YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Americans have giant houses but many people in this world are living in shoebox apartments. So a 70 inch or larger TV is out of the question.
Digital Foundry: Will 8K Gaming Ever Become Relevant?
- Thread starter analog_future
- Start date
alucard0712_rus
Banned
How so?
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
What about upscaling? Yeah rendering at native 8K will be ridiculous, but what if you're using DLSS/FSR/XeSS?
Madserb2023
Member
Would still be extremely demanding and would need to have at least a base resolution of 4k. I think we need to focus on frame rate. I would rather 4k 60 and 1440p 120 next Gen as standard.
FearlessBelgian
Member
I rather dream of a return to 3D... 8K could be useful for that, to have 4K rendering per eye.
scarlet0pimp
Member
Of course one day it will be how many years in the future though is yet to be determined.
I don't see any point for the next generation but perhaps the one after it will be considered normal as 4k is now.
I don't see any point for the next generation but perhaps the one after it will be considered normal as 4k is now.
coolmast3r
Member
The question itself is pretty stupid. What do you mean by "ever"? In 10 years there will be GPUs that easily do native 8K at 60fps minimum. And 8K isn't "pointless", just like any other resolution isn't "pointless". If a GPU can do such a resolution at good framerates then why would it be pointless? The higher the resolution is, the clearer and more stable the image is. Of course, if we are talking specifically consoles, then yea... Even in 2034 (if consoles are still around that is) I doubt there will be a console that can do 8K native at 60fps in AAA releases.
crackajack
Member
Not anytime soon. 4k, native, with ray or path tracing will eat up most advances in hw power in the foreseeable future. Then proper physics might finally be worked on again and that will possibly run on the GPU and need some serious portion to really enable more than we have since PhysX died which was shoehorned into Nvidia hw.
8k for VR, with otherwise less demanding graphics, would make perfectly sense today.
8k for VR, with otherwise less demanding graphics, would make perfectly sense today.
Schmendrick
Member
big screens, be it monitors or TVs, exist and are getting even bigger, PPI has to keep up and 8k is already creeping into the professional space.
Downsampling as well as AI upscaling is also sth to keep in mind. The hardware to handle the throughput is also advancing, no reason to stick with 4k forever even though the difference is not exactly jumping in your face anymore.
Last edited:
UltimaKilo
Gold Member
Unless you're talking about VR panels or PC monitors, then yes, we are nearly there. Nobody was ever arguing that the human eye was unable to perceive more than 720p. 8K will come, but probably not for 10-12 years. There's just almost no need for it.
Heck, you'll see large 5K and 6K monitors way before 8K. I still see a difference with 5K, yet have sat side by side with 8K and seen none at a reasonable distance.
MisterXDTV
Member
In a world dominated by ultra compressed video streams watched on smartphones/tablets/laptops this 8K thing is laughable
There's no content anyway
There's no content anyway
Last edited:
SportsFan581
Member
Pricing is such a big issue as well. A lot of it would hinge on 8K simply becoming the de facto resolution. If your TV breaks and you are buying a new one today, at even a modest size, it's going to be 4k even if you are looking at the cheapest available models.
Corporal.Hicks
Member
8K makes sense if you want to emulate CRT/PVM phosphor masks and make old 240p / 480p games look extremely good. The CRT mask at 8K should also make 1080p games look very good.
Sushi_Combo
Member
Nobody is investing in an 8k display.
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
Not every game is that graphically intensive. A 4090 can already max out many games at 4K60 or even 4K120 without using DLSS.
And people were saying the exact same thing about 4K. "I'd rather they focus on higher framerate or higher graphical fidelity". The reality is that SOME games will focus on those things, some will have multiple graphics options so you can choose for yourself, and some will not even push the hardware enough for it to matter.
It's already insanely expensive to create a game that pushes PS5 hardware to its limits. How many hypothetical PS6 games do you really think we'll get that can reach only 4K60 using FSR3 (or whatever solution Sony uses)?
alucard0712_rus
Banned
Ah yes. Big screens or very small screens (VR) is only appreciable situation. And I don't mind rendering resolution - for me it's about PPI only. Not very popular though.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Imagine thinking consumers will ignore 8K lol
Sir, they will see a number, see its "new" and will buy it.
The "average consumer" doesn't even know the majority of those features in those "new" things anyway, they will buy based on new. When I used to work at Best Buy in 2009, I once saw a man buy 2 laptops and a tv. He saw that it said 720p and tells me "thats the new one, I'll take one if you have it in 40 inches or more" , I had to tell this person that 1080p was actually the "new one" and he said "oh, ok, then that"
This man didn't look side by side, he didn't sit there like some fucking DF video talking about pixels per square inch or any of that shit, I don't even think he understood you NEEDED a source that ran 1080p to even get anything out of that tv
So....look man, I don't think many of you really, really get that consumers don't give a shit about as much about a lot of this as you might think, they see new, they buy.
I just don't see that 8K next to 4K will my majority consumers pick lessor. To them, the number is smaller, they are getting lessor etc
You think those people buying brand new Lexus or Rolls Royce know the fucking specs by heart on those improvements? I mean, at some point they will realize a "Toyota Camry" is good enough" lol
Its the new model, the year is different, they say its new....thats it. Thats all that gets them buying a new model and that is something many times more expensive then a tv or something. So to doubt consumers will consume might be the funniest post on here by far.
The generally consumer does not have "enough" in their vocabulary.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
And even then it will be DLSS style 8K. Which is perfectly fine as well.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Maybe, maybe not.
I think PS6 will market 8K as the reason to buy it, but I think PS5 Pro will market 8K (like checkerboard) or something as its main selling point.
I think you'll actually see that style with PS5 Pro or PS6 or something.
By PS6, I think it will be the relevant thing gamers seek
By PS7, it will be the norm and they'll have some other resolution to tout.
Gamers not too long ago where arguing about having 60fps, now we are seeing 120fps and people talking about the best GPUs to get that.... what anyone things is good enough may not matter to gamers or tv viewers or film viewers. They will want the latest and if that number is bigger, that will be what they aim for, thus creating relevance.
Mercador
Member
Never heard that one
But yeah, "football football" is way more popular around the world than our American Football but that's how it is, no idea why they choose the same word.
Lagspike_exe
Member
You do know that all the streaming services are investing in Spatial Audio and high-res streaming, right?At a certain point you can't convince your average consumer anymore to invest in new technology when the old tech is good enough. Look what happened to hires audio formats like SACD and DVDA that were supposed to make the CD format obsolete. All failed because mainstream consumers were more interested in convenience and portability than better sound quality. So MP3 won out.
This chart is pretty enlightening (or depressing) as well.
DVD had more than 50% marketshare just 18 months ago. I bet a huge number of the people still buying DVDs actually watch them on HDTVs (either 1080p or 4K), but they simply don't care about getting the best image quality. How are you going to make these people ever see the benefit of 8K when they couldn't be bothered to upgrade to Blu-Ray, let alone UHD?
And why did DVD become such a success? Because playing DVDs was much more convenient than playing videotapes that had to be rewinded and were more prone to defects.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
8K has been available to consumers for 4 years already. It's not even "new"; consumers have just rejected the technology.
If consumers just bought "new", we wouldn't see DVDs still outselling blu-ray. We wouldn't see 4K UHD discs failing as a medium altogether. We wouldn't see the 7 year old Switch continuing to outsell "new" consoles like the Xbox Series X. We wouldn't see the vast majority of consumers still owning 3+ year old phones. We wouldn't see the most popular videocards in the PC gaming realm being several year old mid-tier cards. We wouldn't have seen 3D TVs fail. We wouldn't have seen VR headsets struggling to gain footing.
You're vastly overestimating the average customers interest in what's "new". The vast majority of the time they'd rather just stick with what's familiar.
Last edited:
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Nope. You'd just see that migration as subscription services support the format...
Yea..soooo that has more to do with the adaption of streaming
https://www.nexttv.com/news/research-30-of-netflix-customers-subscribe-to-premium-tier
Keep in mind, this is from 2018...even if that data stayed exactly the same, at 270 million users, this means around 81 million Netflix users have the 4K package.
Nah, I think you are ignoring that streaming services have not made that resolution the norm yet.
As soon as you see Netflix, Amazon, Disney start doing 8K streaming, you'll see that needle move.
"rather just stick with what's familiar" lol I know right, them tube tvs and 480p is what they want /s
Last edited:
Kerotan
Member
I was talking native 8k but I can see 5/6k upscaled being a thing on ps6. Ps6 should finally be the console most games are native 4k.
The biggest issue is you'll need a 65" or above to really see 8k differences and that's always going to be a smaller market. I guess 55" 8k will be a thing but it's not worth it IMO.
MALpractice311
Member
Yes, but how big of a jump is it over 1440p, particularly for TVs, when you're sitting 8 or 10 feet from the screen? I don't think it's worth it. I'd rather my games be 1440p if it means every game has a locked 60fps.
NeoIkaruGAF
Gold Member
Prolly because subscriptions have kinda plateaued and there's a still untapped audiophile market that stubbornly refuses to pay for a sub that only streams lossy audio. Also, faster internet makes hi-res streaming easier, but it's not like it couldn't be done earlier.
Even then, the reality is that most people listen to streaming music with cheap (or cheaply built, but shrewdly branded to pump up the price) audio equipment and will keep doing so, especially seeing that the Chinese brands have flooded the market and the really good stuff has gotten crazy expensive. Most people did the math with digital audio a long time ago, when Napster was a thing and the iPod had small HDDs. If you can listen to 10 songs with the same data required for one hi-res song and you're streaming from a phone with dollar store Bluetooth earbuds, the choice is easy.
With TVs it's slightly different because it's not about convenience, and the technobabble can easily convince people to get something they don't need just because it's new and shiny and big. Still, there's no real consumer application for 8K, nor there needs to be in the near future. Physical media is almost dead and streaming still isn't on par even with 4K BRD. Plus, such resolution really only makes sense for bigger screens, and there's only so many of those you can sell to the man in the street. As for gaming, there's such a wide variety of graphic styles that such resolution, again, would only make sense for the biggest and newest. That still requires storage space, and storage on consoles is currently barely enough for a handful of AAA games as it is.
Finally, what kind of improvement are we actually getting with 8K vs 4K? What do we need that detail for? I remember toying with the graphics options in Ori and the Will of the Wisps. 6K vs 4K was barely perceptible - when nothing on the screen moved. On the contrary, 120 vs 60fps made a sensible difference, both in visuals and in responsiveness.
genesisblock
Member
Maybe not for TV's but VR headsets need all the image quality + framerate it can get.
nemiroff
Gold Member
I'd say that "point" is flawed because the path towards 8K resolution for TVs and monitors is a non-linear path towards diminishing returns. The step up to 8K is going to be painful when it comes to image quality vs performance - Mostly only VR headsets can realistically sustain that kind of leap in the near future.
Last edited:
joeygreco1985
Member
Painful with today's technology sure. But where will GPU power be in 5 years? 10 years? You can play quite a few games at 8K today with an RTX 4090, albeit at an exorbitant cost but it's already possible.
AtomicStarving
Member
8K gaming? lol 90% of people still playing on 1080p stfu
