AMD's RX 480 hits half the performance of a Titan X (Pascal) at 8K resolution

[-BirdiE-]

2 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

whats confusing is 21:9 content does not follow this, 1080p 21:9 movie is 1920 x 800.

 

3840 x 1600 is 4k 21:9 LG just came out with a monitor with this res.

Yeah. Definitely confusing, especially because it's called 1080p due to the 1080 vertical pixels, yet the content is only 800 vertical pixels but called 1080p.

 

Now they've changed from labeling resolutions by vertical pixels, to horizontal pixels... and I'm pretty sure it all has to do with marketing. "Why would we add more pixels to advertise it as 4K, when we can give people less pixels and still advertise it as 4K?"

Which I guess is fine... as long as they're not advertising it as an "ultrawide 4K"... Since, as mentioned before, it is NOT wider than a regular 4K monitor.

[The Benjamins]

3 minutes ago, -BirdiE- said:

Yeah. Definitely confusing, especially because it's called 1080p due to the 1080 vertical pixels, yet the content is only 800 vertical pixels but called 1080p.

 

Now they've changed from labeling resolutions by vertical pixels, to horizontal pixels... and I'm pretty sure it all has to do with marketing. "Why would we add more pixels to advertise it as 4K, when we can give people less pixels and still advertise it as 4K?"

Which I guess is fine... as long as they're not advertising it as an "ultrawide 4K"... Since, as mentioned before, it is NOT wider than a regular 4K monitor.

The movie making industry has always used horizontal measurement it is just when 4K started the media picked up the industry term. and 4K is not even correctly used it is 4096x????

"4K" TV's are 2160p aka UHD 

[Drak3]

2 hours ago, -BirdiE- said:

Not true at all...

 

1080p 21:9 monitors are 2560x1080..

1440p 21:9 monitors are 3440x1440...

 

They call them ultraWIDE monitors because they are WIDER than their traditional 16:9 counterparts. If 2560x1080 was considered a 1440p monitor, then it would be the same width as a 1440p 16:9 monitor... and that's not ultrawide at all.. it would be ultrashort.

The discussion was about what an 8K display was, and how 8K/7680 is a meaningless number without an aspect ratio or vertical pixel count.

The discussion was never about what an ultrawide monitor was (which is an arbitrary name for an aspect ratio that was a standard longer than 16:9), although 32:9 and 48:9 would fit the name ultrawide far better.

 

Notice how I didn't say 7680x2160 was ultrawide either, I said it was 8K with an aspect ratio of 32:9.

[-BirdiE-]

9 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

The discussion was about what an 8K display was, and how 8K/7680 is a meaningless number without an aspect ratio or vertical pixel count.

The discussion was never about what an ultrawide monitor was (which is an arbitrary name for an aspect ratio that was a standard longer than 16:9), although 32:9 and 48:9 would fit the name ultrawide far better.

 

Notice how I didn't say 7680x2160 was ultrawide either, I said it was 8K with an aspect ratio of 32:9.

While technically you're right, there are certain implications that are made when you use that terminology. If your friend were to say that they played games at 4K, you would assume they meant they played at 3840x2160, not that they had two 1080p monitors side-by-side...

[Drak3]

Just now, -BirdiE- said:

While technically you're right, there are certain implications that are made when you use that terminology. If your friend were to say that they played games at 4K, you would assume they meant they played at 3840x2160, not that they had two 1080p monitors side-by-side...

While the assumption is right more often than not, there are people that use NVidia surround or AMD eyefinity, with monitor setups that that can effectively be 4 or 8K. Three 720p 16:9 monitors have a horizontal count of 3840, and three 1440p 16:9 monitors have a horizontal count of 7680.

[ARikozuM]

15 hours ago, DXMember said:

 

I have one, believe it or not. I believe it was paired with a Pentium 700Mhz at the time. Played... like sh#t...

[DXMember]

15 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Notice how I didn't say 7680x2160 was ultrawide either, I said it was 8K with an aspect ratio of 32:9.

there's not even 8000 pixels horizontally

[Drak3]

Just now, DXMember said:

there's not even 8000 pixels horizontally

Technically, 8K includes 7680 UHD.

[DXMember]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Technically, 8K includes 7680 UHD.

Ultra-high-definition television 3840 × 2160
Ultra-wide-television 5120 × 2160
DCI 4K (native resolution) 4096 × 2160
DCI 4K (CinemaScope cropped) 4096 × 1716
DCI 4K (flat cropped) 3996 × 2160

 

The standards for UHD and for 4k are different.

There's no sensible 8k standard but I would expect 4320p be called something like Super-Ultra-High-Definition and the cinema DCI standard 8k to have no less than 8000 pixels horizontally