Splint28 said:
darkbreeze said:
gammer5676 said:
i donot want to play games nor movies i just a 4k display now argos offers a u vision 4k upscalecable that turns 1080p 30 hz to 4k 30hz i just want a display thats it i have my ps4 for native 4k hd movies
WITF would you want a 4k display if you're not going to use it for games, movies or video. Who needs a 4k display for browsing the web? That's pointless. There's nothing moving so any HD monitor can do that and look exactly the same as the 4k. I guess I just don't understand people sometimes. Sigh.
Although I don't know how you can not understand I'll try to explain. A computer can be used for loads of other stuff than gaming and videos, and not at all narrowed down to your alternative "browsing the web". A 4K TV would create a desktop that is around 4 times bigger than that of HD. Imagine having 4 x 30 inch (4 desktops) into ONE 30 inch TV. For computer professionals working with web development, photo editing, desktop publishing, CAD, software developing etc etc. the increase in desktop space will be more than welcome and highly wanted. Using a bigger TV at same resolution as your normal monitor will only make everything appear bigger, not increase the available space. A lot of computer professionals have already experimentet with this using a Seiko 39 inch 4K TV, but until now it was only at 30 hz. Some like it, but most do not. All of us have been waiting for graphic cards supporting HDMI 2 or 4K TV's to support either HDMI 2 or displayport. 4K TV's are generally cheaper than 4K monitors.
I fully understand all of that well enough. But the point is, a 4K monitor is not only unnecessary for any of those tasks, it's probably grossly overkill. You don't need a 4K monitor to increase the display size, in fact, for most people it probably makes things worse. TV companies are pushing 4K because they can. It's easy, or at least easier than improving the more important aspects of picture quality (like contrast ratio, color accuracy, motion blur, compression artifacts, and so on ). Somebody who is a graphic artist, does photo editing and CAD who are mainly working with still images won't appreciate or even notice the difference between an HD and Ultra HD display much if at all, other than the negative effects of it like choppiness at high resolutions since hdmi 1.4 only allows 30fps at 34080x2160. This link here shows why software developers probably wouldn't want to move on 4k yet.
http://tiamat.tsotech.com/4k-is-for-programmers-redux
And if you were to take 4 30 inch displays and display them at the resolution necessary to view all four on a single 30 inch display your eyes would never be able to decipher enough details to make it useful. Maybe on a much larger display. Anyhow, aside from that, anybody without HDMI 2.0 capable hardware probably won't be able to appreciate 4K even for motion. I like 4k too, don't get me wrong, it just seems like a waste of money the OP could put towards other areas but I concede that not everybody thinks the same and my opinion is not necessarily more relevant than yours.