NVIDIA and AMD are both working toward 8K resolution (7680x4320)

[TroubleKlef]

"perfect for the visual system"?

 

What are they judging this on? An 8k vs a 4k screen on a 5" smartphone wouldn't be noticeable at all unless you brought in a microscope.

[JAKEBAB]

Why do people freak out when a company says something about 8k or even 4k they never said today! Panel manufactures have said they will start 8k production in 2020 weither or not they release them is anyones guess so nvidia and amd still have a few years to get there gpus ready for 8k

[pit5000]

well if you can drive 8K@60Hz, it means you have the bandwith to drive 4K@240Hz, so dont worry

 

Displayport 1.3 can do 4K at 120hz, we are halfway there

[dlf]

well if you can drive 8K@60Hz, it means you have the bandwith to drive 4K@240Hz, so dont worry

60x16 (since 8k is 16 times 1080) is 960 frames a second for 1080. Jeebus.

[pit5000]

how much and how fast GPU memory would be needed though? I'm curious...

[GloriousPain]

Agreed. Everyone has both things in mind: 1-making better looking games by implementing new technologies and techniques, and/or increasing texture resolution, etc... 2-increasing resolutin But something we cannot do is both at the same time. The jump to 4k was kinda too high. 720p to 1080p doubled the resolution, while 4k is four times higher. If a 780 Ti/980 can not run, I don't know, Star Citizen when it comes out at 1080p, imagine in 4k. I prefer to see games getting better in the future instead of just jumping resolutions so early. I'd stick with 4k for 10 more years if I could. It's just good enough for desktop gaming. But as the Rift will need higher refresh rates etc, I'm not sure if it will be possible to have an 8k Rift model...

 

EDIT: forgot to say something

For rift however I think 60Hz(maybe 75) might just be best and give it an IPS/PLS display... also yeah 1080->2160p is a huge jump we still need wide spread adoption of 1440p 

[Blue fellow]

If we can get a single card to drive a 4k display at 60hz, than we'll need 4 of them to drive 8k at 60hz. I don't think that it's too terribly far off, maybe 1 or 2 more years before we see 4-way CFX/SLI 8k setups.

 

I'm excited for the day that I can get a screen big enough to fill my field of vision and not being able to distinguish the pixels.

 

I think scaling is going to be an issue. If it takes 4 high end GPUs to power an 8k display there won't be much of a market for it. Three way and four way SLi/Crossfire has always been bad since its release. That'll require major work, but why work for that when your users aren't using it?

[bcredeur97]

if a single GPU can drive 4K the same way current GPU's drive 1080p, then i'll care

YES. a mid range card should be able to do 4K gaming perfectly fine at ~45 fps for modern games. mid range being about $170-220

 

until this happens im gonna chill in the 1080p isle B)

[Zeruel]

Silicon will be dead by the time 8k comes out. Right now at least there is pressure on Nvidia and AMD to make 4k ready graphics cards.

 

By the time we have a suitable silicon replacement we will get 8k ready graphics cards  

[jecho]

Amazing graphics at 4k vs marginal graphics 8k. How do I decide....But seriously I would think that at 24 inches 4k is PLENTY.

[7850OC]

i think the new Rx 3xx series will be 8K ready (with the new DP, that can deliver 8K, in one cable)

[Dicehunter]

i think the new Rx 3xx series will be 8K ready (with the new DP, that can deliver 8K, in one cable)

 

We'll be able to display 8k on the desktop, Maybe, No one other than AMD knows but 8K in games ? Hell no, A few years away yet.

[7850OC]

We'll be able to display 8k on the desktop, Maybe, No one other than AMD knows but 8K in games ? Hell no, A few years away yet.

 

keep in mind that "we are not talking just of games" at this point  :rolleyes:

 

the new 8K video comes with the package (and deliver 4x4K in one cable, is still a big challenge)  B)

 

 

 

and on games, the new Vram (oh yeas) will give us many surprises 

[Dicehunter]

keep in mind that "we are not talking just of games" at this point  :rolleyes:

 

the new 8K video comes with the package (and deliver 4x4K in one cable, is still a big challenge)  B)

 

 

 

and on games, the new Vram (oh yeas) will give us many surprises 

 

I didn't say just games though :rolleyes:

 

And even with the new vram we would need an immense jump in performance to do 8k on a single gpu with semi decent peformance other than video and pictures.

[Silent_Xaxal]

The movement just seems too fast. Graphics technology and bandwidth on data transfer on current standards need to improve as well. At best, we're going to be moving forward in an era of variance. Which is still pretty good, seeing as that means that we'll all soon be at 1080p minimum with standard or higher being anything above.

[Nineshadow]

Here's an 8k wallpaper I made : http://www.mediafire...4r/untitled.png

[MasterRaceFanBoy]

They have the tech and keep us behind 3 years at least and we react like is a tech from the future. lol .. either way sounds rly crazy. but it would be fun because when a single gpu can handle 8k 60fps on 240hz monitor, all the console gamers are able to play games on 1080p as well

[MrTomnus]

"If we get to a display resolution of about 8k horizontally and about 6k vertically then, for a player with 20/20 vision, they will have something that is close to perfect for their visual system." After that, the human eye finds it hard to see any more detail on screen

What? What does that even mean? We don't know what viewing distance or screen size they're talking about. I'm going to assume they're talking about the desktop monitor. In which case the monitors would likely be 32 inches. That resolution at that size is absolutely pointless... When you're sat a normal distance at a desk (50cm) from a 4K 27" monitor you can't see the pixels already (The monitor has a ppi of 163, by the way). Why is there this need to go to higher resolutions than that if nobody is going to be able to tell the difference? I guess in this case they may be talking about multi monitor setups, which would maintain the pixel density and that would be fine. But we aren't going to see 8K resolution monitors. Unless you want a 42 inch monitor 50cm from your face.

 

As for the Oculus rift, I think 4K will be just fine. If the display is around 5.5 inches the pixel density is 801ppi (which is insane!), that would be enough for people not to notice pixels

[angst92]

What? What does that even mean? We don't know what viewing distance or screen size they're talking about. I'm going to assume they're talking about the desktop monitor. In which case the monitors would likely be 32 inches. That resolution at that size is absolutely pointless... When you're sat a normal distance at a desk (50cm) from a 4K 27" monitor you can't see the pixels already (The monitor has a ppi of 163, by the way). Why is there this need to go to higher resolutions than that if nobody is going to be able to tell the difference? I guess in this case they may be talking about multi monitor setups, which would maintain the pixel density and that would be fine. But we aren't going to see 8K resolution monitors. Unless you want a 42 inch monitor 50cm from your face.

 

As for the Oculus rift, I think 4K will be just fine. If the display is around 5.5 inches the pixel density is 801ppi (which is insane!), that would be enough for people not to notice pixels

 

I can still see "jaggies" on my 4k monitor, theyre a lot less than 1080p but i can still see them, therefore i can still see the individual pixels. So whathe's saying is probably not that inacurate.

[ivhyn]

The pixels that we see on-screen depends on the distance so saying the difference between 8k and 16k isn't really noticable is wrong.

[-TesseracT-]

Yes, this has been proven, after 8K we shouldn't notice a difference, we'll hit the limitations of our visual system

[Redheadsrule13]

Excellent, even if it means that by pushing 8k 1440p and 4k will be awesome. I don't even want 8k that bad, just insane GPU power for 4k or less.

[LukaP]

Yes, this has been proven, after 8K we shouldn't notice a difference, we'll hit the limitations of our visual system

 

 

The pixels that we see on-screen depends on the distance so saying the difference between 8k and 16k isn't really noticable is wrong.

yeah its all about pixels/angular degree

The maximum angular resolution of the human eye at a distance of 1 km is typically 30 to 60 cm. This gives an angular resolution of between 0.02 to 0.03 degrees, which is roughly 0.6 arc minutes per line pair, which implies a pixel spacing of 0.3 arc minutes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity#Measurement

this means that each pixel has to be at most 0.3 minutes on your field of view (assuming 20/20) for it to not be noticable. so at 50cm from your screen, this is 0.25mm per pixel or 40px/cm or 101ppi(again at 50cm from the eye) for a 20/20 person to not see the pixels

 

edit, so if we take a 16:9 24" screen, we get dimensions of 21.333" (55cm) times 30.5cm. which gives us a resolution of 2200px1220p which is already very close to 1080p, so 1080p at 24" is almost perfect. ideally, we would have 1440p@24" and 4K@27"

[rentaspoon]

Read the title as works together then noticed it's works towards.

Disappointed now.

[bogus]

Read the title as works together then noticed it's works towards.

Disappointed now.

NVIDIA is very agressive when it comes to defend their leadership position in the dGPU market. Unfortunatly for PC Gaming we wont be seeing AMD and NVIDIA working together to push standards for a long time... specially with Jen has CEO. Surely AMD is no saint as well, but I think they are more whilling if it came to such thing.

Competition is a wonderfull thing and I cheer it, don't take me wrong, it's a powerfull force that brought PC to what it is today (it could be better in the CPU department, specially with the prices). But sometimes, you know, once in a while, synergy can be a amazing thing as well. If NVIDIA and AMD wanted to fast forward the 4k adoption in PC, they would do it in one or two years. 

Either way they all eat at the same table, consoles and pc, microsoft, nvidia, amd, sony, major game dev studios... it's not like there are many secrets. The bad practices are known, and probably cheered among them if it's profitable.

Unfortunatly disappointment it's not a very common feeling I have these days in the gaming industry.