I still think reality is the 8K advertising for both systems was thinking video media. No one ever really believed or truly thought 8K gaming. If 8K media boomed we’d have seen support. 8k 24hz is doable by both easily for an 8K Blu-ray.
it's a miracle we've gotten 4K transfers for home video disc/streaming. Studios aren't gonna pony-up to scan titles AGAIN for 8K. 4K is the end-of-the-line for the near future.
Nah because not even non-gaming media really got there. I just think they were going to offer it as an output option and for app distributors to take care of it at their own discretion but 8K interest never kicked on.
That's exactly what it was and this was even mentioned by Sony. The PS5 is capable of displaying 8K video. It's hilarious to see the amount of bobos in the comments here getting angry as if they have an 8K tv and expected games to be rendered at 8K.
You got the chroma subsampling explanation a bit wrong. The 3 digits of the "4:4:4" notation are not RGB, they are Y'CbCr, or "luma, chroma blue, chroma red". Well, sometimes. It depends on the underlying signal, which is RGB in this case. Also, the numbers are not simply "resolution", it's about the size of the sampling rectangle. "4:4:4" means no subsampling. Everything else involves some kind of reduction in color resolution. For desktop-style font rendering, it is noticeable (modern text rendering relies on subsampling). For normal gaming and media content, most people would not notice any degradation with even "4:2:0". Chroma subsampling has been wonderful for us, enabling us to push so much more content into our limited bandwidths and storage capacities. We would not have had the DVD and online streaming revolutions without it, at least not with such excellent picture quality.
Thank GOD. Someone else pointed this out. Surprising that a channel like this made this kind of mistake. A simple Google search too would correct them.
I seen 8k on the box and figured it was for streaming or other media, if content ever gets that high. Just a tech spec imo. The issue with 8k right now is the lack of hardware. If PC at the very high end can't hit 8k, a console can't either. I've seen a few 8k TVs and really couldn't tell the difference. I'd much rather have 4k higher FPS
It’s not the lack of hardware. With a standard graphics today, a game could definitely run at 8k on pc and consoles. It’s just that software needs to catch up, there’s literally no point in better hardware when you don’t have the software to utilize it.
No hardware today can't run 8K. Older games and less demanding games can definitely run at 8K no issue, my 6950 XT runs Life Is Strange 1 at 8K with 60fps just fine but that is still using most of the GPU's power at least. However trying to run Forza Horizon 5 at 8K is terrible and runs really badly below 30fps and pushes the vram limits and Forza Horizon 5 is a well optimised game that isn't anywhere close to as demanding as AAA UE5 games.
@@balloonb0y677 Yes UE5 titles are demanding, what are you on? UE5 inherently isn't demanding but AAA UE5 games are pushing graphics and features that increase the hardware requirements and make GPUs run the games worse and this includes consoles which now need 30fps caps or upscaling from very low render resolutions to hit 60fps. Devs and companies keep pushing ever more demanding graphics on these newer game engines and it means worse performance or cuts in other areas like resolution, if graphics were still like 2015 then 8K gaming would be quite viable but that isn't how thing are.
@@Hayden2447 you do know what the main innovation of UE5 was right? It was virtualized geometry and textures in which they named nanite. Basically, depending on the resolution of the game, it will only allow for a mixed amount of geometry and textures. One factual example is the first demo with ps5 that was rendered at 1440p and maxing our at 30million triangles although the actual amount of triangles in that instance was billions. And no nanite does not remove graphical quality, it retains the same look as the billions that are, and merely removes the need to render what is originally there, so the game could technically have an infinite amount of triangles and the nanite will only allow for 30million triangles to be rendered at 1440p. The only limitations is budget and the fact that nanite doesn’t work on bendable things, but that is soon to be resolved, I’m pretty sure it’s in the next update
But did anyone buy a PS5 for the sole purpose of playing or watching 8K content? The percentage of people with 8K capable displays is probably less than 1% of the total of display owners. So, what's the big fuss anyways?
@@Aki_LesbrincoSo if there is a class action suit where everyone involved would be set for some sort of refund, you're saying you won't participate??? That's great! More money for the rest of the people who were lied to 👍🏾
I doubt a full refund, but some sort. Microsoft had a class action suit over Windows (over $100 refund) and PS3 had one for the whole Linux situation (I think this was $25 refund). They won't give you the whole refund back for the cost of a PS5 🤣
Why are they due a refund? Just because they removed the logo from the box doesn't mean they're suddenly saying "Oh, we lied btw". Technically the support for "8k" (very vague as to WHAT exactly that even means) is still there.
"Can a human eye see 4K or 8K? Yes, human eyes can fully enjoy the clarity of 4K and 8K resolution. However, it's hard for human eyes to compare between the two. Your eyes can tell the difference between 8K and 4K resolution, but only if you have high visual acuity, or if you're extremely close to the screen."
We get diminishing returns the further we increase resolution. Native 4k will never look bad, IMO. 1440p is great, especially when it comes to monitors. I think 1080p still looks fine as a long as a game has well-implemented AA.
What's interesting with Apple's Vision Pro is that the 180 degree immersive video format they are pushing is so high res it's streaming an 8k video to the headset, and being filmed with 2 4k cameras. It's actually too low res video format and you can tell when inside the headset things are fuzzier. There's no way on the filmed footage to even crop things. I feel 8k video, or even higher is going to be what we need on headsets and the pipeline to render or edit video is going to be commonplace for them.
These marketing teams talk about 8K like there are no other aspects in games to improve, let's spend all this extra power on even higher and higher resolutions. Higher resolution isn't something that makes games great, it isn't something that makes even game graphics great.
You should try to dig up the international broadcasting standards agreements, where they set the agreed resolution progressions, makes it so clear that the 8k push by TV manufacturers was purely a marketing ploy to help generate sales after 4k sales started to wain. The envisioned reason for higher resolutions, by broadcasters, was actually a bad future prediction, almost science fictional; it was presumed that, at some point, we would start embedding screens directly into walls, whether as fitted displays or some kind of smart wallpaper. 1080p was expected to be good enough for displays that took up ¼ of a wall; 8k was the next step, expecting to take up ½ of a wall; 16k was the ultimate destination, with an entire wall becoming the display. The important point to note: 4k was never planned to be a display standard, that was created out of whole cloth by the TV industry. Knowing this, it quickly becomes clear the intent that resolution jumps were simply to match significant increases in screen size, to keep a reasonable pixel density rather than pushing for high ones.
4K was definitely a good move by the manufacturers, in hindsight. 1080p just doesn't have the pixel density for modern screen sizes and 8K is too big of a jump to be practical.
Remember when the 3090 was launching and Nvidia was pushing 8k as that cards main selling point? Including sending LTT a 30k TV to show it off lol Except most games crashed if you even tried it past the main menu and it only really became somewhat playable if you ran 8k combined with DLSS ultra performance mode which isn't really 8k at all. Just BS from top to bottom. Another reason 8k never became a thing is because physical media is dying. Pushing resolution happened first and best on whatever the latest newest blu-ray standard was. Now with streaming being the future (for now) everything is already compressed as it is and 8k would just require streamers to compress even harder. It just wouldn't look that much better and it would sky rocket the data required even when compressed. Overall just impractical for a streaming first landscape.
I still use a 1366x768 laptop and a 1440x900 19" LG pc monitor from 2008 😅 still works fine but it's gotten dim, the brightness isn't as good as it was new.
The ability to support an 8k tv doesn’t mean it can render 8k Yes it’s a scummy way to advertise but all adds are scummy. Expecting the ps5 to render 8k is ridiculous and everyone and their grandma could know that
@@murray821It doesn't matter how games render, what matters is if there is a display output option. If there was an output option of 7680 x 4320 then this wouldn't even be a debate because the compatibility is technically still there so this is a grey area at most because the HDMI standard still supports it in theory.
@@murray821Funny, because I argued with so many Ponies on this very channel just after it launched, that it simply hasn't got the grunt to be able to manage 8K gaming (and likely hadn't even for 4K 60fps). There defiantly where a lot of Ponies back then in the comment section, that fell for Sony's typical scummy marketing BS and where adamant and utterly believed that a PS5 could manage 8K gaming. BTW, it's the same damn idiots who are now defending it or playing it down by saying things like "Nobody even thought it could do 8K gaming, only support 8K TV's". Sorry!! but there where plenty of idiots who actually fell for the BS and actually believed that a PS5 could manage 8K gaming. Well at least there was back then. If you don't believe me, then just go back at look at the comment sections on old DF videos of this very subject matter, soon after the PS5 launched.
The fact that u bought the xperia phone because 4k tells me everything I need to know which is u have never seen 4k in ur life. The 4k on the xperia phone was a huge scam, cus the phone is literally too small for u to see 4k on it, also u havent seen 4k on ur tv either because u sit too far n ur tv is too small, search up 4k viewing distance chart u been giving urself placebo n getting ripped off. To see 4k on a tv at 55 inch u need to sit about 4 feet away which no one is doing in a living room, so for a living room u would need about 77 inch to see 4k.
@@Sideways_Singh um,ok why the hostility man? I currently own a 55 inch oled 4k TV and I'm more than happy with it. I can totally appreciate the jump in quality from watching 1080p content to watching in 4k, not to mention I can cast 4k content from my phone to my TV.
@@stephenhall2980 Ignore him he's a clown. He seems to think everyone's living in a mansion with a 2500 sq. ft living room. Many people (like me) don't even have a living room. The phone is also not literally too small for anyone to see 4K, it's just that the average person doesn't have an eye trained well enough to notice, or care. He's just spewing shit he read somewhere from "charts" and has no real world experience with different people and different living configurations.
While not today, 8k could be a thing one day but for it to make sense we'd need to break the current paradigm of TV sizes where most people have tvs between 55 to 75 inches and at that size + a normal viewing distance 8k doesn't make sense, but think about a time when 120"+ tvs become "affordable" and then you'll have a market since I see no problem with people wanting even larger displays.
8K is a fuckin' Joke outside of either a Cinema or a VR Headset... I had a 75" LCD nonHDR 4K TV ( before my current 77" OLED HDR one ) which at some point must have developed a dead Pixel I *_ONLY_* noticed when I got really close to check it for potential issues after the Movers had handled it. That dead Pixel was practically indistinguishable after about half the regular viewing distance and _absolutely _*_gone_* at a normal one of ~3m for a 75" TV which essentially means that 4K at 3m on a 75" TV already is well withing the Diminishing Returns of what you can percieve.
I always assumed the 8k was just for video, youtube , blurays, if sony was thinking 8k gaming, they must have been in a very short meeting about that one
It's definitely not a short meeting, because they need to calculate exactly how they market something, which "8K" and even "4K" (and "HD" before that) is about. - They take a loosely technical term, which they associate with something like "more better quality" to the public, and try to sell it on that premise. - I believe they're now dropping it to prevent lawsuits or something, especially since the cat is out of the bag and most sales have probably been made. - 8K is actually more likely to be for games first, as it's just a matter of pushing more pixels, and as soon as computers are more capable, it's gonna try to become the next standard. - Problem with video is, there barely are 8K sources, save for the few expensive documentaries and perhaps film-scans that were done at 8K or more. Even theaters tend to project at "2K" because, well, that's cheaper and also most movies tend to be mastered/produced at "2K", also for cost and time, even those that are put on 4K Blu-rays. - So it's kind of worse for video in that regard, as "virtual" video, that is like from a game-engine or the GPU-output, can be dictated to output actual resolutions at the source, which is scalable or dynamic. Video is just fixed and how much detail is in there will depend on the very source that we don't have access to (like the film-scan or sensors on the cameras).
@@LLJVBasshaha exactly these kids think they are going to get millions of dollars ... Each person would get 3 bucks if it ever even came to light lol..
Tell the Xbox guys to. Unless you are a complete moron the 8k was for media. Unfortunately 8k media did not and probably will not take off anytime soon
It will probably be a while since we havent maxed out visuals at 4k and most of these games are struggling to put out 30 FPS. Might be a few more gens, console wise.
There just isn't really any reason to push resolution anymore. Almost all the quality improvements we've had on TV's/Monitors don't come from resolution. HDR, 120hz, VRR and just better panel technology like OLED. 4k has been actively detrimental if anything since even on PC you need 600+ dollar GPU's to do it without upscaling. We'd have all been better off if 4k had been left as a high end large screen resolution and anything under 65" was 1440p instead.
@@devilmikey00 Great perspective. My main gaming is done about 5 feet from a 65 inch OLED display, so for me 4K made a huge difference, but I understand that alot of people dont sit that close or may be using PC monitors. Actually waiting on a 32 inch OLED PC monitor, and looking forward to shifting alot of my gaming over to that,w hile at the desk.
I mean to be fair even though Nvidia stopped marketing it, with the 4090 we are actually seeing some real AAA 8K solid 60 Ultra settings gaming on +5yo titles like BF5 / GTA 5 / RE7 / Dying Light / FH5 / COD MW ... Super intensive games like RDR2 or +2023 games like RE4 will run at solid 8K 30 which is somehow still "playable" by console standards. I can guarantee that the same performance will appear on PS6 some 4/5 years later. Even in consoles, true 4K gaming has been a thing since the XboxOne X in 2017 unlike the fake upscaling of the PS4 Pro which will probably happen again this year with the PS5 Pro, They'll claim it can do 8K but it's gonna upscale from a 5K resolution just like how the PS4 Pro was upscaling from 1440p. And 4K TVs are dirt cheap these days as long as you're not looking for OLED
@@Shockloadi remember thinking the PS2 slim could output 720p over the PS2 FATs 480p via a fancy new HDMI 1.1 or whatever. It was a Sony in 2004 who just made the PSP that could play AAA PS2 games in your pocket unlike Nintendo DS or GBA.
@@dorian6021 Yea, I sit about leg-length away from a 65" and I'm not gonna see individual pixels. I couldn't even see it on a 40-something inch 1080p screen. - It's not until I'm like half a meter away (or like a foot and a half) that I start seeing the "raster" of pixels, and even at that point, other than the image just being too large, I could "look past that". I did notice it more on a 27" 1080p monitor at arm's length, but I could still ignore it easily by just enjoying the image. But it's barely noticeable on a 32" or so 1600p screen at the same distance like I have now. I really have to lean forward, to like 30cm or closer, to really be able to see the pixels, so let alone 4K.
Well they could claim 8K stream, but even with the 3.5 year gap since released. There's still small 8K content. Nevertheless, you are right that Sony should get should get sued for false advertising. They are too cocky that can't be touch, since Microsoft throw in the towel in competing on console sale and exclusive games.
Hey, they said there is one game that technically supports it so it isn't false advertising. It said 8k on the box and there is 8k content available. I mean that's what they would try and argue in court.
I get what you're saying but if the thing can play some video content at 8K, then the 8K statement on the box might be ambiguous enough to make it true. Now if the statement in the box specifically said the system can play 8K games, then there might be some basis for a lawsuit. Honestly, I don't have a PS5. And have never paid much attention to what the box says. What is the exact quote on the box?
i remember thinking the PS2 slim could output 720p over the PS2 FATs 480p via a fancy new HDMI 1.0 or whatever. It was a Sony in 2004 who just made the PSP that could play AAA PS2 games in your pocket unlike Nintendo DS or GBA.
Huge tip for anyone having problems with their ps5 HDMI cables. Get Optical 2.1 HDMI cables, they are harder to connect as they are unidirectional but man picture is great as these cables never get hot. I've replaced all my copper cables with Optical and it's been awesome.
Honestly, I think 8k or even higher will be a display tech, but the content will be produced at the lower resolution. The purpose would be to mitigate display tech issues not express content.
Until 1440 p is considered the standard 8K is at least 10 years away still we thought that 1080p was going to be the standard 10 years ago and yet they're still games that struggle to hit that on consoles to this day natively
Only space 8k might still be of use would be some far flung future VR headset. Even then; the Apple vision pro is only 3,660 x 3,142px per eye and reviews said the screen door effect was non existent so 8k might be overkill there too. The GPU needed to drive that resolution at current visual quality expectations would require a small nuclear reactor to power it.
@@Jay053He doesn’t have any source because if he watched DF tech review he wouldn’t spew such doodoo. Most PS5 games are either native 4K @ 30fps/ at or near native 4K @ 30fps using DRS or native 1440p @ 60fps or at or near native 1440p @ 60fps using DRS. He’s just a hater with a pc that can only play minecraft 😂😂😂 Source: DF tech review
It never bothered me that 8K was on the box. I knew I was never going to get an 8K TV anyway. 4K is good enough. I didn't get the ps5 for 8K, I got it for 4K. I got what I paid for. No one believed ps5 would really do native 8K, most of us expected dynamic 8K at best.
On the side of the Xbox Series X it literally also says "8K HDR - Up to 8K High Dynamic Range". Neither Sony nor Microsoft claimed 8K gaming. The PS5 and XSX both have hdmi 2.1 which can display 8K video. Neither consoled enabled it at firmware level. There's no point. Even if they did you'd only have a handful of 8K video to watch on youtube which is compressed by youtube.
I'd like to see HDMI go away, and just use USB-C as the standard. HDMI can only be plugged in 1 direction, whereas USB-C can be plugged in at any direction, with faster bandwidth. USB-C is just super easy to work with. I feel like all of these panel manufacturers keep trying to improve old tech, when they already have new tech, likt USB-C. We have seen some TV panels come with USB-C, mostly likely due to some electronics supporting it, but we haven't seen a huge jump yet. Maybe we see the next PS5 Pro or Xbox Pro consoles support USB-C Display output. Not that it's going to make me upgrade my TV any time soon, but would be a nice addition for those who have a TV with a USB-C Displayport IN connection.
Can't believe people thought a $500 console was playing new games at 4k/60 fps . I was expecting 1080p/60 fps and 1440p/60 fps and that pretty well what I got .
I think 8K is kind of necessary on the absolute largest panels for the sake of pixel-density, which is why those 100" or whatever panels are 8K, besides the "marketing" or whatever you could call it. Because for that last thing, there definitely are people with deep pockets who "need" to have that highest-end thing and companies like LG and Samsung will definitely not mind taking advantage of those "whales". - I mean, we can get all up in arms about the most expensive things like 100" 8K screens when there are no proper sources to feed them, or supercars when you can barely use them to their full potential anywhere, or watches hand-made of exotic materials or what have you. But there are people who will buy them just because they can, which is probably also why these panel-companies only put out a few models and likely produce way fewer of them, so companies will consider that like whale-hunting, just like game-publishers put out very expensive DLC or micro-transactions (think "Star Citizen"). That said, I do think 8K has a purpose and that's, again, for those massive screens, if it's only for the sake of having enough pixels, as long as it has good upscaling. - And again, it's for those who can afford it and want to cover a big wall without resorting to projection, or events, or whatever. - But for the vast majority of the consumer-market, yea, it does not make sense and it's so overkill that it's not even a loss. - Let's also not ignore that most people will still "only" go up to a 55" for lack of space or budget, many will still have a smaller screen, whether that's because of the same reasons or the fact that they're using a monitor or laptop or tablet or whatever. - We can totally enjoy anything between 1080p and 4K with a discerning eye and most people don't even have that to begin with. It just becomes about the idea of "quality", even with "4K", like "It's called 4K so it's amazing." even if it's not even a good 4K or something. Like I bet way too many people think that streaming at 4K, even on UA-cam, is the best it can be, just like there is/was a trend of people putting "4K" in the titles and thumbnails of obviously-not-even-HD videos. - But so goes the market.
Surely Sonys in for a large class action lawsuit? They've falsely advertised what their machine could do for years. While never actually allowing the feature to do it, and were not even sure if the machine is capable of doing it.
I really wouldn't be surprised if they will probably now stick the "8K" nomenclature on the PS5 PRO box... And what's the novelty? Sony has been removing several advertised launch features since the PS3 days, just remember the "Other OS" removal on PS3; and the fact that by the time when PS3 arrived in Europe, they had already removed PS2 hardware compatibility from the PS3. And now with firmware updates, they can remove any feature they want, whenever they want... so you can't just trust them on keeping any feature throughout the whole console's lifecycle
Sony make false claims every generation. PS2 with its 80 million PPS claim (it's highest polygon game reached 6 million PPS with all effects on). Even this gen with its 'tempest sound engine' BS which is basically repurposing a 90s sound card. This is the first time they have done something honest and should be commended. Also 8K will always be overkill, unless you are a video or creative designer. 1080p is the max resolution a living room TV needs.
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you guys are saying. 1440 P 144hz is the sweet spot in my view. Given that there are diminishing returns the higher the refresh rate.
8K will probably always be pointless. I think the vast majority of people aren't even sitting close enough to their 4K panels to make a difference between 2K. In many cases even vs 1080p.
People said that about 4k. Until 4k content was readily available. I'm curious about the 8k demos I've seen are actually filmed in 8k or just upscaled.
@@Mycarisloose According to RTINGS for a typical 65" panel you need to sit within 4 ft (1.2m) or closer for the increased resolution over 4K to be apparent. These numbers change with panel size. Point is most people aren't hitting that number. Maybe you are. I don't know your situation. I would argue a lot of people aren't even hitting the viewing distance for 4K vs 1080p. For that it's about 8 ft (2.4m). Resolutions above 4K really only make sense for desktop computers with large screens that you are extremely close to. For TVs I don't think there are many household situations where anything over 4K makes sense.
In regards to ps5, I've never chosen quality mode over performance mode in any game so far. Resolution, ray tracing, enhanced effects .... give me my frames instead
Shouldn’t have put it there in the first place. 8K being a mainstream thing is still probably 10 years away and even then it will only really be noticeable on 70 inch screens or bigger.
Maybe it's just me but, I never took the 8K to refer to 8K gaming so much as movies. Anyways I think they did this as a last ditch effort to try and push it. Sony is a major manufacturer of cameras after all, especially in cinema.
8k is actually a ton better because it will remove the need for aliasing that causes ghosting and blurriness. So with a such high resolution, you can look at the truelly crisp and native resolution of a screen without any additional affects
@@FungeHucker I recall, it was the base PS4. Don’t remember if it was on the box exactly but they definitely talked about 4K for the base PS4. Think maybe it was just video? Assume PS5 was just doing the same but no one is making 8K content like they said so no point advertising it. Lol
@@LS-Lizzy Nobody can be this dense. The PS4 reveal in 2013 is still on youtube and not once did Mark Cerney mention 4k. The PS4 Pro was announced as 4K capable machine. It achieved 4K either natively or by using checkerboard rendering. DF did a whole episode in the past on every game that was native 4k 60fps on the PS4 Pro.
@@electrikoptik Where did I say Mark Cerny announced the base PS4 was 4K capable? I said Sony discussed 4K for the base PS4 back in 2013, I’m sure you can google and see for yourself I remember there being quite a few discussion about it at the time since 4K was becoming a big topic. My point was that manufactures like to talk about what the console will be capable of in the future even if it’s not ready at launch and never actually gets fully supported, though I’m sure if more 8K content was readily available Sony would be pushing the 8K capabilities of the PS5, it could easily support 8K content outside video games but like DF said there really isn’t any.
@@LS-Lizzy Again, you are remembering things wrong. The PS4 was officially announced on 21st of February 2013 during ‘see the future event’. This event is on youtube and nowhere during this event when the hardware is discussed with Mark Cerney is 4k mentioned. For context the very first 2160p TV (84inch) was launched on October 25 2012 by LG with a price of 20 thousand dollar. In 2013 smaller sized 4K tv launched with an average price of 6000 usd. The very first 4K blu-ray player, Samsung’s UBD-K8500 launched in 2016. I did some digging around and found one interview from 2013 by ‘stuff.tv’ with Mark where they ask Mark about 4k and Mark said and I quote: “Right now we’re focussing on 4K for media, and 1080p for games. Where we go in the future, we have to see. I’m very interested in 4K gaming. It’s just not a focus this year”. Sony’s very first 4K TV the 84 inch XBR-X900 was released in October 2012. This is what Mark means by “Right now we’re focussing on 4K for media”.
To piggyback this, I do believe it’spossible on Xbox. I’ve just got a new tv and I watch a lot of 4k HDR tech demos to test my screen out. I have both systems plus a PC and I did notice that while my systems may not support it. The videos that say 8k on UA-cam look way better on Xbox compared to ps5
Nothing uses 8k yet. There's 8k TVs but you can't even really watch TV or movies or anything in 8k yet. It was pretty silly that they even tried to say the PS5 would be able to do 8k. 8k is also stupidly expensive still
Resolution is very interesting to me because as I said years ago I can only see most displays getting to 4K at tops for the commercial market. The reason I say this is because there is no point in increasing constant resolution in screen sizes that are between 20 to 40 in and smaller. The only reason why you would want something beyond a k or even at AK is either you're putting it on a stupid lock screen like an IMAX screen or if you're putting it right in front of your eyeballs like the way an AR or VR headset does. Cuz that's the only way to justify the pixel density. Otherwise it's just a dick swinging number on a box. It doesn't really mean anything to the human eye. This is especially apparent because as someone who owns a 47-in TV, I'm always shocked when I encounter other gamers that are my age and younger, and they're playing on like these tiny 14-in 20-in screens. They're souped up PC games and Xbox and they're not even sitting at proper distances from them. Fine with that. People are now really used to Nintendo switch, steam deck and smartphones and you really see the lack of need of having higher resolutions because of the size of the screen. The only reason why smartphones have such high resolution is to do clear text like it's on a piece of paper. That's the only other use for something on that small of a screen. Everything else is just bubkiss.
I sort of question whether many people will even have a screen large enough to actually make 8k resolution noticeable by then. I don’t mean in terms of cost but the practicality of having a giant 80”-100”+ TV in your living room. TVs have trended larger over the years but there gets point where having such a large TV is outright unwieldy unless you have a huge home to put it in. I’m sure we’ll all still get it eventually - like how phone manufacturers put increasing high res screens on their devices despite the pixels being indistinguishable at this point, but only a small minority will actually be able to fully make use of it.
4K is old as hell and it still isn't that mainstream for gaming. For multimedia content "fake" 8K can probably become a norm but for gaming not anytime soon probably.
@@kmj4nsen Yeah, you haven't seen a single DF tech review huh? Here's a list of some of the most popular games released the last couple of years. Every resolution stated is the internal resolution. List is backed by DF tech review -MLB the show: native 2160p @60fps - Horizon Forbidden West: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps - The Last of Us 1 (remake): native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps - Gran Turismo 7: native 2160 @ 60fps á 100fps or 1440p @ 120fps - God of War: Ragnarök: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps - Uncharted legacy of thieves collection: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps - Elden Ring: native 2160p or 1440p @ 60fps - Demon's Soul: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps -Spiderman 2: 1440p to 2160p DRS @ 30fps or 1008p to 1440p DRS @ 60fps -Ratched & Clank: 1800p to 2160p DRS @ 30fps or 1620p to 1800p @ 60fps -FF7 intergrade:native 2160p @ 30fps (can drop to 1872p minimum at stresspoint) or 1512p @ 60fps -FF7 rebirth:at or near 2160p @ 30fps or 1152p @ 60fps -FF16: 1080p to 1440p DRS @ 30fps or 1080p @ 60fps -Stellarblade: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps -RE4 remake: 2160p checkerboard @ 60fps or 1944p @ 60fps -COD Modern Warfare II: dynamic 2160p @ 60fps -COD Modern Warefare III: dynamic 2160p @ 60fps -Alan Wake II: 1270p @ 30fps or 847p @ 60fps -Deathloop: 1836p to 2160p DRS @ 30fps or 1296p to 1440p DRS @ 60fps -A Plague Tale: Requiem: native 1440p @ 30fps or 1080p @ 60fps -F1 23: native 2160p @ 60fps or 1800p @ 60fps with RT -F1 24: native 2160p @ 60fps (can drop to 1800p in stress point) -Helldivers 2: 1440p @ 30fps or 1080p @ 60fps -FC24: native 2160p @ 60fps -Returnal: native 1080p @ 60fps temporal reconstruction to 1440p followed by checkerboard to 2160p -Deadspace remake: 2160p @ 30fps FSR2 or 1440p @ 60fps -Cyberpunk 2077: native 1440p RT mode or 1260 to 1728p @ 60fps I count 13 native 2160p games in the list.
They only removed it ... to put it back and heat 8k marketing on when PS6 arrives. But since PS5 does not run most games on 4k (more 1440p - 1800p) and especially in "2024-mode" with 60 fps between 1080p and 1440p... I *would bet money on that even PS6 is not going to be able to run games in 60fps AND native 2160p AND high details and effects like RT shadows or lumen!*
The lack of 8k was disappointing this generation, sure for modern games it would be impossible but something like Halo MCC can definitely can run at a dynamic 8k 60 fps.
@Radek494 120 fps is useless and in the case MCC it struggles to hit it on H2A and breaks the game. 8k would give a more sharp image and would basically get rid of aliasing.
@@deathtrooper2048there are substantially cheaper ways to do anti aliasing, like for example using anti aliasing. The difference between 4k to 8k is so small that the power saved is enough of an argument to not do 8k
@@urmomma2688 Which is why I said for older (specifically games that got enhanced for series X and didn't get any meaningful upgrades apart from a fps boost) games. Series X has the GPU power to run something like Halo MCC or Forza Horizon 4 at 8k native (same fps as xbox one as well).
I mean nobody did and nobody does now. It was just something every company was trying to push to sell new TV's in 2020 (Higher number better!!) but when content never came, the push died out.
There are too few people with 8k tvs to complain about it which is why they are getting away with it. And tbf the owners of 8k tvs are the only people in the position to complain. Everyone else doesnt have the data to know it doesn't work.
A lot depends on the developers to take up this idea and incorporate it into the software as you know that the stumbling block. The hardware may be available, but the games are not designed for 8k. They could incorporate in the foreseeable future but unless they demand is there at this moment in time no. You may get some interest in the next generation but not the pro. Even though they will probably integrate it. But in the mainstream of software as you know there isn’t much call because people I haven’t got TVs or monitors 8K.. the market has to conclude that the fact that if they’re going to bring this type of development to market they have to collaborate more and buy collaborating. I mean in respect that the products that bring out need to have 8k. You can’t have PCs as you know at that that’s not an issue it’s monitors TVs so on and so forth you know the stomach block.. bye for now take care of your friends and family
13:47 - Sure, but I don't agree with this whole sentiment of "1440p being the sweet spot", cause I sit at a 38" 21:9 1600p screen at arm's length here, which is the equivalent of a 30" 16:9 screen for context, and this is just enough to not see the pixels obviously, at least at this distance. - So, once again, where is that REAL in-between that is 1620p?... What is with this endless 720p-derivative that is 1440p??... I don't think that's the way at all. - Yea, I agree with higher refresh-rates, though... I'm good with 120Hz, especially on OLED, or maybe double that up to 240Hz indeed with frame-generation where possible. But make that at least 1620p or I don't want it. - I'm actually going to move to a 42" 16:9 4K panel, not necessarily because of 4K, though it's a nice bonus for some use cases, but I will probably still run a bunch of games at 1620p 21:9 for the extra content on the sides. It's still nice to have that tight resolution, especially on larger panels in your face. - And we're getting to the point that it's not that hard to run anymore anyway, even at pretty high framerates. - So I say why not just both, but don't go crazy on either.
It was funny watching all these fan boys when the PlayStation first came out like I can do 8K I can do 8K I was like yeah OK my 3090 TI can’t even do 8K 😂 my 4090 can though lol. The only way I could see the PS5 doing 8K would be movies like streaming Netflix whenever Netflix supports 8K lol
Pixel count is not in correlation with Resolution by the power consumption. HDMI 2.1 cable is just making efitient communication between Consoles or Computer and Display and otherwise it's not the thing that is burden. 8K will be late for PS5 Pro because already it's off the list of goals for most developers. HDMI cable is not properly protected and can be influenced by interfering signals from all-around electric devices but mostly electrical installations and internet which can be from a neighbor and that's it, but 32GB transfer rate is quite enough and it's standard 32GB is 1 hour of 4K 60 transfer and 40GB is an improvise which is typical for PCs and the users who are think that more is better or faster is better and in fact the truth is as always the middle. Next generation of standards for RAM will be interesting because it will heat up crazy, and CPU will be A.I. / Mashine Learning optimized for taking advantage from the internet Cloud Servers communication and co operation. Motherboards won't have compatibility with current RAM Formats and that's why video game companies in sumiraze and they're aiming for micro transactions and NFT's and it's successful by now despite the critiques. Microsoft didn't have Monopoly and they are not responsible for what is coming.... Think it's not illegal yet. Recent Trend is investment back for Windows 10 so ask your self why or you are ready for subscription's for Internet Providers, Computers and OS maintenance but what is more here are all Professional Software Companies because they are already have problems with every update and Subscription would be enough for making everything working before Updates occur which is good for users but more expenses would be too much and already is.
Why would you care they removed the 8K does the console support 8K anyways if you really want 8K you go buy the 3090 or 4090 graphics card for your PC and play your games in 8K that’s why my PC has the 8K TV not my PS5 that never had 8K in the beginning it’s not good to lie to consumers they buy your products you tell the truth not make things up
Real talk: the law of diminishing returns is hitting resolution and framerate really hard at 7680×4320 pixels and 240 Hz, respectively. Stop pushing ludicrous resolutions and framerates, and start focusing on aesthetically pleasing graphics.
TV companies have reinvented 1080p TVs full HD.. fire high definition.. why not redo 4k TV's an monitors.. I just want a good 2.1 input Nice looking picture.. so I could at least take advantage of what I have an cheap price is everything nowadays. I still don't own an OLED.. or 120hrtz.. 2.1 TV' because I am tired of spending thousands on a TV.. that goes out 3 or 4 years.. it's ridiculous. Some TV manufacturers should be banned.. crappy expensive crap
Xbox 60/120 setting is not about frames. You simply choose the size of the HDMI video bandwidth between hdmi 2.0 (14,40 Gbit/s) and 2.1 (42,6 Gbit/s). This is the worst possible solution applied to the console. In addition, the console doesn't change the amount of Hz depending on the game just always pushes 120Hz, so there are problems such as color bending, white haze on vrr, etc. Even there are problems with pad input and strange input fluctuations due to this. Since the console's launch, they've almost "fixed" it (that's just against industry standards), but many games still have problems. Especially the very old ones like Call of Duty Black Ops 1 from xbox 360. To understand the problem more clearly, imagine that Apple TV pushes, for example, 60Hz on a 24-frame movie, instead of displaying it natively in 24. This is simply wrong. That's what Xbox is doing with games by pushing 30/60 frames at 120Hz.
![Mario Kart: Super Circuit - Credits [Oscilloscope Deconstruction]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vXFYaGxP-wc/mqdefault.jpg)
I can't believe companies are just getting away with false advertising, willy nilly
Let me sell you a bridge!
In Australia it's illegal prob why it was removed
That's Sony for you
@@glenmcl On the side of the Xbox Series X it literally also says "8K HDR - Up to 8K High Dynamic Range".
@@glenmcl It's also on the trashbox series x box lol
I still think reality is the 8K advertising for both systems was thinking video media.
No one ever really believed or truly thought 8K gaming.
If 8K media boomed we’d have seen support. 8k 24hz is doable by both easily for an 8K Blu-ray.
Yep I always thought it was for 8k media streaming if 8k TVs took off.
it's a miracle we've gotten 4K transfers for home video disc/streaming. Studios aren't gonna pony-up to scan titles AGAIN for 8K. 4K is the end-of-the-line for the near future.
Nah because not even non-gaming media really got there. I just think they were going to offer it as an output option and for app distributors to take care of it at their own discretion but 8K interest never kicked on.
yup it was for content but people or too slow
That's exactly what it was and this was even mentioned by Sony. The PS5 is capable of displaying 8K video.
It's hilarious to see the amount of bobos in the comments here getting angry as if they have an 8K tv and expected games to be rendered at 8K.
You got the chroma subsampling explanation a bit wrong. The 3 digits of the "4:4:4" notation are not RGB, they are Y'CbCr, or "luma, chroma blue, chroma red". Well, sometimes. It depends on the underlying signal, which is RGB in this case. Also, the numbers are not simply "resolution", it's about the size of the sampling rectangle. "4:4:4" means no subsampling. Everything else involves some kind of reduction in color resolution.
For desktop-style font rendering, it is noticeable (modern text rendering relies on subsampling). For normal gaming and media content, most people would not notice any degradation with even "4:2:0". Chroma subsampling has been wonderful for us, enabling us to push so much more content into our limited bandwidths and storage capacities. We would not have had the DVD and online streaming revolutions without it, at least not with such excellent picture quality.
Thank GOD. Someone else pointed this out. Surprising that a channel like this made this kind of mistake. A simple Google search too would correct them.
Digital Frauds
How is that not a lawsuit for false advertisement. Someone explain
Because theoretically there are games and media they can run in 8k but it would be like pixel stuff lol
Because no one actually ever cared? Feel free to launch the class action lawsuit. I’ll even sign up. 🤷🏻♂️
It takes money to take a company to court and Sony has plenty of money with which to fight back.
good luck draining your money
Not more than me. I saved up for 20 years so I'm ready to take on Sony who's with me?@@TonkarzOfSolSystem
I remember when they claimed Watch_Dogs would be 1080p 60 fps only on ps4 last Gen
I seen 8k on the box and figured it was for streaming or other media, if content ever gets that high. Just a tech spec imo.
The issue with 8k right now is the lack of hardware. If PC at the very high end can't hit 8k, a console can't either. I've seen a few 8k TVs and really couldn't tell the difference. I'd much rather have 4k higher FPS
It’s not the lack of hardware. With a standard graphics today, a game could definitely run at 8k on pc and consoles. It’s just that software needs to catch up, there’s literally no point in better hardware when you don’t have the software to utilize it.
No hardware today can't run 8K. Older games and less demanding games can definitely run at 8K no issue, my 6950 XT runs Life Is Strange 1 at 8K with 60fps just fine but that is still using most of the GPU's power at least. However trying to run Forza Horizon 5 at 8K is terrible and runs really badly below 30fps and pushes the vram limits and Forza Horizon 5 is a well optimised game that isn't anywhere close to as demanding as AAA UE5 games.
@@Hayden2447 UE5 titles aren’t demanding. And its not about hardware, it’s about virtualized technology
@@balloonb0y677 Yes UE5 titles are demanding, what are you on? UE5 inherently isn't demanding but AAA UE5 games are pushing graphics and features that increase the hardware requirements and make GPUs run the games worse and this includes consoles which now need 30fps caps or upscaling from very low render resolutions to hit 60fps. Devs and companies keep pushing ever more demanding graphics on these newer game engines and it means worse performance or cuts in other areas like resolution, if graphics were still like 2015 then 8K gaming would be quite viable but that isn't how thing are.
@@Hayden2447 you do know what the main innovation of UE5 was right? It was virtualized geometry and textures in which they named nanite. Basically, depending on the resolution of the game, it will only allow for a mixed amount of geometry and textures. One factual example is the first demo with ps5 that was rendered at 1440p and maxing our at 30million triangles although the actual amount of triangles in that instance was billions. And no nanite does not remove graphical quality, it retains the same look as the billions that are, and merely removes the need to render what is originally there, so the game could technically have an infinite amount of triangles and the nanite will only allow for 30million triangles to be rendered at 1440p. The only limitations is budget and the fact that nanite doesn’t work on bendable things, but that is soon to be resolved, I’m pretty sure it’s in the next update
What is the point of dropping it now? All the sales that have already happened are due a full refund for their consoles if they demand it anyways...
But did anyone buy a PS5 for the sole purpose of playing or watching 8K content? The percentage of people with 8K capable displays is probably less than 1% of the total of display owners. So, what's the big fuss anyways?
@@Aki_LesbrincoSo if there is a class action suit where everyone involved would be set for some sort of refund, you're saying you won't participate??? That's great! More money for the rest of the people who were lied to 👍🏾
I doubt a full refund, but some sort. Microsoft had a class action suit over Windows (over $100 refund) and PS3 had one for the whole Linux situation (I think this was $25 refund). They won't give you the whole refund back for the cost of a PS5 🤣
Why are they due a refund? Just because they removed the logo from the box doesn't mean they're suddenly saying "Oh, we lied btw". Technically the support for "8k" (very vague as to WHAT exactly that even means) is still there.
@@Aki_Lesbrinco Read the comments here and you'll see it's mostly people that don't even own a PS5 getting angry. Very odd.
"Can a human eye see 4K or 8K? Yes, human eyes can fully enjoy the clarity of 4K and 8K resolution. However, it's hard for human eyes to compare between the two. Your eyes can tell the difference between 8K and 4K resolution, but only if you have high visual acuity, or if you're extremely close to the screen."
I thought it was more about vibrance, 8k is just more pleasing to look at despite not being able to “see” the difference
We get diminishing returns the further we increase resolution. Native 4k will never look bad, IMO. 1440p is great, especially when it comes to monitors. I think 1080p still looks fine as a long as a game has well-implemented AA.
8K is the quality of most film, so yes.
I'm glad I picked up the 8K version before they pulled it 😅
What's interesting with Apple's Vision Pro is that the 180 degree immersive video format they are pushing is so high res it's streaming an 8k video to the headset, and being filmed with 2 4k cameras. It's actually too low res video format and you can tell when inside the headset things are fuzzier. There's no way on the filmed footage to even crop things. I feel 8k video, or even higher is going to be what we need on headsets and the pipeline to render or edit video is going to be commonplace for them.
Correction, they have new dual 8k camera setups but need to output the rendered files at 8K. But they have overlap from each camera too
These marketing teams talk about 8K like there are no other aspects in games to improve, let's spend all this extra power on even higher and higher resolutions. Higher resolution isn't something that makes games great, it isn't something that makes even game graphics great.
You should try to dig up the international broadcasting standards agreements, where they set the agreed resolution progressions, makes it so clear that the 8k push by TV manufacturers was purely a marketing ploy to help generate sales after 4k sales started to wain.
The envisioned reason for higher resolutions, by broadcasters, was actually a bad future prediction, almost science fictional; it was presumed that, at some point, we would start embedding screens directly into walls, whether as fitted displays or some kind of smart wallpaper.
1080p was expected to be good enough for displays that took up ¼ of a wall; 8k was the next step, expecting to take up ½ of a wall; 16k was the ultimate destination, with an entire wall becoming the display. The important point to note: 4k was never planned to be a display standard, that was created out of whole cloth by the TV industry.
Knowing this, it quickly becomes clear the intent that resolution jumps were simply to match significant increases in screen size, to keep a reasonable pixel density rather than pushing for high ones.
4K was definitely a good move by the manufacturers, in hindsight. 1080p just doesn't have the pixel density for modern screen sizes and 8K is too big of a jump to be practical.
Exactly, 4K is also exactly twice as many pixels on each axis thus 4 times as many pixels as 1080p so it makes a lot of sense as a standard.
Remember when the 3090 was launching and Nvidia was pushing 8k as that cards main selling point? Including sending LTT a 30k TV to show it off lol Except most games crashed if you even tried it past the main menu and it only really became somewhat playable if you ran 8k combined with DLSS ultra performance mode which isn't really 8k at all. Just BS from top to bottom.
Another reason 8k never became a thing is because physical media is dying. Pushing resolution happened first and best on whatever the latest newest blu-ray standard was. Now with streaming being the future (for now) everything is already compressed as it is and 8k would just require streamers to compress even harder. It just wouldn't look that much better and it would sky rocket the data required even when compressed. Overall just impractical for a streaming first landscape.
At that point it's just 1440p 💀
@@deathtrooper2048 8k ultra perf is 1440p
@@WinterSnowism Even worse
Pure marketing BS
HOW DAre you , CONSOOM
I still use a 1366x768 laptop and a 1440x900 19" LG pc monitor from 2008 😅 still works fine but it's gotten dim, the brightness isn't as good as it was new.
Wonder if this could turn into a class action lawsuit similar to the custom OS fiasco from the PS3 era
The ability to support an 8k tv doesn’t mean it can render 8k
Yes it’s a scummy way to advertise but all adds are scummy.
Expecting the ps5 to render 8k is ridiculous and everyone and their grandma could know that
@@murray821 I know that but my grandma certainly doesn't
There was a game that rendered in 8k and down sampled to 4k.@@murray821
@@murray821It doesn't matter how games render, what matters is if there is a display output option. If there was an output option of 7680 x 4320 then this wouldn't even be a debate because the compatibility is technically still there so this is a grey area at most because the HDMI standard still supports it in theory.
@@murray821Funny, because I argued with so many Ponies on this very channel just after it launched, that it simply hasn't got the grunt to be able to manage 8K gaming (and likely hadn't even for 4K 60fps). There defiantly where a lot of Ponies back then in the comment section, that fell for Sony's typical scummy marketing BS and where adamant and utterly believed that a PS5 could manage 8K gaming.
BTW, it's the same damn idiots who are now defending it or playing it down by saying things like "Nobody even thought it could do 8K gaming, only support 8K TV's".
Sorry!! but there where plenty of idiots who actually fell for the BS and actually believed that a PS5 could manage 8K gaming. Well at least there was back then.
If you don't believe me, then just go back at look at the comment sections on old DF videos of this very subject matter, soon after the PS5 launched.
It's for 80" 8K 120hz CRT monitors from 1989.
I'm glad to see folks aren't falling for this 8K upsell. I've talked to many people who say they can't see the difference between 1080P and 4K!
4k was a big thing for me,I bought a Sony Xperia phone with a 4k screen,a PS4 pro and a 4k TV in 2017 and I definitely noticed the difference.
The fact that u bought the xperia phone because 4k tells me everything I need to know which is u have never seen 4k in ur life. The 4k on the xperia phone was a huge scam, cus the phone is literally too small for u to see 4k on it, also u havent seen 4k on ur tv either because u sit too far n ur tv is too small, search up 4k viewing distance chart u been giving urself placebo n getting ripped off. To see 4k on a tv at 55 inch u need to sit about 4 feet away which no one is doing in a living room, so for a living room u would need about 77 inch to see 4k.
@@Sideways_Singh um,ok why the hostility man? I currently own a 55 inch oled 4k TV and I'm more than happy with it. I can totally appreciate the jump in quality from watching 1080p content to watching in 4k, not to mention I can cast 4k content from my phone to my TV.
@@Sideways_Singh Tell me you've never sold TVs without actually telling me you've never sold TVs.
@@stephenhall2980 Ignore him he's a clown. He seems to think everyone's living in a mansion with a 2500 sq. ft living room. Many people (like me) don't even have a living room. The phone is also not literally too small for anyone to see 4K, it's just that the average person doesn't have an eye trained well enough to notice, or care. He's just spewing shit he read somewhere from "charts" and has no real world experience with different people and different living configurations.
While not today, 8k could be a thing one day but for it to make sense we'd need to break the current paradigm of TV sizes where most people have tvs between 55 to 75 inches and at that size + a normal viewing distance 8k doesn't make sense, but think about a time when 120"+ tvs become "affordable" and then you'll have a market since I see no problem with people wanting even larger displays.
8K is a fuckin' Joke outside of either a Cinema or a VR Headset... I had a 75" LCD nonHDR 4K TV ( before my current 77" OLED HDR one ) which at some point must have developed a dead Pixel I *_ONLY_* noticed when I got really close to check it for potential issues after the Movers had handled it. That dead Pixel was practically indistinguishable after about half the regular viewing distance and _absolutely _*_gone_* at a normal one of ~3m for a 75" TV which essentially means that 4K at 3m on a 75" TV already is well withing the Diminishing Returns of what you can percieve.
I always assumed the 8k was just for video, youtube , blurays, if sony was thinking 8k gaming, they must have been in a very short meeting about that one
It's definitely not a short meeting, because they need to calculate exactly how they market something, which "8K" and even "4K" (and "HD" before that) is about. - They take a loosely technical term, which they associate with something like "more better quality" to the public, and try to sell it on that premise. - I believe they're now dropping it to prevent lawsuits or something, especially since the cat is out of the bag and most sales have probably been made. - 8K is actually more likely to be for games first, as it's just a matter of pushing more pixels, and as soon as computers are more capable, it's gonna try to become the next standard. - Problem with video is, there barely are 8K sources, save for the few expensive documentaries and perhaps film-scans that were done at 8K or more. Even theaters tend to project at "2K" because, well, that's cheaper and also most movies tend to be mastered/produced at "2K", also for cost and time, even those that are put on 4K Blu-rays. - So it's kind of worse for video in that regard, as "virtual" video, that is like from a game-engine or the GPU-output, can be dictated to output actual resolutions at the source, which is scalable or dynamic. Video is just fixed and how much detail is in there will depend on the very source that we don't have access to (like the film-scan or sensors on the cameras).
Just shows how shady Sony is
You’ve not looked at Xbox packaging have you?
Sony and Xbox are shady. I'm switching to pc
It's on the trashbox box too fanboy 😅
Sounds like class action suit for everyone who still has the original box 🤔
Neat, I still have mine and could use an extra $3.50
@@LLJVBasshaha exactly these kids think they are going to get millions of dollars ... Each person would get 3 bucks if it ever even came to light lol..
Tell the Xbox guys to. Unless you are a complete moron the 8k was for media. Unfortunately 8k media did not and probably will not take off anytime soon
It will probably be a while since we havent maxed out visuals at 4k and most of these games are struggling to put out 30 FPS. Might be a few more gens, console wise.
Consoles will become faster, but games will become harder to run. 8k is too much resolution and the extra gpu power is better used elsewhere
There just isn't really any reason to push resolution anymore. Almost all the quality improvements we've had on TV's/Monitors don't come from resolution. HDR, 120hz, VRR and just better panel technology like OLED. 4k has been actively detrimental if anything since even on PC you need 600+ dollar GPU's to do it without upscaling. We'd have all been better off if 4k had been left as a high end large screen resolution and anything under 65" was 1440p instead.
@@urmomma2688 Makes sense. It seems like a horrible idea with current hardware limitations.
@@devilmikey00 Great perspective. My main gaming is done about 5 feet from a 65 inch OLED display, so for me 4K made a huge difference, but I understand that alot of people dont sit that close or may be using PC monitors. Actually waiting on a 32 inch OLED PC monitor, and looking forward to shifting alot of my gaming over to that,w hile at the desk.
8K being a selling point for the PS5 didn’t make sense to me because it seemed like the 4K era had just barely started. I don’t even own a 4K TV yet.
I mean to be fair even though Nvidia stopped marketing it, with the 4090 we are actually seeing some real AAA 8K solid 60 Ultra settings gaming on +5yo titles like BF5 / GTA 5 / RE7 / Dying Light / FH5 / COD MW ...
Super intensive games like RDR2 or +2023 games like RE4 will run at solid 8K 30 which is somehow still "playable" by console standards. I can guarantee that the same performance will appear on PS6 some 4/5 years later.
Even in consoles, true 4K gaming has been a thing since the XboxOne X in 2017 unlike the fake upscaling of the PS4 Pro which will probably happen again this year with the PS5 Pro, They'll claim it can do 8K but it's gonna upscale from a 5K resolution just like how the PS4 Pro was upscaling from 1440p.
And 4K TVs are dirt cheap these days as long as you're not looking for OLED
@@ShockloadOLED is old. miniLED is what you want.
@@Shockloadi remember thinking the PS2 slim could output 720p over the PS2 FATs 480p via a fancy new HDMI 1.1 or whatever. It was a Sony in 2004 who just made the PSP that could play AAA PS2 games in your pocket unlike Nintendo DS or GBA.
Same reason why most smartphones are 1080p.
Small screens...not noticeable
@@dorian6021 Yea, I sit about leg-length away from a 65" and I'm not gonna see individual pixels. I couldn't even see it on a 40-something inch 1080p screen. - It's not until I'm like half a meter away (or like a foot and a half) that I start seeing the "raster" of pixels, and even at that point, other than the image just being too large, I could "look past that".
I did notice it more on a 27" 1080p monitor at arm's length, but I could still ignore it easily by just enjoying the image. But it's barely noticeable on a 32" or so 1600p screen at the same distance like I have now. I really have to lean forward, to like 30cm or closer, to really be able to see the pixels, so let alone 4K.
Simply false advertising. Shame there was no lawsuit against Sony and Microsoft.
Sony*
Well they could claim 8K stream, but even with the 3.5 year gap since released. There's still small 8K content. Nevertheless, you are right that Sony should get should get sued for false advertising. They are too cocky that can't be touch, since Microsoft throw in the towel in competing on console sale and exclusive games.
Hey, they said there is one game that technically supports it so it isn't false advertising. It said 8k on the box and there is 8k content available. I mean that's what they would try and argue in court.
Then do it gangsta
I get what you're saying but if the thing can play some video content at 8K, then the 8K statement on the box might be ambiguous enough to make it true. Now if the statement in the box specifically said the system can play 8K games, then there might be some basis for a lawsuit. Honestly, I don't have a PS5. And have never paid much attention to what the box says. What is the exact quote on the box?
Dolby Vision uses a RGB tunneling container. So basically many people will see DV reported as 8 bit at 4:4:4
8k is stupid
then it means that those who play on PlayStation are very stupid because I know more than one person who has fallen for it
It won't be later
U would need like an 80+ inch sceeen tv
even 4k is stupid imo. I'd even much rather we got proper stereoscopic 3D gaming without VR on a display than 4k
@@via_negativa6183
4K Stereoscopic 3D might be cool,
But I personally wouldn't downgrade to 1080p or 1440p for it.
Talk about their replacement numbers who will gonna count them???
Ive had 4K pc monitor for ages and its great but im still rocking a 1080p plasma as a tv and it works fine. No gaming just 1080p movies and tv shows.
i remember thinking the PS2 slim could output 720p over the PS2 FATs 480p via a fancy new HDMI 1.0 or whatever. It was a Sony in 2004 who just made the PSP that could play AAA PS2 games in your pocket unlike Nintendo DS or GBA.
Huge tip for anyone having problems with their ps5 HDMI cables.
Get Optical 2.1 HDMI cables, they are harder to connect as they are unidirectional but man picture is great as these cables never get hot.
I've replaced all my copper cables with Optical and it's been awesome.
Does it help with game responsiveness and even if you only have 2.0 port asking for a friend
Honestly, I think 8k or even higher will be a display tech, but the content will be produced at the lower resolution. The purpose would be to mitigate display tech issues not express content.
Until 1440 p is considered the standard 8K is at least 10 years away still we thought that 1080p was going to be the standard 10 years ago and yet they're still games that struggle to hit that on consoles to this day natively
Pretty sure it was for added for movies
Only space 8k might still be of use would be some far flung future VR headset. Even then; the Apple vision pro is only 3,660 x 3,142px per eye and reviews said the screen door effect was non existent so 8k might be overkill there too. The GPU needed to drive that resolution at current visual quality expectations would require a small nuclear reactor to power it.
People have stopped going higher resolutions for high frame rates because that’s where the GPU market is right now with the 8GB nvidia card issue.
What about 8k movies ?
No way to watch movies or series in 8K.
Would be nice if Sony starts including usb-c display out at some point. HDMI needs to be nudged towards its obsolescence.
Though I doubt they will.
Couldn't even do 1440p.
Source?
To be fair that less of Sony's fault and more to do more lazy 3rd party devs
Output is still available so that's not even a debate. Don't conflate the max display output with the game's target resolution rendering output.
@@Jay053He doesn’t have any source because if he watched DF tech review he wouldn’t spew such doodoo. Most PS5 games are either native 4K @ 30fps/ at or near native 4K @ 30fps using DRS or native 1440p @ 60fps or at or near native 1440p @ 60fps using DRS. He’s just a hater with a pc that can only play minecraft 😂😂😂
Source: DF tech review
@@electrikoptikPS5 at launch didn't support 1440p displays.
So, how do it complain to them for false advertisement?
On Xbox, does HDR10 4K 120hz (4:4:4) have advantages versus using Dolby Vision 4K 120hz (4:2:2) ?
It never bothered me that 8K was on the box. I knew I was never going to get an 8K TV anyway. 4K is good enough. I didn't get the ps5 for 8K, I got it for 4K. I got what I paid for. No one believed ps5 would really do native 8K, most of us expected dynamic 8K at best.
On the side of the Xbox Series X it literally also says "8K HDR - Up to 8K High Dynamic Range".
Neither Sony nor Microsoft claimed 8K gaming. The PS5 and XSX both have hdmi 2.1 which can display 8K video. Neither consoled enabled it at firmware level. There's no point. Even if they did you'd only have a handful of 8K video to watch on youtube which is compressed by youtube.
Not the same. PS5 HDMI really doesn't allow for it, and they advertised in giant gold letters on the front.
I'd like to see HDMI go away, and just use USB-C as the standard. HDMI can only be plugged in 1 direction, whereas USB-C can be plugged in at any direction, with faster bandwidth. USB-C is just super easy to work with. I feel like all of these panel manufacturers keep trying to improve old tech, when they already have new tech, likt USB-C. We have seen some TV panels come with USB-C, mostly likely due to some electronics supporting it, but we haven't seen a huge jump yet. Maybe we see the next PS5 Pro or Xbox Pro consoles support USB-C Display output. Not that it's going to make me upgrade my TV any time soon, but would be a nice addition for those who have a TV with a USB-C Displayport IN connection.
Can't believe people thought a $500 console was playing new games at 4k/60 fps .
I was expecting 1080p/60 fps and 1440p/60 fps and that pretty well what I got .
I think 8K is kind of necessary on the absolute largest panels for the sake of pixel-density, which is why those 100" or whatever panels are 8K, besides the "marketing" or whatever you could call it. Because for that last thing, there definitely are people with deep pockets who "need" to have that highest-end thing and companies like LG and Samsung will definitely not mind taking advantage of those "whales". - I mean, we can get all up in arms about the most expensive things like 100" 8K screens when there are no proper sources to feed them, or supercars when you can barely use them to their full potential anywhere, or watches hand-made of exotic materials or what have you. But there are people who will buy them just because they can, which is probably also why these panel-companies only put out a few models and likely produce way fewer of them, so companies will consider that like whale-hunting, just like game-publishers put out very expensive DLC or micro-transactions (think "Star Citizen").
That said, I do think 8K has a purpose and that's, again, for those massive screens, if it's only for the sake of having enough pixels, as long as it has good upscaling. - And again, it's for those who can afford it and want to cover a big wall without resorting to projection, or events, or whatever. - But for the vast majority of the consumer-market, yea, it does not make sense and it's so overkill that it's not even a loss. - Let's also not ignore that most people will still "only" go up to a 55" for lack of space or budget, many will still have a smaller screen, whether that's because of the same reasons or the fact that they're using a monitor or laptop or tablet or whatever. - We can totally enjoy anything between 1080p and 4K with a discerning eye and most people don't even have that to begin with. It just becomes about the idea of "quality", even with "4K", like "It's called 4K so it's amazing." even if it's not even a good 4K or something. Like I bet way too many people think that streaming at 4K, even on UA-cam, is the best it can be, just like there is/was a trend of people putting "4K" in the titles and thumbnails of obviously-not-even-HD videos. - But so goes the market.
Surely Sonys in for a large class action lawsuit? They've falsely advertised what their machine could do for years. While never actually allowing the feature to do it, and were not even sure if the machine is capable of doing it.
I still see so many consoles in my country (where they are stupidly expensive) still sittin on the shelves since 2020 havin 8k on the boxes lmao
is anyone doing an 8k VR headset? if so, is it just 4k displays per eye?
Pimax does and it's not even 8K it's literally half of 8K yet they still call it 8K because um reasons I guess
I really wouldn't be surprised if they will probably now stick the "8K" nomenclature on the PS5 PRO box...
And what's the novelty? Sony has been removing several advertised launch features since the PS3 days, just remember the "Other OS" removal on PS3; and the fact that by the time when PS3 arrived in Europe, they had already removed PS2 hardware compatibility from the PS3.
And now with firmware updates, they can remove any feature they want, whenever they want... so you can't just trust them on keeping any feature throughout the whole console's lifecycle
I don't even understand the point of 8K.There's no point in having a resolution that hi at all
They tried to hype it a bit to sell some TVs but no one seemed to care.
Sony make false claims every generation. PS2 with its 80 million PPS claim (it's highest polygon game reached 6 million PPS with all effects on). Even this gen with its 'tempest sound engine' BS which is basically repurposing a 90s sound card.
This is the first time they have done something honest and should be commended.
Also 8K will always be overkill, unless you are a video or creative designer. 1080p is the max resolution a living room TV needs.
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you guys are saying. 1440 P 144hz is the sweet spot in my view. Given that there are diminishing returns the higher the refresh rate.
8K will probably always be pointless. I think the vast majority of people aren't even sitting close enough to their 4K panels to make a difference between 2K. In many cases even vs 1080p.
What?!? I clearly see the difference
People said that about 4k. Until 4k content was readily available.
I'm curious about the 8k demos I've seen are actually filmed in 8k or just upscaled.
@@Mycarisloose According to RTINGS for a typical 65" panel you need to sit within 4 ft (1.2m) or closer for the increased resolution over 4K to be apparent. These numbers change with panel size. Point is most people aren't hitting that number. Maybe you are. I don't know your situation. I would argue a lot of people aren't even hitting the viewing distance for 4K vs 1080p. For that it's about 8 ft (2.4m). Resolutions above 4K really only make sense for desktop computers with large screens that you are extremely close to. For TVs I don't think there are many household situations where anything over 4K makes sense.
I guess the value of a complete boxed PS5 with 8K 120FPS value just went up
In regards to ps5, I've never chosen quality mode over performance mode in any game so far.
Resolution, ray tracing, enhanced effects .... give me my frames instead
Shouldn’t have put it there in the first place. 8K being a mainstream thing is still probably 10 years away and even then it will only really be noticeable on 70 inch screens or bigger.
They're all a bunch of liars. They tell you what you want to hear, not what you need to hear.
Maybe it's just me but, I never took the 8K to refer to 8K gaming so much as movies. Anyways I think they did this as a last ditch effort to try and push it. Sony is a major manufacturer of cameras after all, especially in cinema.
I wish they would bring back 3D TVs but with 4k resolution. Then glass less 4k TVs. Heck, where are Holographic displays?
8k is unnecessary. Let's face it games look so good now that they're running out of technical buzzwords to sell stiff
8k is actually a ton better because it will remove the need for aliasing that causes ghosting and blurriness. So with a such high resolution, you can look at the truelly crisp and native resolution of a screen without any additional affects
Base PS4 advertised 4K.
That was PS4 Pro
@@FungeHucker I recall, it was the base PS4. Don’t remember if it was on the box exactly but they definitely talked about 4K for the base PS4. Think maybe it was just video? Assume PS5 was just doing the same but no one is making 8K content like they said so no point advertising it. Lol
@@LS-Lizzy Nobody can be this dense. The PS4 reveal in 2013 is still on youtube and not once did Mark Cerney mention 4k. The PS4 Pro was announced as 4K capable machine. It achieved 4K either natively or by using checkerboard rendering. DF did a whole episode in the past on every game that was native 4k 60fps on the PS4 Pro.
@@electrikoptik Where did I say Mark Cerny announced the base PS4 was 4K capable? I said Sony discussed 4K for the base PS4 back in 2013, I’m sure you can google and see for yourself I remember there being quite a few discussion about it at the time since 4K was becoming a big topic. My point was that manufactures like to talk about what the console will be capable of in the future even if it’s not ready at launch and never actually gets fully supported, though I’m sure if more 8K content was readily available Sony would be pushing the 8K capabilities of the PS5, it could easily support 8K content outside video games but like DF said there really isn’t any.
@@LS-Lizzy Again, you are remembering things wrong. The PS4 was officially announced on 21st of February 2013 during ‘see the future event’. This event is on youtube and nowhere during this event when the hardware is discussed with Mark Cerney is 4k mentioned. For context the very first 2160p TV (84inch) was launched on October 25 2012 by LG with a price of 20 thousand dollar. In 2013 smaller sized 4K tv launched with an average price of 6000 usd. The very first 4K blu-ray player, Samsung’s UBD-K8500 launched in 2016. I did some digging around and found one interview from 2013 by ‘stuff.tv’ with Mark where they ask Mark about 4k and Mark said and I quote: “Right now we’re focussing on 4K for media, and 1080p for games. Where we go in the future, we have to see. I’m very interested in 4K gaming. It’s just not a focus this year”. Sony’s very first 4K TV the 84 inch XBR-X900 was released in October 2012. This is what Mark means by “Right now we’re focussing on 4K for media”.
To piggyback this, I do believe it’spossible on Xbox. I’ve just got a new tv and I watch a lot of 4k HDR tech demos to test my screen out. I have both systems plus a PC and I did notice that while my systems may not support it. The videos that say 8k on UA-cam look way better on Xbox compared to ps5
Nothing uses 8k yet. There's 8k TVs but you can't even really watch TV or movies or anything in 8k yet. It was pretty silly that they even tried to say the PS5 would be able to do 8k. 8k is also stupidly expensive still
Wait until y'all find out not a single 4l TV is actually 4k. You have tp go to a theater to get and actual true 4k screen size
Resolution is very interesting to me because as I said years ago I can only see most displays getting to 4K at tops for the commercial market. The reason I say this is because there is no point in increasing constant resolution in screen sizes that are between 20 to 40 in and smaller. The only reason why you would want something beyond a k or even at AK is either you're putting it on a stupid lock screen like an IMAX screen or if you're putting it right in front of your eyeballs like the way an AR or VR headset does. Cuz that's the only way to justify the pixel density. Otherwise it's just a dick swinging number on a box. It doesn't really mean anything to the human eye. This is especially apparent because as someone who owns a 47-in TV, I'm always shocked when I encounter other gamers that are my age and younger, and they're playing on like these tiny 14-in 20-in screens. They're souped up PC games and Xbox and they're not even sitting at proper distances from them. Fine with that. People are now really used to Nintendo switch, steam deck and smartphones and you really see the lack of need of having higher resolutions because of the size of the screen. The only reason why smartphones have such high resolution is to do clear text like it's on a piece of paper. That's the only other use for something on that small of a screen. Everything else is just bubkiss.
8K is probably still about 5 to 7 years away before it starts taking off
I sort of question whether many people will even have a screen large enough to actually make 8k resolution noticeable by then. I don’t mean in terms of cost but the practicality of having a giant 80”-100”+ TV in your living room. TVs have trended larger over the years but there gets point where having such a large TV is outright unwieldy unless you have a huge home to put it in.
I’m sure we’ll all still get it eventually - like how phone manufacturers put increasing high res screens on their devices despite the pixels being indistinguishable at this point, but only a small minority will actually be able to fully make use of it.
4K is old as hell and it still isn't that mainstream for gaming. For multimedia content "fake" 8K can probably become a norm but for gaming not anytime soon probably.
Why didn't we get an 8K Pong, or Atari Collection of some kind. Just because?
Current gen cant even do proper 4k, so 8k was a bit of a stretch
Plenty of games that do native 2160p @ 30fps with a couple even doing native 2160p @ 60fps.
Source: DF tech review
@@electrikoptik native? I think you can count them on 2 hands, most are upscaled or do not have a stable 30fps lock and run mediocre
@@kmj4nsen Yeah, you haven't seen a single DF tech review huh?
Here's a list of some of the most popular games released the last couple of years. Every resolution stated is the internal resolution. List is backed by DF tech review
-MLB the show: native 2160p @60fps
- Horizon Forbidden West: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps
- The Last of Us 1 (remake): native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps
- Gran Turismo 7: native 2160 @ 60fps á 100fps or 1440p @ 120fps
- God of War: Ragnarök: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps
- Uncharted legacy of thieves collection: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps
- Elden Ring: native 2160p or 1440p @ 60fps
- Demon's Soul: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps
-Spiderman 2: 1440p to 2160p DRS @ 30fps or 1008p to 1440p DRS @ 60fps
-Ratched & Clank: 1800p to 2160p DRS @ 30fps or 1620p to 1800p @ 60fps
-FF7 intergrade:native 2160p @ 30fps (can drop to 1872p minimum at stresspoint) or 1512p @ 60fps
-FF7 rebirth:at or near 2160p @ 30fps or 1152p @ 60fps
-FF16: 1080p to 1440p DRS @ 30fps or 1080p @ 60fps
-Stellarblade: native 2160p @ 30fps or 1440p @ 60fps
-RE4 remake: 2160p checkerboard @ 60fps or 1944p @ 60fps
-COD Modern Warfare II: dynamic 2160p @ 60fps
-COD Modern Warefare III: dynamic 2160p @ 60fps
-Alan Wake II: 1270p @ 30fps or 847p @ 60fps
-Deathloop: 1836p to 2160p DRS @ 30fps or 1296p to 1440p DRS @ 60fps
-A Plague Tale: Requiem: native 1440p @ 30fps or 1080p @ 60fps
-F1 23: native 2160p @ 60fps or 1800p @ 60fps with RT
-F1 24: native 2160p @ 60fps (can drop to 1800p in stress point)
-Helldivers 2: 1440p @ 30fps or 1080p @ 60fps
-FC24: native 2160p @ 60fps
-Returnal: native 1080p @ 60fps temporal reconstruction to 1440p followed by checkerboard to 2160p
-Deadspace remake: 2160p @ 30fps FSR2 or 1440p @ 60fps
-Cyberpunk 2077: native 1440p RT mode or 1260 to 1728p @ 60fps
I count 13 native 2160p games in the list.
@@electrikoptik to my knowledge checkerboarding an dynamic 4k is not native 4k so half your list isnt native 4k
@@electrikoptik and 13 4k titles is a bit low for a machine sold as a 4k gaming machine
I am sure they are capable of playing 8k 120fps 2d and pixel style games.
They only removed it ... to put it back and heat 8k marketing on when PS6 arrives.
But since PS5 does not run most games on 4k (more 1440p - 1800p) and especially in "2024-mode" with 60 fps between 1080p and 1440p... I *would bet money on that even PS6 is not going to be able to run games in 60fps AND native 2160p AND high details and effects like RT shadows or lumen!*
Off topic but Xbox should've done resolution boosts to older games similar to how the Xbox one x did but in a similar manner to fps boost.
The lack of 8k was disappointing this generation, sure for modern games it would be impossible but something like Halo MCC can definitely can run at a dynamic 8k 60 fps.
But why would it? Old games would not look any better at 8K compared to 4K and 4K mode can get 120 fps while 8k is limited to 60 fps
@Radek494 120 fps is useless and in the case MCC it struggles to hit it on H2A and breaks the game. 8k would give a more sharp image and would basically get rid of aliasing.
@@deathtrooper2048there are substantially cheaper ways to do anti aliasing, like for example using anti aliasing. The difference between 4k to 8k is so small that the power saved is enough of an argument to not do 8k
@@urmomma2688 Which is why I said for older (specifically games that got enhanced for series X and didn't get any meaningful upgrades apart from a fps boost) games. Series X has the GPU power to run something like Halo MCC or Forza Horizon 4 at 8k native (same fps as xbox one as well).
@@deathtrooper2048 You are slow!!!!
Why do people care about 8k anyway. Ridiculous.
Looks good in the packaging
@@urmomma2688 no, i mean. Really. The people that buy it or want to buy it, why would they even care? Nonsense.
@@julien2231 it gives the impression of a more powerful system i guees. Not everyone can read gpu specs and see what it's actually capable of
@@urmomma2688 i didnt mean for ps5 but for tvs and 8k in general.
I mean nobody did and nobody does now. It was just something every company was trying to push to sell new TV's in 2020 (Higher number better!!) but when content never came, the push died out.
Class Action Suit for Deception and Enticement
There are too few people with 8k tvs to complain about it which is why they are getting away with it.
And tbf the owners of 8k tvs are the only people in the position to complain. Everyone else doesnt have the data to know it doesn't work.
I heard the ps5 will do 16k 1000fps
That’s amazing, gaming will be changed forever, thanks soney
🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
Let’s keep in mind all this information still dosent change the fact that Xbox is being outsold by PlayStation
A lot depends on the developers to take up this idea and incorporate it into the software as you know that the stumbling block. The hardware may be available, but the games are not designed for 8k. They could incorporate in the foreseeable future but unless they demand is there at this moment in time no. You may get some interest in the next generation but not the pro. Even though they will probably integrate it. But in the mainstream of software as you know there isn’t much call because people I haven’t got TVs or monitors 8K.. the market has to conclude that the fact that if they’re going to bring this type of development to market they have to collaborate more and buy collaborating. I mean in respect that the products that bring out need to have 8k. You can’t have PCs as you know at that that’s not an issue it’s monitors TVs so on and so forth you know the stomach block.. bye for now take care of your friends and family
I think they did so they can put it in ps5 pro.
13:47 - Sure, but I don't agree with this whole sentiment of "1440p being the sweet spot", cause I sit at a 38" 21:9 1600p screen at arm's length here, which is the equivalent of a 30" 16:9 screen for context, and this is just enough to not see the pixels obviously, at least at this distance. - So, once again, where is that REAL in-between that is 1620p?... What is with this endless 720p-derivative that is 1440p??... I don't think that's the way at all. - Yea, I agree with higher refresh-rates, though... I'm good with 120Hz, especially on OLED, or maybe double that up to 240Hz indeed with frame-generation where possible. But make that at least 1620p or I don't want it. - I'm actually going to move to a 42" 16:9 4K panel, not necessarily because of 4K, though it's a nice bonus for some use cases, but I will probably still run a bunch of games at 1620p 21:9 for the extra content on the sides. It's still nice to have that tight resolution, especially on larger panels in your face. - And we're getting to the point that it's not that hard to run anymore anyway, even at pretty high framerates. - So I say why not just both, but don't go crazy on either.
These systems struggles too do 60 fps
These commmmentts struugle to typpe
Use your brain and blame the poor optimization of modern videogames nowadays instead
It's not the "system" it's the "games". Stark difference in limiting factor.
It was funny watching all these fan boys when the PlayStation first came out like I can do 8K I can do 8K I was like yeah OK my 3090 TI can’t even do 8K 😂 my 4090 can though lol. The only way I could see the PS5 doing 8K would be movies like streaming Netflix whenever Netflix supports 8K lol
So PS5 has an 8K game but the console cannot output it while the Xbox might output it but it doesn't have an 8K game.
"Good" job gaming industry.
Xbox didn't lie though. It's up to the Devs to make an 8K game. Whereas the PS5 can't do proper 8K.
3:49
So true on what you said on what our eyes can only see. Why I feel 4K should be it n built off that.
Pixel count is not in correlation with Resolution by the power consumption. HDMI 2.1 cable is just making efitient communication between Consoles or Computer and Display and otherwise it's not the thing that is burden. 8K will be late for PS5 Pro because already it's off the list of goals for most developers.
HDMI cable is not properly protected and can be influenced by interfering signals from all-around electric devices but mostly electrical installations and internet which can be from a neighbor and that's it, but 32GB transfer rate is quite enough and it's standard 32GB is 1 hour of 4K 60 transfer and 40GB is an improvise which is typical for PCs and the users who are think that more is better or faster is better and in fact the truth is as always the middle.
Next generation of standards for RAM will be interesting because it will heat up crazy, and CPU will be A.I. / Mashine Learning optimized for taking advantage from the internet Cloud Servers communication and co operation. Motherboards won't have compatibility with current RAM Formats and that's why video game companies in sumiraze and they're aiming for micro transactions and NFT's and it's successful by now despite the critiques.
Microsoft didn't have Monopoly and they are not responsible for what is coming.... Think it's not illegal yet.
Recent Trend is investment back for Windows 10 so ask your self why or you are ready for subscription's for Internet Providers, Computers and OS maintenance but what is more here are all Professional Software Companies because they are already have problems with every update and Subscription would be enough for making everything working before Updates occur which is good for users but more expenses would be too much and already is.
8K oled will be the best thing to happen once it’s affordable. I have a 4k oled but resolution could be better
I'm still relucted to use 4k because of performance cost, 8K is nonsense.
Why would you care they removed the 8K does the console support 8K anyways if you really want 8K you go buy the 3090 or 4090 graphics card for your PC and play your games in 8K that’s why my PC has the 8K TV not my PS5 that never had 8K in the beginning it’s not good to lie to consumers they buy your products you tell the truth not make things up
I love 4 k that's anuff any way i don't care about no 8 k because 4 k still better you cant really tell the difference
Real talk: the law of diminishing returns is hitting resolution and framerate really hard at 7680×4320 pixels and 240 Hz, respectively. Stop pushing ludicrous resolutions and framerates, and start focusing on aesthetically pleasing graphics.
TV companies have reinvented 1080p TVs full HD.. fire high definition.. why not redo 4k TV's an monitors.. I just want a good 2.1 input Nice looking picture.. so I could at least take advantage of what I have an cheap price is everything nowadays. I still don't own an OLED.. or 120hrtz.. 2.1 TV' because I am tired of spending thousands on a TV.. that goes out 3 or 4 years.. it's ridiculous. Some TV manufacturers should be banned.. crappy expensive crap
I bet they removed it from the standard PS5 box just to add it to the PS5 pro box
@TronSAHeroXYZ what? They could lower settings like they always do, and anything can run on the consoles.
Xbox 60/120 setting is not about frames. You simply choose the size of the HDMI video bandwidth between hdmi 2.0 (14,40 Gbit/s) and 2.1 (42,6 Gbit/s). This is the worst possible solution applied to the console. In addition, the console doesn't change the amount of Hz depending on the game just always pushes 120Hz, so there are problems such as color bending, white haze on vrr, etc. Even there are problems with pad input and strange input fluctuations due to this. Since the console's launch, they've almost "fixed" it (that's just against industry standards), but many games still have problems. Especially the very old ones like Call of Duty Black Ops 1 from xbox 360.
To understand the problem more clearly, imagine that Apple TV pushes, for example, 60Hz on a 24-frame movie, instead of displaying it natively in 24. This is simply wrong. That's what Xbox is doing with games by pushing 30/60 frames at 120Hz.
I never thought it was gaming,I thought it was for video. maybe gaming a basic flash style games.
Tech sony didnt lie
My Sega Master System can 8K/60 only on Tuesday mornings….and on Hanukkah.