This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
They did get around to saying it's pixel density at the end...
But still, it's human variation. Everybody is gonna be different. I'm not a resolution snob, but anything under 100fps pulls me out of the experience. So usually I just run at 1440, when I have fps to spare I'll put all the settings up rather than go to 4k.
Other people would rather 30fps at 4 or even 8k
That's why I have a 65" and sit barely 2m from it. Stick on a 4k Dolby Vision encoded file through Jellyfin. Looks fucking great!
I stick with 1080p for my Jellyfin library because I can’t really tell much difference on my living room TV between upscaled 1080p and native 4k, at least not enough to merit the huge difference in file size. 4k games when sitting close to my computer monitor, on the other hand, are definitely worth it.
If you’ve ever connected a laptop or PC to a television as a monitor, the benefit of 4K for text readability is incredibly apparent.
If this isn’t your use case, and you’re not right up against your screen, 1080p is more than good enough; not like most content is coming down on 4K unless you’re paying extra, anyways.
My PC is on a 40" TV at 1920 x 1080. Looks great to me, and my eyes aren't so hot.
But they are much better for energy companies
Me getting 480p videos for my video projector : "Oh... no really?" ¯\(ツ)/¯
PS: FWIW I do have a Vision Pro (for work, I didn't pay for it personally) so I technically could enjoy high res content... but honestly I can't bother using this to watch videos. I'm fine with just my desktop screen or video projector. I just don't get the high res.
This is pretty obvious due to how they had to add HDR at the same time to sell it. The HDR was a real progression, but they wouldn’t get to sell you higher res Blu-ray formats and streaming packages with just that.
I watch 576i DVDs on a 24" 1366x768 TV and I don't mind because I sit reasonably far.
