this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
550 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

75162 readers
1900 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] afk_strats@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago (14 children)

I haven't seen this mentioned but apart from 8K being expensive, requiring new production pipelines, unweildley for storage and bandwidth, unneeded, and not fixing g existing problems with 4K, it requires MASSIVE screens to reap benefits.

There are several similar posts, but suffice to say, 8K content is only perceived by average eyesight at living room distances when screens are OVER 100 inches in diameter at the bare minimum. That's 7 feet wide.

1000009671

Source: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship

[–] FreedomAdvocate -2 points 1 week ago (8 children)

8K content is only perceived by average eyesight at living room distances when screens are OVER 100 inches in diameter at the bare minimum.

65-75" tv's are pretty much the standard these days. I've got a 75" and I'll want the next one I replace it with to be even bigger, so 100"-ish will be what I'll be after.

[–] czardestructo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

My 36" TV is fine, you monster.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’m sure it’s fine, but I much prefer my 75”. 36” would be way too small in my game room.

[–] Lumisal@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I like a big screen for gaming too, but just wanted to mention it also means you'll do worse at games. You can look it up, but a smaller screen gives you better performance, because your brain can properly see everything that's happening on screen at once.

Unless your screen is significantly far away that is.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Thats only if you’re sitting somewhere where you can’t see the whole screen at once. I can see everything that’s happening on my big tv. I’ve found I do worse on a smaller tv/monitor, moved my gaming pc from my 144hz 34” monitor to the 75” 120hz tv and my results are much better.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)