4k Televisions is there a point?

[sonofsanta]

That’s not 100% true, well I agree on the gold plating having zero impact. But there are lots of versions of HDMI cable and the quality of the image you can get out of them is different.

For example a HDMI 1.4b cable can handle a much higher quality image then a HDMI 1.4a cable.

 

Doing 3D 1080p the A cable will cap out at 24fps while the B hill go as far as 120fps. I didn't realise how big a difference a HDMI cable made until I swapped one and image improved massively.

 

Oh yeah, standards matter, no-one can dispute that, although there's no benefit to having a cable of a higher standard than your equipment can support of course. And it can be worth spending a few quid more to get something with decent build quality (braided cable, sturdier connector housing etc.). But no matter how much you spend on the correct cable, the 1s and 0s either get there or they don't.

 

My favourite Made Up Cable Claim ever has to be this one, though: SATA cables that improve the sound quality of your MP3s (£190 for a 40cm cable)

[abillybob]

My favourite Made Up Cable Claim ever has to be this one, though: SATA cables that improve the sound quality of your MP3s (£190 for a 40cm cable)

 

You could argue that fundamentally the cable is actually worth that dependent on the weight of gold and silver there is in the cable, plus the other materials and design. (If this makes any sense at all) but when cables start to go for Hundreds and hundreds or Thousands you're being a bit silly there now because unless it's got diamonds in for no particular reason than to look pretty I think it'd be very hard to justify the price...

 

Hmm remind me a bit of a certain pretty looking computer manufacturer that does the same kind of thing.

[LosOjos]

You could argue that fundamentally the cable is actually worth that dependent on the weight of gold and silver there is in the cable, plus the other materials and design. (If this makes any sense at all) but when cables start to go for Hundreds and hundreds or Thousands you're being a bit silly there now because unless it's got diamonds in for no particular reason than to look pretty I think it'd be very hard to justify the price...

 

The weight of the entire cable in solid gold would probably not cover it's selling price!

[abillybob]

The weight of the entire cable in solid gold would probably not cover it's selling price!

 

It's 97% Silver and 3% Gold.

[LosOjos]

It's 97% Silver and 3% Gold.

 

I know it's not solid gold, I meant that if it was solid gold, then the price of that gold probably still wouldn't cover the cost of the cable - it'll only weigh a couple of grams.

 

If you want to be facetious, it definitely isn't 97% silver and 3% gold anyway - otherwise it'd just be a lump of metal

[abillybob]

If you want to be facetious, it definitely isn't 97% silver and 3% gold anyway - otherwise it'd just be a lump of metal

 

Haha Bazinga !!!

[pcstru]

Agreed - we were getting a lot of hum from one of our Hall sound systems and we tracked it down to a very cheap 10m jack to jack cable that we had used. We replaced it with one that cost £10 and it worked a treat.

That's a faulty plug. It's not faulty *because* it is cheap. Expensive plugs can hum and buzz too.

I certainly think spending stupid amounts of money on them is just pointless, and if there are improvements I suspect they are so small as to be undetectable to most of us

A lot of high end and exotic stuff is just Anchoring. When you see a bit of cable at £200 a meter, suddenly £10 a meter seems somehow eminently reasonable.

[truebluesteve]

That's a faulty plug. It's not faulty *because* it is cheap. Expensive plugs can hum and buzz too.

 

A lot of high end and exotic stuff is just Anchoring. When you see a bit of cable at £200 a meter, suddenly £10 a meter seems somehow eminently reasonable.

 

No it was the shielding on the cable - we moved the cable to another location and it was OK. The cable was of a low quality - even to the untrained eye. The problem probably wouldn't have occurred with a shorter cable.

[abillybob]

Hey Guys,

 

Got my TV and all is working great, the picture quality is just wow after coming from a 6-7 year old 1080p TV.

Although I have a little niggle with it, for some odd reason when using my Desktop on my PC at 4k res 3840 x 2160 the mouse lags considerably, well not loads but enough to bother me. When I put the Res down to 1080p or even half that of 4k there is no mouse lag at all it works like a dream... only issue is at 1080p for some reason everything on the desktop goes huge, I have even tried setting everything to the "Smallest" Settings and it just makes it all look really ugly.

 

I am presuming it's more so something to do with my GPU than my TV because as I say at 1080p there is no problem with mouse lag at all only when I set the desktop to 4k. I just want to know what it is really because if it's the TV I'll probably send it back, it is fairly annoying but if it's my GPU then I'm sure I can manage until I upgrade it. I'm presuming that the mouse would lag at any resolution if it was my TV although not entirely sure so thought I'd ask you guys!!

 

Thankyou

[newpersn]

Have you got any gpu monitoring tools? I know some of the ati cards have it. Just to see if your hitting 100% usage

 

How old is the gpu? (Model number)

[Arthur]

for some odd reason when using my desktop on my PC at 4k res 3840 x 2160 the mouse lags considerably, well not loads but enough to bother me.

Unless you have a GeForce GTX 970 or 980 which both have HDMI 2.0 ports, your graphics card will be displaying 4k UHD at 30Hz on your KD-49X8505.

[abillybob]

Have you got any gpu monitoring tools? I know some of the ati cards have it. Just to see if your hitting 100% usage

 

How old is the gpu? (Model number)

 

It's barely touching 5% at idle on just the desktop with 4k resolution enabled so I don't think it is that :/

Unless you have a GeForce GTX 970 or 980 which both have HDMI 2.0 ports, your graphics card will be displaying 4k UHD at 30Hz on your KD-49X8505.

 

Ah, I did read up on something about this. I have got a MSI GTX 770 so this may be the problem. Would it make a difference if I used a DVI to HDMI adapter? Would that counteract the problem temporarily or will it be like this until I upgrade my GPU?

 

Although @Arthur these are my settings so I'd presume it's running at 60hz?

Edited December 24, 2014 by abillybob

[Arthur]

I have got a MSI GTX 770 so this may be the problem.

The GTX 770 only has HDMI 1.4a unfortunately.

 

• www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-770/specifications
  
• www.nvidia.com/content/geforce-gtx/GTX_770_User_Guide.pdf
  

Would it make a difference if I used a DVI to HDMI adapter?

Nope.

 

these are my settings so I'd presume it's running at 60Hz?

Kind of.

 

NVIDIA Kepler Cards Get HDMI 4K@60Hz Support (Kind Of) « AnandTech

 

... when Kepler based video cards using NVIDIA’s R340 drivers are paired up with very recent 4K TVs, they gain the ability to output to those displays at 4K@60Hz over HDMI 1.4. These setups were previously limited to 4K@30Hz due to HDMI bandwidth availability, and while those limitations haven’t gone anywhere, TV manufacturers and now NVIDIA have implemented an interesting workaround for these limitations that teeters between clever and awful.

 

Lacking the available bandwidth to fully support 4K@60Hz until the arrival of HDMI 2.0, the latest crop of 4K TVs such as the Sony XBR 55X900A and Samsung UE40HU6900 have implemented what amounts to a lower image quality mode that allows for a 4K@60Hz signal to fit within HDMI 1.4’s 8.16Gbps bandwidth limit. To accomplish this, manufacturers are making use of chroma subsampling to reduce the amount of chroma (color) data that needs to be transmitted, thereby freeing up enough bandwidth to increase the image resolution from 1080p to 4K.

 

What this means is that Kepler cards can drive 4:2:0 4K TVs at 60Hz today, but they are doing so in a manner that’s only useful for video. For HTPCs this ends up being a good compromise and as far as we can gather this is a clever move on NVIDIA’s part. But for anyone who is seeing the news of NVIDIA supporting 4K@60Hz over HDMI and hoping to use a TV as a desktop monitor, this will still come up short. Until the next generation of video cards and TVs hit the market with full HDMI 2.0 support (4:4:4 and/or RGB), DisplayPort 1.2 will remain the only way to transmit a full resolution 4K image.

 

will it be like this until I upgrade my GPU?

It's looking like this might be your only option.

[mac_shinobi]

The GTX 770 only has HDMI 1.4a unfortunately.

 

• www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-770/specifications
  
• www.nvidia.com/content/geforce-gtx/GTX_770_User_Guide.pdf
  

 

Nope.

 

 

Kind of.

 

NVIDIA Kepler Cards Get HDMI 4K@60Hz Support (Kind Of) « AnandTech

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's looking like this might be your only option.

 

 

GPU wise - whats the minimum gpu required to run 4k properly with the relevant hdmi spec / support etc

[Arthur]

GPU wise - what's the minimum gpu required to run 4k properly with the relevant hdmi spec / support etc

For TVs you need a graphics card with HDMI 2.0 ports. For 4k UHD monitors you need DisplayPort 1.2/1.2a (or better still 1.3 when that's available later next year).

 

NVIDIA GPU support for 4K Resolutions

All GeForce GTX 600 and 700 series GPUs can support 4K resolutions through DisplayPort. The NVIDIA driver automatically detects 4K 60Hz tiled format, so no special user set up is required. In order to power games at this resolution with settings turned up NVIDIA recommends GTX 780 SLI or better.

 

https://developer.nvidia.com/4k-ultra-high-resolution-development

Edited December 24, 2014 by Arthur