Sony Uses Gran Turismo Sport to Showcase Its 8K TV at CES 2019

Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by GTPNewsWire, Jan 9, 2019.

  1. GTPNewsWire

    GTPNewsWire Contributing Writer

    Messages:
    8,948
    Location:
    United States
    Lukanyon, im_seb30, kalakanto and 8 others like this.
  2. TetsuKobura

    TetsuKobura Premium

    Messages:
    1,201
    Location:
    United States
    Hard to believe how back then, 480p was considered really high quality on YouTube.
     
  3. David Brooks

    David Brooks

    Messages:
    384
    Location:
    New Zealand
    There is no practical application for 8k apart from super large screens more suited to outdoor events. I'd hardly call it a consumer product.
     
    huiop2, im_seb30, JakeMR2 and 4 others like this.
  4. GiuliettaQV82

    GiuliettaQV82

    Messages:
    100
    GRS Gran Resolution Sport
     
  5. Nielsen

    Nielsen

    Messages:
    6,427
    I wonder if my eyes support 8K. :lol:
     
  6. I_Leak_Oil

    I_Leak_Oil

    Messages:
    108
    I have not noticed an improvement for 30 years.

    I think my eye sight is getting worse at the same rate tv’s get better
     
  7. Sven Jurgens

    Sven Jurgens

    Messages:
    4,284
    Location:
    Canada
    And VR. 8K spread over 150 degrees is comparable to 864p over 30 degrees, the recommended smpte viewing angle for 1080p tv. Of course in VR you can use foveated rendering with eye tracking, no need to render full 8K as your eyes only see sharp detail in a 2 degree cone.
     
  8. Calmlity

    Calmlity

    Messages:
    296
    PS5 could be 8k
     
  9. SlipZtrEm

    SlipZtrEm Administrator

    Messages:
    27,337
    Location:
    Canada
    Not natively. The PS4 Pro doesn't even do 4K natively in most cases. We're talking 16x the resolution of a 1080P screen, or 33 million pixels.

    AFAIK, there's very few companies producing 8K content right now. The Russo brothers filmed both Avengers 3 and 4 with IMAX/ARRI cameras that don't hit true 8K. Film companies are driving demand because an 8K camera can still produce better 4K content, but honestly, unless you're running a setup as big as this 98-inch Sony screen, you're not really going to notice a difference between 4K and 8K. 4K is still a hard sell for most folks — there's not a lot of content out there that's genuinely made for it — so good luck to any company trying to push for 8K to be remotely common place in the next decade.

    ...That said, I'm sure it's stunning to witness. :drool:
     
  10. Sven Jurgens

    Sven Jurgens

    Messages:
    4,284
    Location:
    Canada
    98" is on the small side for home theater projectors. 120" to 200" screens are common. Projectors aren't great for HDR though, nor input lag.

    https://www.digitalprojection.com/emea/dp-projectors/insight-laser-8k/
    https://www.projectorreviews.com/review-tv/cedia-2018-digital-projection-insight-laser-8k-video/
    Price available on request... Not for consumers.

    This fake 8K consumer projector already costs 18k (e-shift to simulate 8K, while not supporting 8K input, only upscaling)
    https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/09/11/71847/
     
    Dave Beerman likes this.
  11. Just The Stig

    Just The Stig

    Messages:
    196
    Location:
    Croatia
    There's no point playing a racing game on a TV because of input delay...I wonder what this thing's input delay is?
     
  12. Lord Protector

    Lord Protector

    Messages:
    2,785
    Location:
    Slovakia
    Wow. So I guess there are millions of people playing racing games on their TVs for no reason...
     
  13. Sven Jurgens

    Sven Jurgens

    Messages:
    4,284
    Location:
    Canada
    As long as the input delay is constant it doesn't matter when it's 60 ms or less. Just guessing, I found NFS shift 2 with input delay of 120ms hard to play in the fast cars, as well as trying to remote play Trackmania turbo at 120ms input delay, definitely too much. I've never had a problem with 60 ms though. Current TVs are well under that in game mode, even without game mode they are under or around that.

    I notice the difference in input delay when I switch tvs and drive GR.1 cars. It takes a couple laps to re-adjust my brake and turn in points, yet I'm just as fast afterwards. An extra 40 ms won't do anything for your reaction times which is about 250 ms for visual stimuli, then add the time to turn the wheel or press the brakes and the car to respond. Racing is all about situational awareness and anticipating the movements of other cars.

    What does matter is screen size. The more real estate to fill your vision, the more use you have out of your natural ability to judge speed and lateral movement. VR is obviously the best as it keeps you aware of your lateral movement on the track much better than a monitor or tv can.

    Now I wonder what HDMI 2.1 VRR will do to racing games. Variable frame rate, as in, display as soon as a frame is ready, sounds great on paper. No screen tearing when a game drops a few frames and smoother when there's less to render. However when a game runs at 50 to 80 fps, does that mean that you're now dealing with variable input delay? That would be very bad as I notice after switching tvs.

    The difference between 50 and 80 fps is only 7.5 ms render time, so perhaps it won't matter at all. I have no clue what the difference in input lag is between my 1080p and 4K HDR tv. I know it's less on the 4K HDR as I brake and turn in too soon on that one after playing on the old 1080p set. On the old set I have to start braking sooner as I'm actually already further ahead than what I'm seeing on screen. Most noticeable at 378kph (105 m/s) braking for Mulsanne. 7.5 ms variation between 50 and 80 fps is still less than a meter at top speed, so perhaps no issue.

    Anyway my 4K tv runs at 34ms input lag with HDR in game mode. No issues with that. No clue what my old 2006 Sharp Aquos 1080p tv runs at, input lag wasn't tested back then.
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2019
    Dave Beerman and Pigems like this.
  14. Just The Stig

    Just The Stig

    Messages:
    196
    Location:
    Croatia
    Uhhh...sorry, don't get me wrong, I just meant that a 5ms delay, for example, makes a massive difference from the 38ms my TV has. I switched to an older monitor which has only 5ms delay and I could feel the difference instantly, I even managed to drift around a couple corners properly in Project Cars 2 for the first time ever... It's the improvement in reaction time that counts, especially in racing (and drifting in this case).

    I will always remember the input delay I had with GT6, I tried drifting with a wheel and the 38ms input delay simply made it impossible for me.
     
  15. huiop2

    huiop2

    Messages:
    119
    Not gonna happen, it will be a 4K console and some demanding games won't even run at 4K.
     
  16. Auditore

    Auditore

    Messages:
    1,679
    Wait a minute,can you have more than 2 people racing at rally tracks?

    And the way the headlights iluminates the tokyo track :drool:
     
    Dave Beerman and AMPMROCKETFANN like this.
  17. Bornhall

    Bornhall

    Messages:
    26
    Indeed you can, and it's actually quite fun once you accept it as not-really-rally :)
     
    silverman_GT and Auditore like this.
  18. Milouse

    Milouse

    Messages:
    1,770
    Location:
    France
    It shouldn't be worse than a whole missed frame, should it? The risk is that developers take that for a don't-need-to-care-about-framerate free licence.

    My PC monitor IS a TV (40" 4K, that's the best fitting size for 4k as far as i'm concerned). Travelling my mouse from it to my old 120 Hz monitor plugged as a secondary side monitor, i don't notice the difference in response time.
     
    perja55 and ImaRobot like this.
  19. SimTourist

    SimTourist

    Messages:
    1,308
    Yeah, 8k is 16 times the resolution of 1080p, so to have GTS run at that res you need 16 times the power of PS4 - somewhere around 30 TFlops, which is triple or double of what PS5 will have depending on the specs.
     
    super_gt, TheProRacer and poumpoum like this.
  20. TBR 427

    TBR 427

    Messages:
    473
    Eye tracking rendering sounds brilliant on paper, but it's going to be a lot of fun to handle LOD-ing down things that aren't in focus - which can cause all sorts of problems in terms of image stability (do you want things popping in and out of LOD stages in the corner of your eye) and you're going to have the CPU doing heavy lifting figuring out what to render at max res vs what's a bit off, and with eye movement being so fast that's a lot of work.
    Most likely yeah it'll be a more solid 4k console. 4k or something similar to the 1280x1080 (x4?) resolution that they did with GT6 on the PS3 for those hard-to-render games.

    Unfortunately, of the 3 options (resolution, framerate, and hdr) we're taking the resolution route. One with the biggest performance hit and the least improvement in quality, but because it's easier to market that's what we got.
    Check some of the driving missions and tests in GT Sport, I'm pretty sure they have many cars on the rally tracks. You might even be able to get 6(?) car races in arcade mode too.
     
  21. FoRiZon

    FoRiZon

    Messages:
    8,006
    Maybe the fact that consoles only supports up to 60 hertz for display plays the part?

    (For those who dont know, most TV supports up to 60 hertz, while PC Monitor can do more than that, typically 144 Hertz for a high end ones. PC Gaming can reach more Hertz for obvious reasons.)
     
  22. Seasidesammy

    Seasidesammy

    Messages:
    8
    Human eyes see in 2k 24fps
     
    Pigems likes this.
  23. TBR 427

    TBR 427

    Messages:
    473
    Input delay is more than refresh rate / frame time.

    Given an instantly responsive PC, and zero transmission time from the player controller and any controllers, at worst you're going to have 16.6ms of input lag between you doing something and WHAT YOU SEE. This isn't the same as WHAT IS SIMULATED.

    Simply put, if you do something a nanosecond after the previous frame is shown, you've got to wait a minimum of 16.6 milliseconds before the next frame shows something.

    But let's think about all the things that have to happen:

    You move the joystick > controller registering that move. Might be 1/8,000th of a second (not sure about DS4 polling rate).

    Then, the controller transmits that wirelessly to the PS4, so encoding, transmission, verification+decoding the signal.

    Then GT Sport takes that info, and simulated based on it. Physics simulation is done hundreds of times a second, so each of those frames at 60Hz might contain dozens of physics steps. BUT, it won't show any of that until it's done enough physics and started rendering, at which point time is 'frozen'. Not actually frozen, but the renderer takes that point in time. So there's an offset there, if that makes sense.

    Now to output - through the wire to the TV. The TV then does whatever it does, and this is where the high-response rating of monitors shines. Because they're built for interactive things, this is smaller than a TV (because you never really test this on a TV do you).

    I'm assuming this is what he's alluding to in that post, the TV response time part.

    I'd love to get some numbers on all of these bits. Do some actual objective math on it per-system.
     
  24. Lord Protector

    Lord Protector

    Messages:
    2,785
    Location:
    Slovakia
    Dude :D most don’t even know how many hertz their tv support :lol: reason why most of us play on tvs is simple. It’s more convenient to hook a PS4 to a tv. I for one don’t even have a monitor :D
     
    TimBoss351, TomBrady and perja55 like this.
  25. Ridox2JZGTE

    Ridox2JZGTE

    Messages:
    11,646
    Some tv can run in PC input mode that can support more variety resolutions from VGA to 1080p/higher, and higher refresh rate 75-85Hz are common AFAIK, maybe the high end ones can even reach 100+Hz. I used my tv for pc gaming as well :p
     
  26. Tassie_tiger

    Tassie_tiger

    Messages:
    1,641
    Location:
    Australia
    I think most OLED panels are very good.
    My C7 is 120Hz Refresh and 0.2ms Response.
     
  27. Ridox2JZGTE

    Ridox2JZGTE

    Messages:
    11,646
    0.2ms :eek: that's insane, how is that possible on 120Hz tv ?

    -Edit : I think we are mixing something up here, what response you are referring to ?
     
  28. Tassie_tiger

    Tassie_tiger

    Messages:
    1,641
    Location:
    Australia
    Refresh being image change, response being pixel colour change.
    I think OLED, as opposed to LCD, has effectively 0ms Response.
     
    TomBrady likes this.
  29. Ridox2JZGTE

    Ridox2JZGTE

    Messages:
    11,646
    Oh, pixel response :) which is more related to motion blur and juddering which I think even most OLED still have issues and they usually have the fancy interpolation to much higher Hz like 240/480 :eek: or black frame insertion to combat them.
     
  30. Tassie_tiger

    Tassie_tiger

    Messages:
    1,641
    Location:
    Australia
    Yep.
    But related to refresh rates as the panel can only refresh quick if the pixels respond fast.

    At least this is what I remember from researching when buying my TV 12 months ago.
    A TV panel expert I am not. :p