Upcoming power consumption restrictions could limit sales of 8K TVs in the EU

NikoBB

Posts: 99   +60
When viewing a 4K BluRay I notice a slight difference compared to an HD picture but most people would not notice any. I stopped saving things in 4K because the huge file sizes aren't worth the small picture improvement in unless storage was much cheaper. Someday that may change.
Many do not take into account that not all films:
1. Is everything done in a 4k studio master, including intermediate stages.
2. For most films, even if the master is made in 4k (if indicated on imdb), the shooting is done on cameras with insufficient resolution. To get a real 4k result in the studio master, taking into account post-processes and special effects (which also requires huge capacities), shooting should be done on digital cameras with at least 6k resolution and at least 4:2:2. 8k is better. And effects too. A 6k/8k optics is very expensive. And not all projects can afford it.

And do not forget the main thing - all studio masters, even made in 4:4:4 4k and 36-bit color with a huge bitrate, you get on BD/Netflix always in 4:2:0 at best with HDR. And only copies for cinemas most often come with a bitrate of 250-500Mbps in 36-bit color and only 4:2:2 as maximum. Those, real 4k with 4:4:4 is physically inaccessible to you. So, in the best case, even with a reference studio master, you get about real 3k at home screen...

For example, to make it clear to everyone, I can give the final part of the Marvel crafts about the Avengers. There is a small stage where nature is shown on the planet of Thanos. I am always interested in such crafts from a technological point of view, as a milestone. So that's all they were able to calculate in 1-2 years of work - an insignificant piece of what was done on level for the full-length Avatar(completely naive and childish film of the level of teenagers according to the script) of 2009 (which was also full of unfinished scenes due to lack of resources, which is clearly visible to professionals). Despite their huge budget (Marvel), the actual level of special effects is just embarrassing for 2018-2019. Apparently all the money went to pay the actors. Today, in order to really surprise the audience, even taking into account modern special effects, the budget of the picture, minus actor's fees, should already be close to $1-1.5 billion. And who will go for this? After all, the goal is to collect a quick cash register. Not to mention the shameful quality of Hollywood (and not only) scripts in 99% of films. That is why cinema is the lot of naive youth and it is on them that all calculations and box office receipts are built.

Then older you get, then more boring and naive the movies become. Books are the only thing that can save, but and there is a lot of garbage. And books are mostly useful for development in youth. That's when they need to read a lot and voraciously. But who would only suggest to a young man the most important, like milestones, works?
 
Last edited:

kiwigraeme

Posts: 1,393   +1,036
Yes there are edge cases for 8K - but they are professionals - scientific , mastering at higher level before downscaling etc .
8K is a gimmick - probably it's main use is giving a better 4K image - more dark, light , tone control etc .

I've ranted consistently for GPUs forget about 8k give us more immersion things - sound, light etc

A 1080p Pixar movie will look 100x better than a highly detailed 8K cartoon without attention to detail

Same as cameras - Indy filmmakers are buying up the cheaper Alexa or Arri whatever they are called - because of the gorgeous images - you know those ones of trains rolling along in later afternoon light - yes the latest are 4K or 6K - but Indy companies are happy with cheaper ones - the cleanness of large sensors etc
 

toooooot

Posts: 1,827   +983
I love 4k to be honest. Games look better in 4k on 4k monitor, movies look amazing on 4k tvs although not as noticeably as games on monitors.
Is there a need for a 8k right now though.
I would really love to compare 4k and 8k monitors side by side to answer this question.
For TVs however... Sitting few meters away it is hard to notice what resolution it is running in.
Why dont we come up with better ways to produce electricity instead?
We have the proble m already, we have too many human beings that pollute in all ways possible.
Once we have reliable ways to produce clean energy in large amounts there would not be a need to save electricity by lowering TV resolution.
 

p51d007

Posts: 3,423   +3,107
For the last 2 years, probably I have watched 4k contents like 3 times so what's the point for 8k ?xD

Simple...just as with bigger is better. More megapixels in phones, higher refresh rates in phones...8k HAS to be better than 4k because the number is bigger. LOL
 

MarcusNumb

Posts: 108   +179
Simple...just as with bigger is better. More megapixels in phones, higher refresh rates in phones...8k HAS to be better than 4k because the number is bigger.
Probably it might be better but at what cost. Btw, that industry will create needs by all means to push sales but honestly, I don't think having a big high quality 8k TV will serve anybody good. My grandmother watches TV everyday and she can't tell the difference between 720p and 4k so...
 

bviktor

Posts: 1,154   +1,685
Europe got on the "Green" bandwagon WAY to early. Now they can't power their own grid. Hope the US doesn't get infected with too much of this madness.

The madness is the enormous waste western countries do. Especially the US. Why are you so entitled to waste more electricity on pixels your eyes are incapable of seeing?
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 1,559   +1,465
Great news. Many of the 8K 77" TV's I've seen are well over 1kW. I remember the BS about them killing plasma for it's energy use when it was around 400-500W.

So imagine gaming with a 4090, 13900K, 83" OLED with a total system draw around 1.5kW
 

Puiu

Posts: 5,956   +4,997
TechSpot Elite
Yet you can buy 20 4K TVs and that's perfectly legal.

Government regulations to achieve warm fuzzy emotions about being a good person are stupid.
Your 20 4K TVs mean nothing when we are talking about hundreds of millions of units sold yearly.

I'm glad they are doing this. It's time manufacturers innovated on the efficiency side too.
 

Badvok

Posts: 353   +182
Seems many people live in a very different world to me. I'd say >60% of what I watch is 4K, all the big streaming services provide lots of 4K content. Even the BBC are streaming a lot of content in UHD these days. I just wish NowTV would catch up.

4K has taken off because it fills in the detail on living room sized TVs that were often too big for FHD. 8K is not going to be viable for this TV size unless you sit 30cm away which kind of defeats the living room TV idea. 8K is only going to be viable for the relatively small market segment of large home cinema displays.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,350   +4,358
Europe got on the "Green" bandwagon WAY to early. Now they can't power their own grid. Hope the US doesn't get infected with too much of this madness.
It's not a "green bandwagon" that they got on too early. This is a result of refusing to buy Russian gas because of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. France doesn't have this problem because unlike Germany, only about 7% of France's electricity is generated with fossil fuels. They're primarily nuclear and hydro which makes them more or less immune to the problem. Of course, I'm sure that France will be happy to aid its fellow EU members where it can. I don't know how much total excess capacity France has but the French could be key to the EU weathering this storm.

It's not that hard to have foresight, something that Canadian provinces like Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and British Columbia have all demonstrated with hydropower being dominant in all of those provinces for decades (except Ontario where it's now second to nuclear). Meanwhile, Alberta and Saskatchewan are still in the dark ages burning coal and gas. It's pretty embarrassing to be honest.
The EU also wants to push kilowatt sucking EVs, and power everything with the magic of wind and renewable natural gas.
Unlike 8K TVs, those are actually important endeavours but I don't know what "renewable gas" is. Sounds like magic to me. With the exception of France, Europe has to get its act together when it comes to power generation because the people stupidly elected right-wing governments who did absolutely nothing while in office when it came to their power grids.
How long until there are restrictions on how many kilowatts you can shove into your car? 5 years? Anything to avoid upgrading the grid or embracing nuclear power.
I can assure you that, based on the experiences of France and Canada, the EU will not be shunning nuclear power for very long.
California, predictably, already has some stupid garbage on their books, which is why some lower end alienware computers cannot be purchased there, they dont consume power efficiently enough to meet government standards because they dont have HDDs.

It's really dumb.
That doesn't make sense at all because HDDs use for more power than SSDs. That IS stupid! Mind you, it does save people from making the mistake of buying Alienware so that's a silver lining! :laughing:
Yet you can buy 20 4K TVs and that's perfectly legal.

Government regulations to achieve warm fuzzy emotions about being a good person are stupid.
Only when they're that easy to circumvent. If the laws were rock-solid, then they'd be better. However, let's be real here. Who is going to purchase multiple 4K TVs to try to get around not having 8K? It just doesn't work that way.
Do not be discouraged - the harsh Nature itself will correct the presumptuous humanity in its unrestrained consumption. Sooner or later.
Yeah, but those least responsible for the bad situation that we're in will bear the brunt of nature's vengeance.
In the end, even the creation of real AI is 100% the end of human civilization, as the king of nature. We will be moved down immediately.
A properly-programmed AI would have HUGE advantages over the sorry excuses we have for leaders at the moment. AI wouldn't be able to be bought and wouldn't be constantly taking vacations to get away from all of their "hard work". AI will do things efficiently and wouldn't be corruptible. That's exactly the kind of leadership that we need.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,350   +4,358
Probably it might be better but at what cost. Btw, that industry will create needs by all means to push sales but honestly, I don't think having a big high quality 8k TV will serve anybody good. My grandmother watches TV everyday and she can't tell the difference between 720p and 4k so...
It's not always better. The only reason that these super-high resolutions exist in the first place is because screens got bigger. On a screen the size of a phone, you'd be very hard pressed to tell the difference between 480p, 540p, 720p, 1080p, 1440p and 2160p. Basically, the limitations of the human eye make having a phone-sized display at a higher resolution than 480p a complete waste of time and resources.
Great news. Many of the 8K 77" TV's I've seen are well over 1kW. I remember the BS about them killing plasma for it's energy use when it was around 400-500W.

So imagine gaming with a 4090, 13900K, 83" OLED with a total system draw around 1.5kW
Yeah, I think I'll pass on that. Maybe it would be ok in January if I lived in Nunavut.
Seems many people live in a very different world to me. I'd say >60% of what I watch is 4K, all the big streaming services provide lots of 4K content. Even the BBC are streaming a lot of content in UHD these days. I just wish NowTV would catch up.

4K has taken off because it fills in the detail on living room sized TVs that were often too big for FHD. 8K is not going to be viable for this TV size unless you sit 30cm away which kind of defeats the living room TV idea. 8K is only going to be viable for the relatively small market segment of large home cinema displays.
Make no mistake, you'd need a TV with DOUBLE the frame size for 4320p to really matter. So, if anyone wants a 110" panel, then maybe but most people I know don't have ceilings high enough for it. :laughing:
GPU power usage restrictions should be next. I laughed reading about brand new melting Nvidia 4090 cards 😆
Hopefully the Radeons will be better with regard to power use. I mean, it's not like they can be worse! :laughing:
 

NikoBB

Posts: 99   +60
On a screen the size of a phone, you'd be very hard pressed to tell the difference between 480p, 540p, 720p, 1080p, 1440p and 2160p. Basically, the limitations of the human eye make having a phone-sized display at a higher resolution than 480p a complete waste of time and resources.
When watching a video at 5-6 ", I disagree with less than 1080p. And when reading text at least 400ppi, below I clearly begin to distinguish pixelation from 20-25cm.
 

p51d007

Posts: 3,423   +3,107
Probably it might be better but at what cost. Btw, that industry will create needs by all means to push sales but honestly, I don't think having a big high quality 8k TV will serve anybody good. My grandmother watches TV everyday and she can't tell the difference between 720p and 4k so...
When I got a new phone last January, it came with 120Hz. I keep it on 60 because I'm not playing games, watching 4k videos etc. But, I showed it to coworkers saying hey look, this phone does 120hz! Look how smooth it is and how sharp the photos bla bla bla. Everyone thought it was great, then I showed them it was on 60, then put it on 120 and no one could really tell the difference.
Marketing, mostly...most would never get the benefit out of high video, refresh rates, more ram, more megapixels, faster CPU's on most devices.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,350   +4,358
When watching a video at 5-6 ", I disagree with less than 1080p. And when reading text at least 400ppi, below I clearly begin to distinguish pixelation from 20-25cm.
Well, then I'm glad that my eyes aren't as good as yours because I can't even tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on my craptop's 15.6" screen. Like, seriously, I can't. I run the craptop in 720p mode because it uses way less power, puts less stress and heat on the circuits and looks the same to me.

Maybe if I looked REALLY close and had one image next to another I might see a difference but when it's the only screen in view, it looks the same to me.
 

NikoBB

Posts: 99   +60
I can clearly see the difference between 4k and fhd sources on an fhd screen. And everyone sees it, if they are not blind. And on YouTube to watch videos of less than 4k, if there is a 4k source and hardware drags 4k, in general bad manners today - you deprive yourself of a clear picture, especially in complex scenes.

Anyone can easily be convinced even on a 15.6" fhd screen by watching a piece from this video from this timecode and switching the resolution from fhd to 4k. The difference in the crowns of the trees and the building in the background is huge - on YouTube's fhd resolution there is a solid blocky mess, at 4k it's almost like a photo, every frame is in detail...