1080p HDR image better than 4k non HDR ?

ultragpu

Banned
According to this article it does.
http://www.pureoverclock.com/2016/07/wheres-the-hdr-monitors-already/
AMD stated at CES, earlier this year, that we need better pixels. While the human eye may not work well compared to the magnifying focus of an eagle eye, what it can see as far as the range of colors is concerned is pretty amazing. If pixels aren’t reproducing colors to the extent that the human eye can see them, shades blur together making images look flat, rather than vibrant and varied. This is where High Dynamic Range (HDR) comes into play. HDR can almost reproduce all the colors the human eye can see on an individual pixel basis. This means that a 1080p monitor can actually look better than a 4K that isn’t using HDR.
Personally I've never seen a 1080p HDR image on a HDR capable display, just the 4k HDR image on a 4k HDR TV so I'm not entirely sure. But from the sound of it it appears despite having much lower pixel density, the 1080p HDR image offers much better pixel quality than the 4k one. I think we might get some clues once PS4 gets that HDR update and we can compare a 1080p HDR game to a 4k non HDR PC game. But apparently the author have seen something similar at CES and it's vastly better than the 4k non HDR image.
I still can’t seem to find monitors that support this yet and it’s driving me nuts! The reason I’m so excited about this is during my trip to CES, I actually got to see this in person. What I saw visually blew me away! I would trade 4K in any day for HDR at 1080p. Shoot! Even VR didn’t feel quite as good as an HDR monitor.
How very interesting, could it mean playing PS4 Pro games with HDR on at a reconstructed 4k frame actually be more impressive "visually" than on a native 4k PC with non HDR capable monitor? What do you guys think?
 
More acronyms to argue over, yay! Seriously though, for me HDR makes much more of a difference than 4K but then for me 1440p is the sweet spot beyond which the increased detail of 4K is virtually impossible to detect.
 
I've tried looking. Found this 40" Samsung 4k TV with HDR for $448.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01DUTL4OI

Tommy McClain
Not very good for HDR gaming honestly, the peak brightness only tops at 426 nits which is far lower than the UHD standard for LCD at 1000 nits minimum. The lack of local dimming also limits the black level dynamic range. I would get something at least on the level of Samsung KS8000 for a respectable HDR picture, but again that series doesn't come in smaller sizes.
 
HDR is more important. At least IMO. For some it's very challenging to differentiate resolution, especially when things are moving or distance from screen. That's not to say higher native resolution doesn't have more detail, it certainly does.

But colours as they improve we get closer to what we see IRL even if the resolution is poor. Should be a bigger difference in how we perceive the image.

The unfortunate case is that HDR and 4K currently is not decoupled.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
How do modern 4k tvs handle resolution during motion?

Iirc the first 4k tvs were not really 4k during motion, but had it reduced?!?
 
Don't buy cheap HDR monitors for gaming unless you know the latency first. Some HDR monitors have incredibly high latency with HDR enabled, enough to have an effect in the gaming experience.
 
I don't think there are many 1080p HDR TVs available at all though. Almost every HDR capable TV is a 4K one. All the TV manufacturers want people to start upgrading. 4K may not be enough, but maybe requirement to get 4K + HDR will be so there's that angle.

But honestly the prices are already quite good, even surprisingly so. I was thinking I buy a new TV in a year or so, but the prices in U.S. at least are very attractive already.

I will go for smaller TVs though, I don't like large TVs. I prefer the higher pixel density. My home 1080p TV is 42 inches, so I will get something similar size for 4K.

Only key things IMO to look for is latency (while using HDR mode as well) and of course whether or not it supports the HDR10 mode.

And apparently you need new HDMI wires that are 2.0 capable to take advantage of it as well.

Planning to pre-order the PS4 Pro soon, and so I will just buy the 4K HDR TV now I think. There's some decent sounding ones at least for my needs even almost as low as under $700 which was really amazing to me.
 
There is clearly no real harm in getting UHD instead of Full HD, and the way phones are influencing pixel density, I bet 4k will eventually be cheaper to make. But for HDR, contrast matters, and that has been expensive to make for a long time, and clearly still is. So I think asking for 1080p HDR 1000+ nit screens is basically pointless.
 
http://ca.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-features/hdr/best

Samsung KS8000 is a good mid-range HDR set. The Sony X800D is a good budget HDR set.
KS8000 has (edge) dimming whereas the Sony does not, but the Sony is cheaper and comes in smaller sizes.
Both sets have VA panels so good native black levels/contrast.

The Vizio has great PQ but with HDR on the input lag is on the higher side.

Personally I'm gonna hold out as long as I can before I jump into 4K/HDR. Content is limited for now. And I'm still happy with my 60" Panasonic 1080p plasma. Even though it's only 1080p, to get similar or better PQ I'd have to spend an arm and a leg. I'd also have to buy a new receiver, not to mention a PS4 Pro. Gaming is becoming very expensive. :(
 
Last edited:
Yep. I have long ago vowed that I would wait with buying a new TV until the TV I want costs 500 euros. That's what I intend to do now as well - once a 1000+ nit HDR tv hits that price I am in. By that time, content should start to be reasonable.

First let's see what VR brings ;)
 
And I'm still happy with my 60" Panasonic 1080p plasma. Even though it's only 1080p, to get similar or better PQ I'd have to spend an arm and a leg. I'd also have to buy a new receiver, not to mention a PS4 Pro. Gaming is becoming very expensive. :(

...plasma still has the best pixel structure in TVs ( least screendoor / highest MTF -only projectors have better , interestingly JVC-s also have less dither issue because of R G B are completely overlapped). If they can use "tone mapping" on HDR with an external processor and pass it on within the old hdmi's "deep color" SDR - 10/12bit format , it should be one of the best performers in a dark room still.
 
" HDR can almost reproduce all the colors the human eye can see on an individual pixel basis. "

maybe thats what microsoft call as "uncompressed pixel"?
 
" HDR can almost reproduce all the colors the human eye can see on an individual pixel basis. "

maybe thats what microsoft call as "uncompressed pixel"?
Everything is still compressed until you get a set as bright as a nuclear explosion which itself is brighter than the surface of the sun:). So if MS' vision comes true then 99% of future COD players would become blind day one.
MS is evil confirmed?
 
Back
Top