Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

4K Resolution TVs Will Be Called ''Ultra HD''

By - Source: CEA | B 55 comments

Your 1080p HD TV is being phased out.

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) has announced the next TV resolution: Ultra HD, which previously was also known under monikers such as QuadHD, can be used for TVs that deliver at least 8 million active pixels via a resolution of at least 3,840 horizontally and at least 2,160 vertically. UltraHD displays will also have to provide an aspect ratio with width to height of "at least" 16 X 9, the CEA said.

"Ultra HD is the next natural step forward in display technologies, offering consumers an incredibly immersive viewing experience with outstanding new levels of picture quality," said Gary Shapiro, president and CEO, CEA. "This new terminology and the recommended attributes will help consumers navigate the marketplace to find the TV that best meets their needs." The UltraHD label is the result of a recommendation of the "4K" Working Group that was formed by the CEA earlier this year.

There was no information on the rollout of commercial devices and how those UltraHD TV sets will be offered. Let's hope that it will be less confusing than the rollout of HD, which introduced terms such as HD ready and HD capable, full HD, 1080p, 1080i, 768p and 720p, which had substantial differences and puzzled consumers and retail staff alike.

If you can't wait, 4K displays are already on sale and can be yours from about $25,000.


Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 55 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 24 Hide
    bkinder83 , October 22, 2012 5:18 PM
    How large would the movie file be at this resolution?
  • 21 Hide
    CrArC , October 22, 2012 6:29 PM
    jn77so I am confused (Not that I would recommend doing this) but why can't I buy 4 "New Ipads" or Ipad 3's or what ever Apple calls them, gut the screens out of them and stack them 2x2 for a rectangle screen, use precise alignment tools so the pixels line up and for $2000 have a (approximate) 20 inch 4K display.There is no way they cost $25,000 to make. I just proved it; now if you are talking about a 120 inch 4k display, then that might be different.

    I work in the LCD industry, perhaps I can explain. There are various generic issues (supply/market demand, quantities involved, etc) which are very basic reasons for the price, I'll skip over those and address the technical issues affecting costs.

    Mostly it's a matter of yield. When you make an LCD, you are layering a complex lattice of components and chemicals in a very precise fashion to formulate a functional display. The higher the resolution, the greater the chance of a faulty panel. 4K res is over 8 million pixels per display. That's over 24 MILLION sub-pixels in an RGB panel. The chance of pixels being faulty is... well, high. For a premium TV, dead/stuck pixels are basically unacceptable, so you've gone to all that effort to make this complex panel and now you must throw it away. Bear in mind these complex materials and chemicals cannot really be recycled into the process, so they're wasted too unless you spend even more money trying to recover them. Because of the low yield, you're doing this a lot to get working panels.

    On a smaller display, no big deal, but these are large telly panels. They use more glass and fab resources. Each one wasted is a bigger deficit. For a given surface area of glass, you could have several defects, but when the glass is divided into smaller panels you have several workable displays from a given batch. On a bigger panels, much more wastage occurs. So your iPad Retina displays are much cheaper to manufacture than these 4K display can be.

    Even if the panel has no dead pixels, it may have other issues. Panels are very complex to drive properly. New, higher resolutions and smaller dot-pitches demand new technologies to make them happen. There are teething problems (look at Apple's Retina Macbook image retention issues, for instance).

    There's also development costs for these new technologies and new manufacturing equipment. It's expensive. Very expensive.

    There's also the cost of the components required to drive the display. To me, it's incredible displays work as well as they do. Seriously impressive. 8 million pixels (24 million sub-pixels) requires some serious hardware to push the incoming data to the crystals. You can't just pop a voltage across each sub-pixel and call it a day. DC voltage damages pixels, they're actually driven by an AC waveform. It's a complex weave of carefully design PWM pulses at varying levels designed to oscillate the pixels, while moving them into the correct orientations for a given image, without inducing interference in neighbouring pixels. It's a bloody nightmare and the more pixels you have... well, you can image. This, again, costs oodles of money to achieve.

    So no, you can't just glue four Retina iPads together, haha. Well, you could, but assuming you managed to build a Retina display without a bezel (you can't) you'd still have this bizarre cross-shaped line running through the middle of your bodged display. The pixel pitch is vastly smaller than the distance between the display's active area and its edges.

  • 18 Hide
    freggo , October 22, 2012 6:35 PM
    CrArCI work in the LCD industry, perhaps I can explain...


    Rare to see such a well written explanation in here.
    Thank you for taking the time!
Other Comments
  • 17 Hide
    mightymaxio , October 22, 2012 5:06 PM
    Wait I thought 8k was going to be UHDTV and 4k was going to be Super High Def. Things change quick lol
  • 0 Hide
    stevelord , October 22, 2012 5:07 PM
    "The new Samsung 1080P ULTRA HD DLP LCD LED TV with 3D and 240h-z" Just call it HZ instead of hertz at this point.

    Getting annoying....
  • 24 Hide
    bkinder83 , October 22, 2012 5:18 PM
    How large would the movie file be at this resolution?
  • 7 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , October 22, 2012 5:22 PM
    phased out then you see the starting price at 25k. lol 1080p tv's are here to stay for a while by the time 4k tv's get down to mainstream range 2,000 and under you are looking at another 6 or 7 years from now. first lets start off with the research and development fees that will take a good 3 years to pay off from this companies and once that is paid off that will lower the price a lot from where it is now, but not nearly as much as going down under the 2,000 dollar price tag. Then you have to get the technology to become affordable to manufacture which will take another 3 or 4 years. So by the time it's all said and done you are looking at at least another 8 years of 1080p HDTV's being the mainstream choice for consumors. Another thing to factor in is the adaptation of 4k tv's I mean as of right now nothing viewing format supports it. Consoles, Blu-Ray, Broadcast stations, streaming vidoes Dish and cable providers don't support 4k. Heck, the vast majority of broadcast stations and dish and cable providers still don't support 1080p for the most part let alone 4k! Most broadcast station and dish and cable providers still broadcast in 1080i. So it's going to be a while before you start seeing 4k tv's become widely compatible with other media fromats.
  • -9 Hide
    jn77 , October 22, 2012 5:23 PM
    And I would get allot of use out of a 20-24 inch 4k display right now for $2000 which is allot more affordable. Infact, I will take 6 of them to go with my eyefinity setup.
  • -9 Hide
    jn77 , October 22, 2012 5:26 PM
    And that is paying retail for the ipads. The screens alone are what? $200 each, so if I got them at cost, they would be $800 for 4 Ipad screens. A much better deal.
  • -5 Hide
    bak0n , October 22, 2012 5:26 PM
    jn77so I am confused (Not that I would recommend doing this) but why can't I buy 4 "New Ipads" or Ipad 3's or what ever Apple calls them, gut the screens out of them and stack them 2x2 for a rectangle screen, use precise alignment tools so the pixels line up and for $2000 have a (approximate) 20 inch 4K display.There is no way they cost $25,000 to make. I just proved it; now if you are talking about a 120 inch 4k display, then that might be different.


    Costs include R/D and many other aspects. Research "product life cycle" if you want to know what's involved in pricing. I had an upper division class on it and still feel like a newb regarding it.
  • 8 Hide
    jcurry23 , October 22, 2012 5:31 PM
    @ aoneone I think you will be surprised on seeing the difference. The great thing about it the viewing distance will be less. You will be able to buy a bigger tv for a smaller room and not see the pixels. That is the problem with 1080p people have these huge tv's in their small living room and you can see all of the pixels because it is to close.
  • 15 Hide
    Niavlys77 , October 22, 2012 5:31 PM
    aoneoneLOL what difference does it make if its 4k or 1080p or even 720 for that matter? Don't you people realize that beyond 1920 x 1080 the human eye doesn't even distinguish the pixelation factor at that point? On TOP of that, current screens on various electronics won't even be mainstream with 4k or 'ultra HD' for another 15 years? Even as of 2012, all electronics are JUST getting into regular HD such as 480p, 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. If you ask me, you are just wasting your money and again... the eye will not see any difference between 1080p and 4k.. TRUST me~


    So you think a 70" TV with 1080p will look the same as one with 4k? Ignorance...such bliss.

    At least you'll save yourself some $$$ in the meantime.
  • -2 Hide
    nbelote , October 22, 2012 5:33 PM
    Super Ultra Mega Chicken...

    SHH! He is legend...
  • 10 Hide
    bobafert , October 22, 2012 5:34 PM
    aoneoneLOL what difference does it make if its 4k or 1080p or even 720 for that matter? Don't you people realize that beyond 1920 x 1080 the human eye doesn't even distinguish the pixelation factor at that point? On TOP of that, current screens on various electronics won't even be mainstream with 4k or 'ultra HD' for another 15 years? Even as of 2012, all electronics are JUST getting into regular HD such as 480p, 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. If you ask me, you are just wasting your money and again... the eye will not see any difference between 1080p and 4k.. TRUST me~


    Sorry but your comment is a bit oversimplified. Depending on viewing distance and screen size, you can tell the difference. For home theater/large screen formats you will definately see a difference.

    Not that I think a move to 4k or "Ultra HD" is needed. We have enough problems with 1080p video sucking up bandwidth on the internet. This will just make the problem 4x worse.
  • 8 Hide
    YardstickWHACK , October 22, 2012 5:35 PM
    aoneoneLOL what difference does it make if its 4k or 1080p or even 720 for that matter? Don't you people realize that beyond 1920 x 1080 the human eye doesn't even distinguish the pixelation factor at that point? On TOP of that, current screens on various electronics won't even be mainstream with 4k or 'ultra HD' for another 15 years? Even as of 2012, all electronics are JUST getting into regular HD such as 480p, 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. If you ask me, you are just wasting your money and again... the eye will not see any difference between 1080p and 4k.. TRUST me~

    I see a huge difference between 720 and 1080 on my 58 inch TV and I wish the resolution went higher. Maybe being an fps gamer has made me more picky, but please don't speak for everyone else just because you are unable to discern a difference. You're also on the totally wrong way of thinking. You have confused high DPI of the 300+ nature with resolution. The bigger the screen, the lower the DPI.
  • 6 Hide
    math1337 , October 22, 2012 5:36 PM
    Finally! We've been stalled at 1080p for far too long.
  • 0 Hide
    jcurry23 , October 22, 2012 5:36 PM
    @jn77 any new technology is really expensive when it first comes out. plus the supply/demand factor makes it really expensive.

  • 2 Hide
    bobafert , October 22, 2012 5:36 PM
    nbeloteSuper Ultra Mega Chicken...SHH! He is legend...


    LOL!

    Arise Chicken!

    ATHF FTW!
  • 1 Hide
    YardstickWHACK , October 22, 2012 5:41 PM
    jcurry23@ aoneone I think you will be surprised on seeing the difference. The great thing about it the viewing distance will be less. You will be able to buy a bigger tv for a smaller room and not see the pixels. That is the problem with 1080p people have these huge tv's in their small living room and you can see all of the pixels because it is to close.

    You're exactly right. A friend gave me a 58 inch (lucky, I know) for my little multi-story apartment. The farthest viewing distance I could find for it was about 10 feet.
  • 5 Hide
    freggo , October 22, 2012 5:58 PM
    aoneoneIf you ask me, you are just wasting your money and again... the eye will not see any difference between 1080p and 4k.. TRUST me~


    Don't know if you have seen 4K content on a 4K display. If you have and did not see the difference I suggest you visit your Ophthalmologist.

    Besides, eventually computer folk may finally get screens that go beyond 1080 without breaking the bank.

  • 6 Hide
    djscribbles , October 22, 2012 5:59 PM
    aoneoneLOL what difference does it make if its 4k or 1080p or even 720 for that matter? Don't you people realize that beyond 1920 x 1080 the human eye doesn't even distinguish the pixelation factor at that point? On TOP of that, current screens on various electronics won't even be mainstream with 4k or 'ultra HD' for another 15 years? Even as of 2012, all electronics are JUST getting into regular HD such as 480p, 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. If you ask me, you are just wasting your money and again... the eye will not see any difference between 1080p and 4k.. TRUST me~


    Wasting money? Maybe.

    No visible difference between any resolution and any other resolution? Complete garbage. Unless you clarify screen size and viewing distance, you are just spouting nonsense when making statements comparing resolutions... Trust me
Display more comments