Re: AMD weighs in on HD versus 4K

On Thu, 29 May 2025 10:09:13 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Wed, 28 May 2025 05:22:56 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Xocyll wrote:
>

Hell I don't even buy Blu-Ray if DVD is an option - I literally see no
difference between them, so 4K Ultra was never in consideration.

>
I do Bluray for the audio. There I can definitely hear a difference. I
found this out when I got Fight Club on Bluray.
>
But a 4k picture is only noticable to people with 20/10 vision on a
minimum 90" screen from 5-10 feet.

Heh. I saw a 98" UHD TV the other day in a store. THERE I noticed the
difference... when standing less than a foot away. The pixels were
big!

But even I wouldn't be using a TV that big unless I was sitting on a
couch. And I'm the weirdo who uses a 47" display as one of my
monitors. Just the thought of dragging a mouse across a screen that
big makes the carpal tunnel flare up! ;-)

(I was surprised at how inexpensive screens that big had become
though; it seems that just a few years ago anything larger than 60"
was in the $5-6000USD range, and now you can get a 98" screen for less
than 2 grand).

Maybe if I had a Bradbury telewall I'd consider it.

I'd probably end up with four Telewalls for full wrap-around
immersion. Next best thing to the holodeck! ;-)

(I'd have to do something about all the furniture blocking the view,
though. It wouldn't feel very Doom-like if that credenza with the
daisies on top of it were always in view)