 would be a good safe minimum for active viewing but passive viewing isn't nearly as important so with the majority of content being 24/30 fps and 60hz I'd consider it a huge win just getting the world to 60. 1440p60 is already a lot of cpu resource and bandwidth as it is currently...I guess my point is resolution has well and truly reached the point of diminishing returns, 4K is more than enough and fps is far to underrated.
@Warm Soft Kitty that's bogus, because I have a great 4k tv (Samsung q6fn) with some excellent brightness around ~1000 nits and it's awesome. 4k is not that much of a improvement to be honest, but HDR is definitely a game changer!
@Warm Soft Kitty It's literally just the colour version of higher resolution. The only way it can look like shit is if the content itself looks like shit.
I'm afraid 120 hz will never be the standard as it's too smooth for TV's for most people. In terms of gaming, it would be great but people don't like high frame rates for video.
@@memeweaver2553 it looks hyper smooth and even 60fps feels strange to watch for real life video and takes twice as much space for literally no actual visual benefit apart from “it’s smoother”. You don’t need smooth when you’re not the controller like in a game.
4k gaming is way better then 2k the reason why your saying 4k dumb because you are watching 4k video in your 1080p or 1440p monitor thats why you cant see the diffrences between 4k to 1080p
@@husainhusain1341 - I have a 43" 4k Monitor as well as a Acer predator 34" 1440p ultrawide and I have to say that 1440p ultrawide is hands down better than the 43" 4k as that visually its hard to tell the difference between them, also the fact that I get better fps with higher graphic settings at 1440p ultrawide is why I still think 4K gaming is "Dumb".
@@virtuaconker85 cheap 43 inch 4k displays are just trash thats why you cant differences between 1440p to 2160p go buy a good 4k oled tv like lg c8 or c9
Husain Husain - why would I buy a tv for my gaming pc? They can’t compete with pc monitors in terms of input delay, also I didn’t say anything about pricing as it wouldn’t matter at 43” as it’s too small for 4K and that’s why you can’t see a difference. You will only see a difference on larger tv’s like 80” or bigger and then it’s too big for a desktop computer setup.
Honestly for a monitor, refresh rate and color reproduction are more important than resolution. They're just not big enough to justify much more than 1440p.
Even if I bought a higher resolution screen my GTX1060 couldn't run the most demanding games at 60fps anymore. Same thing with high refresh rate, what's the point when I don't play CSGO or something else competitive that will actually run at above 60fps on my hardware? At least high resolution screens allow for watching high detail videos on relatively cheap hardware.
3440x1440p is the sweet spot for monitors. Great 21:9 ratio and super crisp image. To get a 4k that same size you're talking several thousand dollars. Most 4k monitors are simply too small to matter.
Yep, I dropped cable years ago at home for Roku boxes on all my TV's, but have it at my work if I want to use it, and so I finally plugged up the little cable box yesterday, and most of the channels where 480i with horrendous combing artifacts that made them unwatchable, so I just unplugged it, and went back to my 1080p Roku Express I brought from home for my clients to use.
@UCXz5f7sqP0_EekuqynRns8A well 1080i is the highest the current North American OTA ATSC standard went up to when it was fully adopted in 2008, and Analog 480i was phased out. the new OTA ATSC 3.0 will do 4K along with more guide features, weather alerts that only activate in your area, so someone else does not have their programs interrupted, and even free OTA on demand content(I'm guessing ad supported though lol). So yeah that's why, because the companies know they can get way with it, as that's all the government mandates them to broadcast at OTA, Sat, or cable.
I gotta give you that 1080p for videos are great. But on bigger tvs the resolution and upscaling software can make a different. Anime for example upscales really well atleast on my Samsung mu8000.
@@grzegorzklimek6023 Look at 0:56. You know how on a normal 1080p screen most of the individual buttons and text are a bit small (without zooming in)? Well now imagine them being 16 times smaller and scattered around the whole perimeter of the screen... Thats why image scaling is a thing, to make the ui bigger and actually usable.
Let's get all our TV and video etc. in 1080p first. Most TV channels, physical video formats and online videos are still compatible with the 480i/30 NTSC or 576i/25 PAL systems, which in their colour variants first emerged nearly 60 years ago, and in greyscale 20 years before that. Once all new video is in 2K (1080 X 1920), as a minimum standard, we can move on to thinking about 8K as a serious format, assuming that anyone except for cinemas/ movie theaters would ever actually need it.
Err this is skipping over important details, it is not true that most films are shot into 2k, many are shot higher, in potentially many different formats even: partially in film, partly in 4k, sometimes in 2.8k, depending on which cameras are being used for each shot. To put all those different sources together and add CG a common intermediate format has to be picked. Usually in 2k, with few exceptions, which means that most 4k Blu-ray's are indeed upscaled- mad Max, the Martian, the Avenger's. Oddly enough, Deadpool was apparently 4k all the way.
You forgot the problem of field of view. If you sit too close to a huge screen to see the detail, you can't see all of it, all at once. 4k is truly the benchmark in home media for decades to come. Other things that'll become better and more widespread are: Higher refresh rate, HDR, Color accuracy. Basically increasing the quality of the resolution instead of just the resolution.
Yes sir. Most movie theatre display 2k and I have never experienced someone telling that's not sharp enough... Most people seat as far as possible from the screen anyway.
yes 8K is pointless. 4K is already on the brink of being pointless imo. 1080p still looks great to me and I have perfect vision. I don't sit 1m from my tv
@Paul Dybala Agreed! That is actually exactly why we need this seemingly insane resolution and pixel density race. Strange that so few see this. The merger of VR + 8k/16k + AI is the future, cross-feeding.
There is a special place in hell for people that call 1440p (2560×1440) displays "2K". If 3840×2160 displays are 4k and 7680×4320 displays are 8k, then 2k should refer to 1920×1080 displays. Even then, we are misusing the 17:9 resolutions for cinema. 4K means 4096×2160, the 3840×2160 TV is called UHD.
@@azadanes 8k camera are for 4k content. You want your sensor twice the resolution of your display. It allows you to have additional detail for editing.
I'm still happy with 1080P, though I could MAYBE see me moving to 4K in the future if I bought a large enough monitor, but with some of the insane costs involved, I would be happy if I never moved beyond FHD.
I don't see people in the cinema going "Boooo! It's too pixelated i want it higher res! " Imagine these people's shock when they discover that their perfect big(Lil) cinema runs at 2k, basically 1080p... And the fact that there are merely a few films in 4k. 99.99 percent of them are 2k.
+FirestoneX Of course Blu-ray looks better because you watch it on a digital panel, majority of cinemas today still use projection to a black or grey matte background.
I have, and it looks barely any better while requiring far more powerful hardware and internet which all together make it ludicrously more expensive. AKA, a stupid gimmick meant to separate people of middling intellect from their money.
This list is ridiculous, 1080 is fine for home items like phones, laptops and tablets. Tvs are fine at 1440p and even 1080p, it just rises the price for little to medium difference. 4k is fine for cinema as 8k doesn't give too much of a difference from what I've seen (could be due to by dying eyes).
I just h a t e this list because you placed tablet as 1440p and phones at 1080p, when was the last time you saw someone use a tablet casually for everday uses that isnt little kids, elders or people testing it out for reviews. HOME DEVICES ARE FINE AT 1080P
@@itstotallynotsai6577 this list is based on the size of the devices. Maybe 1080p is enough for you and thats fine but 4k is just todays new standart and i have a pretty big tv and you can see the difference to a 1080p
Fun facts: 35MM film movies that were projected for over a century are close in resolution to 4K. When digital projection first hit the market they were projecting 2K images (so we took a step back in resolution). Now cinema projectors have caught up to 4K projection resolution (now back to the similar resolution of 4K). IMAX 70MM film has a resolution somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 to 12K. So higher resolutions are better, and we've used them for years, but you don't notice them until blown up on movie size screens.
Unless you are planning on getting a TV bigger than 55 inch there is no reason to go to 4k as well. That is the way I see it. 1440p on a small monitor is great over 1080p but not by that much but that is because you are sitting right in front of a monitor not a TV. I have a 40inch 1080p TV from Samsung that still looks amazing and has HDR as well. Almost looks like a 60 inch 4K would look. I don't think people really need a bigger than 65 inch 4K if their living rooms aren't far back of 20 feet. There is no reason to get bigger TVs unless you upgrade to a bigger living room or family room where it's 20+ feet back from the TV.
@@GoogleUser-wf8mt Technology never stops, I do believe the whole resolution phase will slow down to catchup with 4k and 8k but I do believe it will continue.
@@GoogleUser-wf8mt But here we are at 8k. I personally can't tell, no matter location or time spending viewing an image, the difference between 1080p and 4k, but yet we still are arriving at 8k. With the "high end" and "cutting edge" type individual it's just about having the best possible technology for whatever reason and even though not practical, not everything in the market is practical.
I have 2021 vision, low resolution TV's make my eyes ache... I can tell the slightest difference in pixel count.. but I didn't have any eye problems before TV's went digital.
@@shaansingh6048 I don't believe you have a 'pretty good' pc then my friend. I bought a not exactly high end (at it isn't Titan or 2080ti levels), but it's sorta close to high end being an RTX 2070 OC to play with, and even spending $1k on my pc, I still had to put out extra for a monitor because having a separate display for your pc use and your tv/console use is important, at least to me. I enjoy watching content on a big screen with high resolution, I like playing games on my Switch screen, I mean I'm focusing for games anyway, might as well have a smaller screen for me to focus at.
8K may have a purpose even without 8K content. Less chance of seeing pixels or moiré patterns. Even on smaller displays. Also greater possibilities of scaling lowres content via integer scaling, resulting in a sharper picture.
I’m not one to keep up with the very forefront of monitor tech, but I love the 2736px tall display of my Surface Pro. UA-cam vids look terrific when I go above 1080, and going all the way to 4k, though not natively possible, still gets me loads of that sweet sweet bitrate-proportional picture quality.
@@atimholt The reason 4k videos on youtube look better than 1080p even if your monitor is only 1080p is because of compression. Compressing on 4k and downscaling to 1080p gives much lesser loss of detail than downscaling to hd and then compressing it. Both are worse than raw 1080p footage.
I really do not know who the heck these things are for. The internet in America can either barely handle 4k, or the wonderful data caps will kill this. It isnt for gaming because hardware cannot push it yet.
8k does have a use. It makes 4K panels cheaper.
And boy are they cheap, I got a 4k tv for under 200 bucks thats crazy!
Yea and that is gonna make 1080p cheaper so I can finally buy a 720p one
@@asdanjer you can literally buy a 1080p monitor at a thrift shop dude
@@TheHipisterDeer you ever heard of a ***joke***
@@asdanjer Oh yes as the Americas say hahaha very funny
"Is 8k useless?"
"yes"
Todd Howard : "16 TIMES THE DETAIL"
"NEW IMPROVED ENGINE"
@@A.Froster 4 TIMES THE SIZE OF FALLOUT 4
It all is starting to make sense now!
came to the comments looking for this
jensen juan: 100x time price!~
8k in Japan when most people's houses there weren't big enough for kinect.
Well if you're stuck 20 inches from your tv you might as well get more pixels.
@@MatthewBaka In that case, 1440p will be plenty.
The Olympics are watched worldwide
Tbf smaller countries really do have a problem with space.
Now the UK and Mexico, for example, we are just bad in distributing homes
@@emilmullerv3519 so's the U.S.
missed the perfect opportunity to upload this video in 8k
It's not even 4K
youtube can barely do 4k, 8k you dont even want to imagine the bandwidth required for it.
it also proves his point
@@moltenlava1877 2160p tho
@@bradhaines3142 one min of 4k video takes up only 375 MB 😅
@@moltenlava1877 We don't have to talk about compression do we?
"16x the detail"... Now where have i heard that before 🤔
Tod, is that you??
TODDDDDDDD!!!!!
😂😂 i knew someone will write that
1080p
@@crax-55 who is Tod
2020 Olympics, that's so funny
What even is that?
😥
We don’t know her
Just what I was thinking of…
Haha so true
"The upcoming 2020 Olympics"
uhhh
yeah that aged well
Best Joke Linus ever made
Truly ahead of his time
it was a simpler time
Yea lol...
"Is 8K pointless? Yes."
"Speaking of yes, say 'yes' to Squarespace!"
Speaking of useless: Squarespace!
No
it is literary "pointless", because you can't see individual points
That’s a way better segue than Linus usually manages.
I think 8K is useful but only big format displays and VR you can see individual pixels in even the newest oculus so shrink the panels for vr please, sony made a 4k phone so that shouldnt be too difficult.
Linus 2019: Don't buy 8k
Linus 2020: OMG 8K IS THE HIGHEST FIDELITY GAMING I HAVE EVER EXPERIENCED! THIS IS SO AMAZING, THIS BRINGS A NEW LEVEL OF IMMERSION OMG!
It's still kinda pointless from normal viewing distances
Yeah it's almost as if technology and market prices changed with time
He'll say anything for $
"16 times the detail" sounding a lot like Todd Howard there, Linus.
It just works
@@felixthefox100 It just works.
FarawayThrower little lies
LOL that comment made me actually giggle. But still... better God Howard than Pete Hines. Pete would say 8k is not paid mods, while grabbing your wallet and giving you absolute junk.
It is..
Linus: 16 times the detail!
[Todd Howard liked this]
16 times the bullshit!
I was about to write this comment instantly. xD
"Giving them 16 times as much detail...!"
Let me stop you right there for a moment, Todd Howard.
LOL YOU ARE A LEGEND I JJST COMMENTED THAT AND I THOUGHT SOMEBODY ELSE MITHT HAVE NOTICE DTHAT
It just works
@@dinonuggiemonster1288 Lol
Exactly what i thought lol
Lair!
Id much rather see content go to 60 fps as a minimum standard...
jedics thumb this
120-144 minimum I think, and I'm on 60 fps monitors.
@@OkesTreeProductions I notice when it drops below 90 fps immediately and younger eyes than mine are probably more sensitive so 120 would be a good safe minimum for active viewing but passive viewing isn't nearly as important so with the majority of content being 24/30 fps and 60hz I'd consider it a huge win just getting the world to 60. 1440p60 is already a lot of cpu resource and bandwidth as it is currently...I guess my point is resolution has well and truly reached the point of diminishing returns, 4K is more than enough and fps is far to underrated.
jedics and here I am trying to reach the 30 fps mark in games
Why not both? You don't have to choose.
Fun fact: the human nose can only hear up to 12 gb of RAM.
You can hear up to 32gb if you add rgb lighting to it.
Pfft it's just easier to download more ram then hear it from your nose
shut the f up
@@flameshana9 that will be cool
then here is the new RED camera 32k which can be run at 200ft deep
8K is pointless, the TV manufactures should rather spend time improving HDR on their TVs instead
Exactly!
@Warm Soft Kitty that's bogus, because I have a great 4k tv (Samsung q6fn) with some excellent brightness around ~1000 nits and it's awesome. 4k is not that much of a improvement to be honest, but HDR is definitely a game changer!
@Warm Soft Kitty It's literally just the colour version of higher resolution. The only way it can look like shit is if the content itself looks like shit.
Have u saw a 8k tv before? Do you owned a 8k tv? I guess not
And national broadcasters rolling out 4k for live sports on a consistent basis! Hello ESPN!
I’d much rather have 120 hz as a standard rather than 8k.
Well once 8k becomes a standard 120hz probably will too around the same time, actually once 8k becomes the standard, 240hz might become it.
I'm afraid 120 hz will never be the standard as it's too smooth for TV's for most people. In terms of gaming, it would be great but people don't like high frame rates for video.
No. Higher hertz looks weird and too smooth for video. Standard broadcast is 24-30fps. Make HDR better and mainstream. It makes such a big difference.
@@memeweaver2553 it looks hyper smooth and even 60fps feels strange to watch for real life video and takes twice as much space for literally no actual visual benefit apart from “it’s smoother”. You don’t need smooth when you’re not the controller like in a game.
@@OhKnow379 Higher hertz is bad for videos but higher hertz is way better than higher resolution for gaming
"4k gaming is dumb, 8k TV is completely pointless"
I think the real sponsor is Nintendo
4k gaming is way better then 2k the reason why your saying 4k dumb because you are watching 4k video in your 1080p or 1440p monitor thats why you cant see the diffrences between 4k to 1080p
Using a gaming monitor with 30+ inch could benefit from 4k. The size plays the important role here rather than the distance to the monitor.
@@husainhusain1341 - I have a 43" 4k Monitor as well as a Acer predator 34" 1440p ultrawide and I have to say that 1440p ultrawide is hands down better than the 43" 4k as that visually its hard to tell the difference between them, also the fact that I get better fps with higher graphic settings at 1440p ultrawide is why I still think 4K gaming is "Dumb".
@@virtuaconker85 cheap 43 inch 4k displays are just trash thats why you cant differences between 1440p to 2160p go buy a good 4k oled tv like lg c8 or c9
Husain Husain - why would I buy a tv for my gaming pc? They can’t compete with pc monitors in terms of input delay, also I didn’t say anything about pricing as it wouldn’t matter at 43” as it’s too small for 4K and that’s why you can’t see a difference. You will only see a difference on larger tv’s like 80” or bigger and then it’s too big for a desktop computer setup.
8K *IS BAD*
ME WITH MY 480P: *FINALLY*
I have an 1080p tv, but the cable tv is completely crap. Probably like under 480 or 720p lol
@@stefan-x9g is it a smart tv? Use youtu.be
Your display still probably supports HD or higher. I have a UHD tv, but most stations are only in 576p/i. Some like Discovery are in 1080p/i.
Oof that's rough. Those old panels from the early 2000s all looked like that and were do pixelated🤣
Got 1080p recently and it's very nice!
Still here with my 1080p monitor :D
Honestly for a monitor, refresh rate and color reproduction are more important than resolution. They're just not big enough to justify much more than 1440p.
Even if I bought a higher resolution screen my GTX1060 couldn't run the most demanding games at 60fps anymore. Same thing with high refresh rate, what's the point when I don't play CSGO or something else competitive that will actually run at above 60fps on my hardware?
At least high resolution screens allow for watching high detail videos on relatively cheap hardware.
Must suck
3440x1440p is the sweet spot for monitors. Great 21:9 ratio and super crisp image. To get a 4k that same size you're talking several thousand dollars. Most 4k monitors are simply too small to matter.
1080 for phones 2k or qhd for monitors and phones. 4k for tvs
Linus: Does 8k matter
Also linus: HoLy $h!t- We bought a 12k tv!!!
Edit:Thx for the 1k likes.
Yeah like they bullt a 16k gaming setup.
To his defense, they live on being on the edge between sense and craziness.
Vault Dweller. Hows that Minecraft on 16k doing.😂
@@catboybubs
Hahaha
"Bought" How naive
Woah, it's 16 times the detail.
T-todd, h-howard..
Australia: "we have 5G now"
also Australia: *internet speeds of like 30MBit/s and gigabit internet is urban legend*
Mbits or MBytes?
@@LuisC7 bit. We have shit internet.
In Poland we have 1 Gbps for 20 euro available in most big cities. Nice to live in Europe huh
@@SergiuszOlszewski In Portugal, I also get 1000/100 or more for about €25, but it's cheaper in Poland because people also earn less on average.
guess I'm moving to Europe because we pay about €40 for internet that'll either be 300mbit or 20 :|
90% of TV channels are not even in 720p 😂 hilarious...
im quite fine with my 1080p TV.. from 2011
Yep, I dropped cable years ago at home for Roku boxes on all my TV's, but have it at my work if I want to use it, and so I finally plugged up the little cable box yesterday, and most of the channels where 480i with horrendous combing artifacts that made them unwatchable, so I just unplugged it, and went back to my 1080p Roku Express I brought from home for my clients to use.
@UCXz5f7sqP0_EekuqynRns8A well 1080i is the highest the current North American OTA ATSC standard went up to when it was fully adopted in 2008, and Analog 480i was phased out. the new OTA ATSC 3.0 will do 4K along with more guide features, weather alerts that only activate in your area, so someone else does not have their programs interrupted, and even free OTA on demand content(I'm guessing ad supported though lol). So yeah that's why, because the companies know they can get way with it, as that's all the government mandates them to broadcast at OTA, Sat, or cable.
1080p is pure shit
I gotta give you that 1080p for videos are great. But on bigger tvs the resolution and upscaling software can make a different. Anime for example upscales really well atleast on my Samsung mu8000.
@@xpodx 1080P OLED looks good on my phone
Can we get 4K to go more mainstream before going to 8k? We’re still stuck with 1080i 720p on cable.
I am still on 480p on cable because I ain't paying more
Think your missing the point here, 8k won't be mainstream for another 5 year at least, by which time ...
@@okami93kage91 No
Linus: Is 8K Completely POINTLESS?
Me: *watches this on a 1366x768 pixels screen
Andrean Romanky 1600x900 is what I have and it’s good
Watching on my 3DS 400x240
@@とふこ i used to swatch youtube on my 3ds but now when i try to it say "address not found"
Watching this on a 6" FHD smartphone. Lol pixel density is too high for this resolution on such a small screen
watching on a 1024x768
8K wasn't scary until imagining 8K Linus on a 100 inch TV.
Lol I agree, + you can also use a vertical speaker as big as your your 100 inch TV with maximum volume to hear Linus' ads.
I would be beautiful
Linus on a 100 inch screen would not be that bad. He's pretty attractive for a dude that sounds like an anime character.
K?
"16 times the detail"
Hmm, where did I hear that before?
oh god humanity will be a fallout after this reference
This upload isn't 8k?
*Not good enough.*
haha!
Not terrible, not great
@@Hirnlego999 It was a little more than 3.6
And it was recorded with an 8K red camera
@@whitebeartigtig *no it wasn't*
"sixteen times the detail" ~ Todd Howard ~
I’m going to build a room with 4 8k tvs that take up my walls just so I can have Linus screaming tech tips at me all around my room.
Ok
have you ever tried editing spreadsheets on a 4k monitor? imagine 8k...
Zoltan R sounds great lol scaling has gotten good
No i didn't. Is there some problem doing so?
@@grzegorzklimek6023 Look at 0:56.
You know how on a normal 1080p screen most of the individual buttons and text are a bit small (without zooming in)? Well now imagine them being 16 times smaller and scattered around the whole perimeter of the screen...
Thats why image scaling is a thing, to make the ui bigger and actually usable.
As long as it's a large monitor, then it's great. The text is clearer and/or more information can be displayed at once. I do have good vision though.
It looks great on my monitor, but if there's an earthquake I'm going to get crushed by this thing. ua-cam.com/video/2kYrQ-LOiXE/v-deo.html
"while you enjoy your sugared cereal..."
Bro wtf. I was eating frosted flakes.
Literally was eating mini wheats while watching this video on our tv
Reese's Puffs watching on 720p TV here
@@SchlossRitter 720p is still awesome. My 720p plasma looks better than a lot of modern non-OLED TVs.
SchlossRitter du armer :(
@@ouwebok3356 Bruh you seem to have some hatred towards americans like jeez just chill
I’m ok with my 1080p monitor, thanks
😂
who the hell would spend so much to just see slightly better, it's stupid
@@rarespetrusamartean5433 me, you have no idea what 8k is so 🤫
@@x32i77 I do
more fucking pixels at a price that could save someone's fucking life in a pitch
@Lopeo2324, 1080p is all you need. Everything else is marketing BS.
I watch all my UA-cam videos in 480p
Same
Most people watch 1080 or less.
I watch this video in 240p
Most of the time 1080p here, unless I'm one of my Lenovo Thinkpads then it's 480p, or 720p.
Me too, but only YOUR videos.
I am using 24" 1080p, 60hz monitor since 2009 with DVI-D input and still happy with it.
same here
Me too. I'm using hdmi to dvi cable
I finally got a pc and 1080p monitor last year so...
I just got a pc and 1080p monitor 3 months ago, AFTER I owned an Xbox One X, Ps4 Pro, and a 4k Samsung 😂😂. Sold the One X for my PC.
same but through vga
Let's get all our TV and video etc. in 1080p first. Most TV channels, physical video formats and online videos are still compatible with the 480i/30 NTSC or 576i/25 PAL systems, which in their colour variants first emerged nearly 60 years ago, and in greyscale 20 years before that. Once all new video is in 2K (1080 X 1920), as a minimum standard, we can move on to thinking about 8K as a serious format, assuming that anyone except for cinemas/ movie theaters would ever actually need it.
most films are shot in 2k and upscaled to 4k, because it would add a long time on the cgi render times
Loadatat not true at all.
@@douglasreyes4251 it is, most movie theatres only have 2k projectors, those shot in 4k are usually finished in 2k due to render times
Also the upscaling studios use are a lot better than what you find on a TV
Err this is skipping over important details, it is not true that most films are shot into 2k, many are shot higher, in potentially many different formats even: partially in film, partly in 4k, sometimes in 2.8k, depending on which cameras are being used for each shot.
To put all those different sources together and add CG a common intermediate format has to be picked. Usually in 2k, with few exceptions, which means that most 4k Blu-ray's are indeed upscaled- mad Max, the Martian, the Avenger's. Oddly enough, Deadpool was apparently 4k all the way.
Many are still shot with actual films, not digital storage.
TV Walls, Fahrenheit 451 called it !!!
fish headset shame about the book collection though 🤔
You forgot the problem of field of view. If you sit too close to a huge screen to see the detail, you can't see all of it, all at once. 4k is truly the benchmark in home media for decades to come.
Other things that'll become better and more widespread are: Higher refresh rate, HDR, Color accuracy. Basically increasing the quality of the resolution instead of just the resolution.
Video about 8k watched in 240p
Nah bro I only do 144p it shows wayyy more detail
240p is clear enough for the content of this video.
Same here
Short answer:
It is pointless.
Uchiha Madara ahead of its time*
Someone has to do this shit or it would never happen
Wrong
@@brandoloudly9457 its been out for like 4 years. And we have the capability to do 64k if we wanted on a 32" monitor
Yes sir. Most movie theatre display 2k and I have never experienced someone telling that's not sharp enough... Most people seat as far as possible from the screen anyway.
Linux: forgets that 40 inch + monitors exist.
Also Linux: 8k is pointless.
Unless you have a giant TV, differences between a 8K and 4K are negligible.
My eyes are so bad, I’m happy I can make out my 65“ tv in the room
yes 8K is pointless. 4K is already on the brink of being pointless imo. 1080p still looks great to me and I have perfect vision. I don't sit 1m from my tv
Yeah.... The internet (1995): Never to be going to be happening....
In 10 years you will be astonished...
@Paul Dybala Agreed! That is actually exactly why we need this seemingly insane resolution and pixel density race. Strange that so few see this. The merger of VR + 8k/16k + AI is the future, cross-feeding.
Try 1440p.
*ahead of its time. Its not pointless. Its just not worth the price.
“640K is more memory than anyone will ever need.” -Bill Gates
Synopsis:
If you buy an 8K TV just make sure to buy binoculars and not need any money for a few years.
"Sixteen times the detail"
Todd Howard joined the chat
Sounded similar to him too
Linus: "Including the upcoming 2020 Olympics!"
April 2020- Coronavirus: 😏
There is a special place in hell for people that call 1440p (2560×1440) displays "2K". If 3840×2160 displays are 4k and 7680×4320 displays are 8k, then 2k should refer to 1920×1080 displays.
Even then, we are misusing the 17:9 resolutions for cinema. 4K means 4096×2160, the 3840×2160 TV is called UHD.
*Linus made this video just to justify his purchase of an 8k tv.*
Cactusmann He done it to justify buying an 8k camera
Tax write-off lol
@@azadanes 8k camera are for 4k content. You want your sensor twice the resolution of your display. It allows you to have additional detail for editing.
@@kazedcat did you miss the part where Linus said 4 times the resolution of 4k?
@@alaskanhybridgaming Twice as the length of each side but 4 times more surface area.
A * B * 4 = (A * 2) * (B * 2)
Shoutout to the Editor that decided to make the lines at 0:48 follow Linus fingers exactly.
Taran sends his regards.
SilverStone XAdvanced who said it‘s hard,he said „that decided“ not „that managed“
5 years later and 8k is still no where to be found. Almost like they just gave up on it
Just announced dude
0:58 for a moment I heard Todd Howard’s voice goes “16x the detail”
I'm still happy with 1080P, though I could MAYBE see me moving to 4K in the future if I bought a large enough monitor, but with some of the insane costs involved, I would be happy if I never moved beyond FHD.
8K and 4K are not resolutions; they are just dimensions. It has nothing to do with the density of the pixels.
he wasn't knowing 2020 Olympics won't happen
Further reducing the purpose of 8k lol
This video was uploaded last year lol
Olympics posponed to next year
Yes but the 2021 Olympics will!
Yeah, obviously.
Me: spends 15k $ on a 8k, 80 inch TV.
also Me: watches 720p Anime On It.
You can buy a 8k tv for under 4,000
@@xpodx ... It's a joke.
8K TV looks much better than 4K. 4K looks granular and washed out compared to smooth and vibrant 8K.
"16 times the detail"
oh my
So this guys live under a rock and don't know vr needs a screen right in front of your nose
8K porn will encourage consumers to adapt more quickly and push the tech industry to accept 8K as the new standard.
My 24" 1080p monitor is still going good .
I can squeeze few years from it
I mean it has the same ppi as my 4k, screen. It's just that it is 4 times smaller by area. Mine is 48".
I don't see people in the cinema going "Boooo! It's too pixelated i want it higher res! " Imagine these people's shock when they discover that their perfect big(Lil) cinema runs at 2k, basically 1080p...
And the fact that there are merely a few films in 4k. 99.99 percent of them are 2k.
I complain. Bluray looks better than theaters
@@FirestoneX ofc it does, you watch a professionaly upscaled version on a high contrast high brightness screen...
+FirestoneX
Of course Blu-ray looks better because you watch it on a digital panel, majority of cinemas today still use projection to a black or grey matte background.
The solid gold toilet at 1:22 made me laugh at Donald Trump and I ain't sorry about it 🤣 Trump had one installed in his private jet.
0:58 Todd howards claim about having "sixteen times the detail of fallout four" referencing fallout 76 is coming true!!
Tod howard: HEY HEY! 16 times the detail is MY motto!!!! Hands off!
I'm still in the camp that 4k is a scam and 1080 is all you need, just here to see someone more qualified's reasons
I have, and it looks barely any better while requiring far more powerful hardware and internet which all together make it ludicrously more expensive. AKA, a stupid gimmick meant to separate people of middling intellect from their money.
Fuck 8K I'm holding out for 32K.
The "what you should have" for every kind of device.
Phone: 1080p
Tablet: 1440p
Laptop/Monitor: 2k-4k
TV: 4k
Cinema: 8k or way more
This list is ridiculous, 1080 is fine for home items like phones, laptops and tablets. Tvs are fine at 1440p and even 1080p, it just rises the price for little to medium difference. 4k is fine for cinema as 8k doesn't give too much of a difference from what I've seen (could be due to by dying eyes).
I just h a t e this list because you placed tablet as 1440p and phones at 1080p, when was the last time you saw someone use a tablet casually for everday uses that isnt little kids, elders or people testing it out for reviews. HOME DEVICES ARE FINE AT 1080P
@@itstotallynotsai6577 this list is based on the size of the devices.
Maybe 1080p is enough for you and thats fine but 4k is just todays new standart and i have a pretty big tv and you can see the difference to a 1080p
@@NotAn_NPC thats a tv, of course a tv would have a higher resolution BUT WHY WOULD A TABLET HAVE 1440P
I know you say its based on size, but cmon. Tablets are fine at 1080p
Fun facts: 35MM film movies that were projected for over a century are close in resolution to 4K. When digital projection first hit the market they were projecting 2K images (so we took a step back in resolution). Now cinema projectors have caught up to 4K projection resolution (now back to the similar resolution of 4K). IMAX 70MM film has a resolution somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 to 12K. So higher resolutions are better, and we've used them for years, but you don't notice them until blown up on movie size screens.
“2020 olympics”
Emotional titanic flute music plays
Someone: I can't wait to watch the 2020 olympics on my 8k TV!
Coronavirus: you wish
Unless you are planning on getting a TV bigger than 55 inch there is no reason to go to 4k as well. That is the way I see it. 1440p on a small monitor is great over 1080p but not by that much but that is because you are sitting right in front of a monitor not a TV. I have a 40inch 1080p TV from Samsung that still looks amazing and has HDR as well. Almost looks like a 60 inch 4K would look. I don't think people really need a bigger than 65 inch 4K if their living rooms aren't far back of 20 feet. There is no reason to get bigger TVs unless you upgrade to a bigger living room or family room where it's 20+ feet back from the TV.
200K with all new microscope mode
Guy in 2075:
Remember 32k was like 100000$?
HotS Lights guy in 2348: remember when 186k was $1100?
@@GoogleUser-wf8mt Technology never stops, I do believe the whole resolution phase will slow down to catchup with 4k and 8k but I do believe it will continue.
@@GoogleUser-wf8mt But here we are at 8k. I personally can't tell, no matter location or time spending viewing an image, the difference between 1080p and 4k, but yet we still are arriving at 8k. With the "high end" and "cutting edge" type individual it's just about having the best possible technology for whatever reason and even though not practical, not everything in the market is practical.
More like 2077
Christ, it's a breath of relief just to watch a video that doesn't have commercials at the beginning.
"The upcoming 2020 Olympics"
I wonder how good thats going....
I was eating cereal when linus said eating your sugared cereal!!! Linus is now transdimensional!!!
I have 2021 vision, low resolution TV's make my eyes ache... I can tell the slightest difference in pixel count.. but I didn't have any eye problems before TV's went digital.
i do not think i will ever move from 1440p monitor since i have best of all worlds with it
@@1tangyboy no u
Still watching on my 720p PC.
Also having an old 4:3 picture tubed TV.
I have a pretty good pc but no monitor so I have to connect it to my 1366x768 TV 🤦♂️
@@shaansingh6048 I don't believe you have a 'pretty good' pc then my friend. I bought a not exactly high end (at it isn't Titan or 2080ti levels), but it's sorta close to high end being an RTX 2070 OC to play with, and even spending $1k on my pc, I still had to put out extra for a monitor because having a separate display for your pc use and your tv/console use is important, at least to me. I enjoy watching content on a big screen with high resolution, I like playing games on my Switch screen, I mean I'm focusing for games anyway, might as well have a smaller screen for me to focus at.
Raj Aryan Prince and a dinosaur as a pet
I want my 14" old tube tv that was in 1080i better res than my living room tv
@@TheGauges420 r/ woooosh
If i even got an 8k my internet can only stream at 360p at maximum with buffer every minutes
2:33 Hey Tokyo Olympics. Spring 2020 here to say go away till next year.
"Frank's 2000 Inch TV" song by Weird Al. We also need smellovision...
8K may have a purpose even without 8K content. Less chance of seeing pixels or moiré patterns. Even on smaller displays. Also greater possibilities of scaling lowres content via integer scaling, resulting in a sharper picture.
Can't wait to watch Linus drop stuff in 8K!
👍Alan Smithee reference! 😂🤣😎✌️
Excellent video Mr. Sebastian! I have a 43 inch 4k tcl. Love it! Got it on clearance from Best Buy. The greatest showman with hdr is unreal.
I don't see myself needing something more than an 1080 resolution (for personal use)
1440p is ok, and with a gtx 1080 ti, it will run it well.
@@coows at this point just get a 2080
@@minglee9288 true tho, since it will run 1440p much better than 2160p(4k)
But Linus, you already are my whole wall while I enjoy my sugared cereal!? How else can I listen to the tech gods!?
Standard fullhd? In Germany you must often pay for 1080P_HD TV programmes
Didn‘t expect someone to bring the same argument as I did lmao
1:03 16 times the detail...
Why does this seem familiar..?
8k 30hz wooo, we're actually going backwards.
MannYSJ Consoles be like
How about 2x2 interlaced 120hz?
Yeah I would pick 4K 120hz over 8k 30-60hz any day
No point going above 4k if your TV is up to 70'
wait a minute
"POTASSIUM poisoning"
"K?"
SNEAKY BASTARDS
I needed a few moments to get the joke. .-.
@@azarilh2355 potassium's atomic symbol (letter on the periodic table) is K
@@shaansingh6048 Yeah, i said i get it. .--.
People watching to much TV go outside for a walk instead
I haven’t turned my tv on in 2weeks haven’t missed a thing
Japanese people who purchased a 8K tv to watch 2020 OS In Japan.... SIKE Corona is a thing 😑
I've had a 4k tv for 4 years and I haven't used any 4k content except some ps4 pro games....
I’m not one to keep up with the very forefront of monitor tech, but I love the 2736px tall display of my Surface Pro. UA-cam vids look terrific when I go above 1080, and going all the way to 4k, though not natively possible, still gets me loads of that sweet sweet bitrate-proportional picture quality.
sounds like Hobbit talk.
@@atimholt The reason 4k videos on youtube look better than 1080p even if your monitor is only 1080p is because of compression. Compressing on 4k and downscaling to 1080p gives much lesser loss of detail than downscaling to hd and then compressing it. Both are worse than raw 1080p footage.
Brb, going to buy a 70k$ tv to watch the olympics
For that much money, you can just fly to Japan and watch every event live.
I really do not know who the heck these things are for. The internet in America can either barely handle 4k, or the wonderful data caps will kill this. It isnt for gaming because hardware cannot push it yet.
I'm still on 1080p and I'm fine with it tbh