8K-X Status update?


I am sure that there will be a noticable difference between the upscaled picture and the native 4K one - provided the input in both cases is true 4K resolution and with detailed scenery, where it makes a difference. Otherwise why would people like Abrash even bother to mention the ultimate goal of 16K per eye?

However, it is true that currently there will be limited true 4K input (though due to 4K monitors being around, it is coming sooner or later). And the real issue is, that nobody will have a machine powerful enough to run native 4K content of a game offering the kind of detail with 80-90 Hz to make it a fun experience. Either you have a simple grafics game a la Fruit Ninja which you can power with your high end GPU on the full 4K resolution, but then you indeed hardly notice it, or you look at a nice Eliute Dangerous slide show.

In the first instance I fear it rather will be practical for watching movies in a virtual cinema with a really good resolution of the virtual screen in front of you.


I dont care about blind test. The result of blind tests is influenced by many factors like mood, short memory, concentration. We talking about viuals here and you can instantly compare A to B on 1 screen


Tell that to the soldiers that rec’d sugar pills & felt better believing they rec’d morphine.

This is a well documented scientific phenomena.

A blind test ensures your bias is not playing into what you are perceiving.

Four systems setup in booths ensures a cleaner test then changing settings yourself.


The problem with resolution without using still samples or having a very trained eye most won’t see subtle differences between A & B.

Yes there will be differences if you know where to look. Take Dying light & change quality settings while leaving resolution fixed. The differences in quality settings is not as wide as it once was.

Truth in games if you have time to study the scene to notice differences in high resolutions; then your probably not enjoying the game much.


I understand your point, but most of us are not american soldiers , we are tech oriented ppl with trained mind and eye and years of gaming exp. and some of us have strong orientation on details. If you jump into cockpit of 4K textured plane from il2 BoS there is no way you can do mistake and say this 1K textures. Differences in this example are very noticable. Sim lovers have 100s of hours in cockpits and 4k textures are very welcome


I agree with what your saying but remember 1k is not to be confused with 1080p which is 2k ish.

It’s why I say the best test is to use the scientific method with controls for a cleaner set of results.

1k Resolution would be around 720p ish.

Now where you can definitely see a clear difference between 1080p & 2160p is with larger screens like a 55"+ (of course you need to be within a set view distance).

Years playing & looking for sure you are likely to see a real difference depending on your visual aquity compared to the consider average norm.

I remember for years (and some still cling to it) that Analog sound is perceivably better than any digital sound.

Make no mistake; I do agree technically higher resolution is better. But the point was that on the average the majority won’t perceive a difference.



There are the special cases of sims, like flights ims and racing sims, where you will notice that difference very much - you will only be needing it for a tiny fraction of the screen, but there it then is vital.

Think of the enemy fighter plane somewhere out there far away, just barely visible. Or the next bend on the race track after a long straight. This is where even with the new Samsung displays you still are left guessing if there is anything to be seen, and what exactly.

Display resolution still has a long way to go for a number of use cases, and it is about more than just proper aliasing - sure, that can help give the impression of more sharpness but will not show more details where the information has not been included in the picture data feed from the GPU.

These sims make up quite a good part of the VR community…


Hmm interesting notion. If there’s enough texture data but the object is just further away, then indeed 8k-x will show it better than the 8k. So for objects further away there indeed should be a noticeable difference.


I have agreed with a great deal of what you have said @Heliosurge in the past and as you know always appreciate your input on these subjects yet in this case I’l have to kindly disagree on 2 points just my personal opinion. 1. As a long time gamer someone like Yata_PL described having a strong orientation on graphical detail after using mods and HD tecture packs in games like Skyrim and Fallout 4Vr, to my eyes there is a clear and noticable difference in 2k textures and above I can’t go into detail here of all the areas where I have seen noticable major improvements. Another subject I’m familiar with is the difference between a standard blue ray player and a UHD blue ray player again to my eyes a very noticable difference and secondly and a little off topic, analog is better just my Opinion if i had the link to a youtube video i would provide it where the difference was recorded through some computer software revealing a much greater amount of information being revealed with the analog signal vs the digital. Sorry to be contrary I guess I just wanted to type something this morning.


I do agree that on a side by side test with studying you can see a difference if your focused on it.

And as @Axacuatl said certain games the native input will give clear benefits. Ie sim games (car & flight) in that Guages will have an even cleaner look & potenial as he said with far off opponets might be spotted.

But in a blind test where you don’t know which is which & don’t have the side by side testing most will not be able to perceive the difference.

For example if we had 4 test setups & you tried them over 4 days (1 rig per day) with high levels of action. Would one be able to accurately identify which is which. Through in the mix some ss on one of the upscaled setups & of course an easy 1 setup with 1080p.

While Analog has more Data than a digital; perceivably it can be negliable as demostrated by the blind Audio test.



Heliosurge my man and the MVP of this forum thanks for lol. You are right so much of it comes down to personal perception and differences in people. Since were not all robots yet ( i think ) or there was a whole lot of fancy programming going on. :grimacing:


I’ve done a few tests on my 4K monitor in Elite Dangerous. 3840x2160 does look crisper and I’m sure it would look even better if I could enable super-sampling, while maintaining a reasonable framerate, but I can’t (on my 980Ti). When I run 2560x1440 (8K single eye res) with super-sampling enabled it actually looks BETTER, while keeping the FPS in the acceptable range.

Of course this is purely subjective and your opinion may differ.


Strange that people are arguing against a blind test.

If you really discern the difference in anything, then a blind test wouldn’t worry you. Blind tests scare people who have talked up their abilities beyond the truth.

I prefer my audiophile vinyl records to my digital files of the same albums. I wouldn’t claim I can always discern analogue from digital sounds though as blind tests will prove me wrong.


Perceptions are more complex and may shift since you “eat with your eyes” as well. Of course blind tests are good to break something down to a single aspect, which may however not match the perception as a whole. Eg why should I eat something even if it tastes very good with a blind test but looks disgusting. Same with audiophiles, the feeling that sound is actually created analog adds to the feeling how music is heard, can be touched, in a way more appreciated. So quality, of course subjectivly, is not necessarily covered by a blind test. But beeing into nerdy stuff I actually do blind test regulary, and even those results may shift from time to time, I guess depending on mood :wink:


Well the only way to really know for example if a FLAC has added value in comparison to a 256kbit mp3 is to do a blind test, otherwise your brain will play tricks on you. Same with this 4k native resolution.

I also did this with the Pimax 4k btw, back when Pimax increased resolution from 1080p to 1440p, I randomized the driver files and then asked my self if I was looking at 1440p or 1080p, just to make sure my brain wasn’t playing any tricks on me.


To my knowledge mp3 cuts super high and super low frequencies outside of human hearing range, amongst other things, to save data making it sound the same but audiophiles will hate the very idea.


Here is the results of Audio sampling via blind test.

The original Maxpc article



Interesting, that’s exactly what I found myself during a blind test. I have a high end audio setup (barefoot micromain 45) and always thought that I could easily hear the difference between uncompressed flac and mp3. Turned out that as of 256kbit I couldn’t distinguish anymore between that and flac. Lower than 256k I could hear, so whenever I’m looking for music, I now know that 256k is high enough :slight_smile: BTW, without the blind test, just listening at the mp3’s, I always felt sure I heard a difference, so that’s why blind tests are the only way to find out in such cases.

Anyway, so yeah, that’s why I’m convinved that 4k testing also needs to be done as a blind test, cause your brain WILL play tricks on you otherwise.


Indeed its like the old trick. Gather 5 friends have 4 of them in on a gag/deception. Take a random picture & have you & your conspirators agree to all see something in a picture.

When you have the mark present discuss the picture. The Mark is likely to see what the group sees. There or not.

That new tv series Deception is pretty good. :smirk:


missing frequencies in mp3 it is definitly NOT outside the human rearing range, neglectable though. I admitt ist different with flac that I honetstly dont use for pratical reasons.
If you listen for example to hi hats closely you will notice that something is missing.
you may not notice the frequencies themselfs but that there is something odd if you exactly know how it usually sounds. Non musicians adapt and, rightfully, give a shit.
I don’t wanna go to deep into harmony/overtone theory but if you know what to look for u will find it. This particular thing I blindtestet many times.