What is necessary to process all game graphics [I have a Samsung 4k Crystal UHD]

[Jatlon]

figuring other than frames rates/not my focus/the quality mostly covering all game graphics [hdmi compared to 2.1] seems mostly higher tv quality mostly for movies/well over graphicard standards of course

[TatamiMatt]

7 minutes ago, Jatlon said:

figuring other than frames rates/not my focus/the quality mostly covering all game graphics [hdmi compared to 2.1] seems mostly higher tv quality mostly for movies/well over graphicard standards of course

What do you mean?

 

Apologies for my lack of understanding

[Blue4130]

3 hours ago, Jatlon said:

figuring other than frames rates/not my focus/the quality mostly covering all game graphics [hdmi compared to 2.1] seems mostly higher tv quality mostly for movies/well over graphicard standards of course

A gpu is needed to process game graphics. As for which one, the 4090 is going to be the best bet to get the maximum number of games close to your 4K tv limit. But I feel that your post is lacking in much information to give you a detailed answer.

[Jatlon]

needing to know the tv can render the game graphics/obviously the graphicard is how you get the graphics; just needing to know what the limit on tv would be to not be able to get the graphics displayed < Having a Sumsung 4k Crystal UHD TV. It's 2.0 HDMI, figuring more in quality & price for 2.1 is more for movie quality< game graphics determined by graphicard. Needing to know tv quality limit or what have currently will render with graphicard/all graphics displayed by tv

[Blue4130]

43 minutes ago, Jatlon said:

needing to know the tv can render the game graphics/obviously the graphicard is how you get the graphics; just needing to know what the limit on tv would be to not be able to get the graphics displayed < Having a Sumsung 4k Crystal UHD TV. It's 2.0 HDMI, figuring more in quality & price for 2.1 is more for movie quality< game graphics determined by graphicard. Needing to know tv quality limit or what have currently will render with graphicard/all graphics displayed by tv

The tv quality limit is 4k 60hz with hdr.

[Jatlon]

On 3/7/2024 at 10:28 PM, Blue4130 said:

The tv quality limit is 4k 60hz with hdr.

basically that's the limit on how to get all graphics accurately displayed on tv? other than having a asus strix rtx 4080]

[Blue4130]

8 hours ago, Jatlon said:

basically that's the limit on how to get all graphics accurately displayed on tv? other than having a asus strix rtx 4080]

I don't really understand what you are asking. But yes. To display graphics you need a monitor (or TV) and a gpu of some sort.

[Andrewtst]

On 3/8/2024 at 1:44 PM, Jatlon said:

needing to know the tv can render the game graphics/obviously the graphicard is how you get the graphics; just needing to know what the limit on tv would be to not be able to get the graphics displayed < Having a Sumsung 4k Crystal UHD TV. It's 2.0 HDMI, figuring more in quality & price for 2.1 is more for movie quality< game graphics determined by graphicard. Needing to know tv quality limit or what have currently will render with graphicard/all graphics displayed by tv

HDMI don’t impact image quality. HDMI 2.1 is required for higher refresh rate in 4K as bandwidth issue. If your TV is only 4K 60hz, it is not required HDMI 2.1, and it will came with HDMI 2.0 as this standard is sufficient bandwidth for 4K 60hz.

 

14 hours ago, Jatlon said:

asus strix rtx 4080

Technically GPU will not impact image quality also, but impact to games performance. But it do in directly impact image quality as you may need to lower down the image quality to get faster performance and playable.

[Jatlon]

4 hours ago, Andrewtst said:

HDMI don’t impact image quality. HDMI 2.1 is required for higher refresh rate in 4K as bandwidth issue. If your TV is only 4K 60hz, it is not required HDMI 2.1, and it will came with HDMI 2.0 as this standard is sufficient bandwidth for 4K 60hz.

 

Technically GPU will not impact image quality also, but impact to games performance. But it do in directly impact image quality as you may need to lower down the image quality to get faster performance and playable.

no graphicard settings I have is power or graphically optimized/all in game graphics set as high as can be/nvidia graphicard settings set to either recommended or best stability/but still set realistic for best graphics over performance wearys << I have 3 way fan cooling system/will be posting pictures in full on profile around monday; has been very recent that this AM5/DDR5 build was complete/near 10 months/very expensive & to an extent had to push the price as a one time buy for majoring components.

 

Image quality is all am worried about, having a Samsung 4k Crystal UHD TV; 2.1 hdmi I figured higher refresh rates/but more so all game graphics/up to PS5 consule rendered < obviously in real life [i.r.L.] graphics you could say will always remain higher.

 

So long as samsung 4k crystal tv works with rendering the graphics as made < per game/primarily able to display the graphics from what a playstation 5 console generates; then I will stick with the samsung crystal series. All displayed graphics by this tv is just what am wanting to know, thanks for the feedback everyone; anything additional & at you lesiure

 

 

[Blue4130]

1 hour ago, Jatlon said:

no graphicard settings I have is power or graphically optimized/all in game graphics set as high as can be/nvidia graphicard settings set to either recommended or best stability/but still set realistic for best graphics over performance wearys << I have 3 way fan cooling system/will be posting pictures in full on profile around monday; has been very recent that this AM5/DDR5 build was complete/near 10 months/very expensive & to an extent had to push the price as a one time buy for majoring components.

 

Image quality is all am worried about, having a Samsung 4k Crystal UHD TV; 2.1 hdmi I figured higher refresh rates/but more so all game graphics/up to PS5 consule rendered < obviously in real life [i.r.L.] graphics you could say will always remain higher.

 

So long as samsung 4k crystal tv works with rendering the graphics as made < per game/primarily able to display the graphics from what a playstation 5 console generates; then I will stick with the samsung crystal series. All displayed graphics by this tv is just what am wanting to know, thanks for the feedback everyone; anything additional & at you lesiure

 

 

The display quality is determined mostly by the display itself. The time to evaluate it is BEFORE you buy the screen. If you have the TV already, just adjust the TV settings until you are happy.

[Jatlon]

On 3/10/2024 at 12:12 AM, Blue4130 said:

The display quality is determined mostly by the display itself. The time to evaluate it is BEFORE you buy the screen. If you have the TV already, just adjust the TV settings until you are happy.

for the most part am not going to be surprised if Samsun 4k Crystal UHD is enuf to display all graphics/special effects properly < difference of any higher/hdmi 2.1 to 8k is mostly for intense quality with dvd/movies << more than likely for irl [in real life] quality. Game graphics are no where as intense as movie quality also

[Mihle]

36 minutes ago, Jatlon said:

for the most part am not going to be surprised if Samsun 4k Crystal UHD is enuf to display all graphics/special effects properly < difference of any higher/hdmi 2.1 to 8k is mostly for intense quality with dvd/movies << more than likely for irl [in real life] quality. Game graphics are no where as intense as movie quality also

You are hard to understand, I don't know what your overall question is.

But I don't think 8k movies are available anywhere. Well test footage/timelapses are possible to be found online, but very rare.

[Jatlon]

6 hours ago, Mihle said:

You are hard to understand, I don't know what your overall question is.

But I don't think 8k movies are available anywhere. Well test footage/timelapses are possible to be found online, but very rare.

not sure what the difficulty is, however online communication is it's own language at times. A TV that can render/display all game graphics & special effects; shouldn't be an issue with a Samsun 4k Crystal UHD TV < Game graphics are not as intense as irl [in real life] quality < thus hdmi 2.1 mostly for higher visual quality & realism in clarity < only takes so much of a TV to display all game graphics/special effects properly <

[TatamiMatt]

11 hours ago, Jatlon said:

not sure what the difficulty is, however online communication is it's own language at times. A TV that can render/display all game graphics & special effects; shouldn't be an issue with a Samsun 4k Crystal UHD TV < Game graphics are not as intense as irl [in real life] quality < thus hdmi 2.1 mostly for higher visual quality & realism in clarity < only takes so much of a TV to display all game graphics/special effects properly <

Few things to point out, games are MUCH harder to render than irl things like movies or TV shows, because the movies and TV shows are not rendered at all, they are just shown from wherever they are. Every polygon in a game, billions of them, are rendered in realtime in whichever direction you look.

 

Also TVs dont render anything, they just display whatever they are told to and however they are told to.

 

Also displaying to a certain degree of quality requires a minimum standard of HDMI cable, anything beyond that provides no more benefit than that minimum level as the only thing HDMI does is data transfer, the newer the HDMI standard the more data transfer can take place, but if youre using (for handiness sake we'll use simple numbers) HDMI 2.0 and transferring 10Gbps over a cable that can transfer 12gbps, upgrading the HDMI cable to be able to transfer 24gbps is redundant as it will still only be transferring the same 10gbps, there quite simply is no more data to be transfered at any one moment in time

[Andrewtst]

14 hours ago, Jatlon said:

not sure what the difficulty is, however online communication is it's own language at times. A TV that can render/display all game graphics & special effects; shouldn't be an issue with a Samsun 4k Crystal UHD TV < Game graphics are not as intense as irl [in real life] quality < thus hdmi 2.1 mostly for higher visual quality & realism in clarity < only takes so much of a TV to display all game graphics/special effects properly <

HDMI version is bandwidth increase. Nothing to do with quality.

 

HDMI 2.1 is not required for a 4K 60hz display, this included playback of 8K video and they is no 8K video yet except those YouTube demo.

 

Also video is very light to process than 3D data (for example games) as it required GPU for every calculation of the polygon. This is not needed for video as it is already pre-render and you only need to decoded it where all GPU now can hardware accelerate it with very low GPU or CPU usage.

 

Lastly your english is really difficult to understand as it is very upside down the whole sentence. I suggest you write in your own language and let Google translate it. I am not saying my english is very great, my english is also broken, but reading your sentence is some how very hard to interpret your meaning and I need to keep reading few times and rearrange myself the sequence to try to understand it.

[Jatlon]

9 hours ago, TatamiMatt said:

Few things to point out, games are MUCH harder to render than irl things like movies or TV shows, because the movies and TV shows are not rendered at all, they are just shown from wherever they are. Every polygon in a game, billions of them, are rendered in realtime in whichever direction you look.

 

Also TVs dont render anything, they just display whatever they are told to and however they are told to.

 

Also displaying to a certain degree of quality requires a minimum standard of HDMI cable, anything beyond that provides no more benefit than that minimum level as the only thing HDMI does is data transfer, the newer the HDMI standard the more data transfer can take place, but if youre using (for handiness sake we'll use simple numbers) HDMI 2.0 and transferring 10Gbps over a cable that can transfer 12gbps, upgrading the HDMI cable to be able to transfer 24gbps is redundant as it will still only be transferring the same 10gbps, there quite simply is no more data to be transfered at any one moment in time

dramatically detailed & thank you for such an explanation; apart from what is required & necessary/very true on graphics & game special effects/particle count <<

thus from a samsung 4k crystal uhd tv < can it render the graphics a ps5 is processing/fully displayed on the tv specified that currently have

 

thanks again for that intensity of details

[Jatlon]

7 hours ago, Andrewtst said:

HDMI version is bandwidth increase. Nothing to do with quality.

 

HDMI 2.1 is not required for a 4K 60hz display, this included playback of 8K video and they is no 8K video yet except those YouTube demo.

 

Also video is very light to process than 3D data (for example games) as it required GPU for every calculation of the polygon. This is not needed for video as it is already pre-render and you only need to decoded it where all GPU now can hardware accelerate it with very low GPU or CPU usage.

 

Lastly your english is really difficult to understand as it is very upside down the whole sentence. I suggest you write in your own language and let Google translate it. I am not saying my english is very great, my english is also broken, but reading your sentence is some how very hard to interpret your meaning and I need to keep reading few times and rearrange myself the sequence to try to understand it.

hdmi is thus speed < to what is required/necessary; thus by gpu [having a Asus Strix 4080] using a Samsung 4k crystal uhd tv, can it provide the full display of graphics that a ps5 has. Everything provided has been more than enuf help, however particle/polygon count < & by the tv using < is it going to be accurately able to render PlayStation 5 graphic/special effects [the primary question]

[Andrewtst]

4 hours ago, Jatlon said:

hdmi is thus speed < to what is required/necessary; thus by gpu [having a Asus Strix 4080] using a Samsung 4k crystal uhd tv, can it provide the full display of graphics that a ps5 has. Everything provided has been more than enuf help, however particle/polygon count < & by the tv using < is it going to be accurately able to render PlayStation 5 graphic/special effects [the primary question]

Yes it can.

 

The 4K TV purpose is for output display only.

 

Every render is process by the GPU 4080 or PS5. The TV is just a device for displaying out the image only. Display is dummy and don’t have processor to do any render process.

[Blue4130]

8 hours ago, Jatlon said:

dramatically detailed & thank you for such an explanation; apart from what is required & necessary/very true on graphics & game special effects/particle count <<

thus from a samsung 4k crystal uhd tv < can it render the graphics a ps5 is processing/fully displayed on the tv specified that currently have

 

thanks again for that intensity of details

The TV doesn't render anything. The rendering is being done on the PC/console. The tv is just displaying what is fed to it. It will display anything up to 4k, 8 bit native (or 10 bit with frc).

[Jatlon]

3 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

The TV doesn't render anything. The rendering is being done on the PC/console. The tv is just displaying what is fed to it. It will display anything up to 4k, 8 bit native (or 10 bit with frc).

so long as it can atleast fully display PS5/RTX 4080 graphics; awesome. basically what have been wondering about since first post, tho alot of details to review other than what is necessary to not be shorted on what the ps5 console or RTX 4080 is putting out on up to date graphics/special effects

[Stahlmann]

If I understand your question correctly, the answer is that it's currently not possible to reproduce true-to-life images using a TV. Some TVs get closer than others, but even TVs costing upwards of £3000 need to improve significantly to achieve that. Technically, not even a display capable of meeting the highest HDR mastering standard of 10.000 nits of brightness can offer an image that's as lifelike as the real thing, since some objects in real life are significantly brighter. There are currently no consumer displays that can even come close to this level of brightness.

[Jatlon]

12 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

If I understand your question correctly, the answer is that it's currently not possible to reproduce true-to-life images using a TV. Some TVs get closer than others, but even TVs costing upwards of £3000 need to improve significantly to achieve that. Technically, not even a display capable of meeting the highest HDR mastering standard of 10.000 nits of brightness can offer an image that's as lifelike as the real thing, since some objects in real life are significantly brighter. There are currently no consumer displays that can even come close to this level of brightness.

based on available graphics/playstation 5 being the highest other than how much better over all a graphics card can generate, render & perform; basically just wondering what is the base line on tv's to fully & compatibly meet the standards of both graphics & special effects for the playstation 5

[Andrewtst]

20 hours ago, Jatlon said:

based on available graphics/playstation 5 being the highest other than how much better over all a graphics card can generate, render & perform; basically just wondering what is the base line on tv's to fully & compatibly meet the standards of both graphics & special effects for the playstation 5

You need to understand one thing - A display (TV is a display) is for output the image object of the thing you attached, a display don't do render of the image object quality from the device you attached. The image object quality setting is process render by the system you attached, nothing to do with the display. All display can display whatever device you attached as long the connection is supported. The higher bandwidth basically required due to increasing of the hz from the display. For example 4K 240hz required HDMI 2.1 but 4K 60hz no need HDMI 2.1, but this is only the hz of the display which make the image much smoother and reduce tearing, but again it don't impact to the graphics quality because the graphics quality was control by the device GPU not the display (your TV). Off course higher bandwidth also required for higher color bitrate of the display, for example 8-bit required less bandwidth than 10-bit color, but this is not a very huge image quality differences can be spot by naked eye.

 

But then, the display technology had different image output quality, (this had nothing to do with your graphics/PlayStation 5).

At the moment, the best display technology in market is OLED and OLED will give you the most accurate image output and the most best looking image output. (again remember it is output the image and not related to how the image is being render as the image was render by the device GPU you attached into it, your PC 4080 or your PlayStation 5).

 

If you concern on getting the best looking image output, you should look into different type of display technology. Currently basic type of display (in here monitor) in market included TN, VA, IPS, Mini LED and OLED  (WOLED or QD-OLED) where OLED is the best looking display where in general TN is the worst looking display.

 

For TV wise, in general it is category to LED LCD, QLED (local dimming full array LED LCD) and OLED (WOLED or QD-OLED) where OLED is the best and LED LCD is the worst. You didn't mentioned what is your TV model but general term of Samsung 4k Crystal UHD where normally Samsung 4k Crystal UHD is LED LCD, which is the least good TV display output.

[Jatlon]

On 3/16/2024 at 7:39 AM, Andrewtst said:

You need to understand one thing - A display (TV is a display) is for output the image object of the thing you attached, a display don't do render of the image object quality from the device you attached. The image object quality setting is process render by the system you attached, nothing to do with the display. All display can display whatever device you attached as long the connection is supported. The higher bandwidth basically required due to increasing of the hz from the display. For example 4K 240hz required HDMI 2.1 but 4K 60hz no need HDMI 2.1, but this is only the hz of the display which make the image much smoother and reduce tearing, but again it don't impact to the graphics quality because the graphics quality was control by the device GPU not the display (your TV). Off course higher bandwidth also required for higher color bitrate of the display, for example 8-bit required less bandwidth than 10-bit color, but this is not a very huge image quality differences can be spot by naked eye.

 

But then, the display technology had different image output quality, (this had nothing to do with your graphics/PlayStation 5).

At the moment, the best display technology in market is OLED and OLED will give you the most accurate image output and the most best looking image output. (again remember it is output the image and not related to how the image is being render as the image was render by the device GPU you attached into it, your PC 4080 or your PlayStation 5).

 

If you concern on getting the best looking image output, you should look into different type of display technology. Currently basic type of display (in here monitor) in market included TN, VA, IPS, Mini LED and OLED  (WOLED or QD-OLED) where OLED is the best looking display where in general TN is the worst looking display.

 

For TV wise, in general it is category to LED LCD, QLED (local dimming full array LED LCD) and OLED (WOLED or QD-OLED) where OLED is the best and LED LCD is the worst. You didn't mentioned what is your TV model but general term of Samsung 4k Crystal UHD where normally Samsung 4k Crystal UHD is LED LCD, which is the least good TV display output.

typing fast makes such explanations possible other than knowing your references; very accurately detailed. https://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-65-class-cu7000-crystal-uhd-4k-smart-tizen-tv/6537363.p?skuId=6537363

altho at the moment having a 55 inch, it's a 7,000 series/wanting to go to 75 inch 7,000 series of the 4k Crystal UHD Samsung series. By this tv how well it can detect/display what the Asustrix 4080 can render/process; is as close/direct with the question of accuracy/performance of the Crystal UHD series/what is capable of/is it efficient display  < https://images.nvidia.com/content/tesla/pdf/78071_Tesla_M40_24GB_Print_Datasheet_LR.PDF

however/additionally I have 2X of the M40 TESLA series & they are made for literal image enhancement & graphics, display & effects improved on an exceeding scale. The M40 has 15 imagery frameworks, 24GB & it's own GPU/CUDA Core Count. Was very obvious going from Strix 4080 to when the M40's were installed; particle ratio's that would near match 8k res clarity standards at a res display set at 4k [a.i. learning graphic accelerator card]

it's extreme for how well TESLA worked with NVIDIA during a duration of time [around a few years]

Other TESLA series compared, most are work loads, program assists with ram & improvement of load times & rendering/edit; M40 is literally graphics enhancement especially for it's pricing < bought both for only $85 each. Given additional/finaledetails provided, to what addition anyone else wants to add & again always impressed on linus tech