I used to think my next computer purchase would be whatever was required to drive the first 4k monitor under $2k. But I have seen that I was incorrect. Smoothness is far more important than resolution (to me), so if this technology proves to be useful, I will probably end up purchasing a monitor with this capability and a new computer to go with it.
I really have to applaud the engineers at Nvidia, and whoever else drove this initiative. I thought graphics were slowing down and I wouldn't need to upgrade for a while (it's already been two years). To come up with a product that proves me wrong is both surprising and delightful. Great work from a corporate perspective, great work from a gaming perspective, and great work from an engineering perspective. Just really fantastic all around.
Agreed! But I see no reason why we can't have both. Resolution and smoothness. I'd be so happy with both.
Especially if I can have it at Seiki prices. I picked up one of their $700 4Ks and the only thing holding Seiki back from cracking the desktop display market is the 30Hz limit they inherit from HDMI 1.4, making the monitor only suitable for work (but very well suited to work).
Unless the world economy collapses permanently, I have no doubt that we'll have both eventually. I don't have the patience to wait for inexpensive 4k in the face of this sync stuff though, which is why I can't have both in this generation.
I thought 4k was just for large tvs, can you tell a difference over a retina display? Aren't they called retina because that's the most your eye can see?
4k is nothing more than the double resolution from 1080p
> can you tell a difference over a retina display?
A 21" Retina Display iMac would be 4k (the current 21" iMac is 1920x1080). A 27" Retina Display iMac would be way beyond 4k (it would have a 5120x2880 display)
> Aren't they called retina because that's the most your eye can see?
That's more of a marketing moniker and incomplete. The original point/qualifier is that they fall beyond the eye's angular resolution so you can't "see" individual pixels anymore. That's not "the most your eyes can see" though, many arthropods create details & colors through nanometric structures.
Actually, 4k screens are useless for TVs (despite what all the TV manufactures want you to believe), since you generally sit so far away from them. A 4k monitor would be very nice, since it would be large but still very high DPI (ie, "Retina").
My understanding is that a 4k 30" monitor is a retina display at 30 inches. I know that I can see pixel edges on my Dell Ultrasharp, and it's 2560x1440. My guess is that I would not be able to see pixel edges if the resolution was quadrupled (4k).
I really have to applaud the engineers at Nvidia, and whoever else drove this initiative. I thought graphics were slowing down and I wouldn't need to upgrade for a while (it's already been two years). To come up with a product that proves me wrong is both surprising and delightful. Great work from a corporate perspective, great work from a gaming perspective, and great work from an engineering perspective. Just really fantastic all around.