For the majority of people a 1080p60 with a high bitrate and 10+ bit color space will look absolutely perfect. Some can pixel peep and tell, but more people still struggle seeing when the aspect ratio is wrong on their TV.
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2026
699 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
79881 readers
4481 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What's interesting to me is that film is roughly, perceptually around 8K. However, very very few people have cinema-sized screens in their home, so what's the point if it's "only" even 80 inches?
I think giant 8K monitors are still useful for productivity, but only for a small number of people. I personally like having multiple monitors over one big one.
I cannot fathom why, but people do not seem capable of understanding resolution, screen size and viewing distance as important factors that interplay with each other.
8k is absolutely pointless on a 49" TV that is several metres away. However, I will take 4k over 1080 on even a 24" computer screen every time.
That is just me though, your preferences and vision may be different to mine. Same with the monitors. You like multiple screens, I prefer a single larger screen.
TV manufacturers salivated at the idea of TV resolution, hoping desperately to turn the TV market into something like the PC market, in that you have to upgrade every 5ish years to stay on top of technology and use the latest stuff to artificially increase sales beyond what their already abysmal build qualities provide them.
I'm glad the plan is failing spectacularly.
Hopefully this forces them to think more about quality and start focusing on TVs that actually last now... You know, like we used to have 30 years ago.
I have an fairly high end TV and honestly I don't know what the point is because there is virtually no content that's available for it.
Pretty much none of the streaming services go beyond 4K and often they're at 1080p and I have to upscale to 4K. Consoles also don't go above that 4k and again often in fact don't even hit that.
All we want is a clear picture and no ads.
Did you say you want really clear ads? We got just that!
4k is a little much for me.
Do you use 27-inch monitors?
At a certain point yours eyes can't tell much difference. It is like music, people would obsess over tweaking their stereo systems to the point where I doubt you could physically tell the difference, it was mostly imagined.
Huge tvs also require big rooms to make the viewing angle work. Not everyone has a room they work in. Apartments are especially too small for huge tvs.
The coathanger experiment should have been the coffin lid on all the audiophile/overpriced super ultra premium cable bullshit.
I never knew about this but it's hilarious: https://www.soundguys.com/cable-myths-reviving-the-coathanger-test-23553/
4k is enough, 60fps is enough, no smart or AI stuff is perfectly fine...
What about reducing the energy consumption? That's an innovation I want.
I hope you mean 60hz is enough for TVs. Because I certainly don't want that regression on my monitor 😄
Totally agree. Huge difference when moving windows or gaming on a 120 Hz or higher monitor. So smooth.
Never noticed.
Honestly you will. You probably never compared the two side by side.
It's incredibly apparent, you think it's smooth but then when you go over to 120 Hz and then go back the difference is very apparent.
I had a 980ti for AGES that could do 120hz at 1080. got a big 4k screen, immediately had to upgrade the gpu because it wouldn't do 4k at anything higher than 60hz. even moving the mouse across the screen felt sluggish.
The forbidden comparaison.
People live happily untill they do it. Than .... Than they can't ever go back . It's a curse.
Don't taste the forbidden fruit
You have never noticed the difference between 60 and 120hz?
When I tried a game that had a 120hz mode, I had to lower the quality a little to get it work well, but didn't notice a big difference, but there was a difference.
A few days later I went back to 60hz so i could increase the graphics quality , and the difference was crazy huge. I had to go back to 120hz.
60 and 240hz, yes I had it setup correctly.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(13 replies)
Getting rid of my tv was the best thing I did for myself. That’s the future. Removing and reducing all screen time.
I love that for you
For me, the opposite was true. Ever since I injured my knees last year, putting a 75 inch TV in my bedroom has improved my quality of life.
I know people will probably say "oh just fix your knees" and think that sentiment is helping, but I tend to not take my medical advice from technology communities and instead listen to doctors. It makes me sound rude, but it's true that medical advice should be given by medical professionals for the best outcome possible.
I really do love having a nice big TV in my bedroom.
Trust me this is not a technology community. If anything this is an anti-technology company more so than any other community that I've ever been a part of.
load more comments
(1 replies)
We didnt have one for a long time.
Then we got one for free. So we use it for movies and some gaming together, but we dont have any streaming subscriptions.
I agree it'd be better to not have. But im into old console gaming so I like to have a couple tvs.
Its good to balance it with reading and exercising of course! But movie nights are fun.
view more: next ›