Suddenly a 5 GB 1080p x265 encode balloons to (possibly) 20 GB. Now I don't know if that means you'll have a 4x larger file at 3840 x 2160 with an x265 encode versus a 1920 x 1080 encode, but I think it would be reasonable to assume it'll be at least twice as large and possibly much larger. Even with x265, which I suspect will become widespread on trackers by the end of this year, you're still dealing with 4x the pixel density of 1920 x 1080. And I can tell you from personal experience that you'll need at least 1 GTX 980 to drive a 4K display for most games, and you're going to want dual GTX 980s for some games. But I have yet to meet one single person on a private tracker that doesn't do at least some gaming. Yes, I know that even a $199 and less video card will drive a 4K display. Sure, you can get an awesome 60 Hz IPS panel from Dell for $599 (less with coupon codes), but most people I know, even hardcore gamers, are running $200 - $400 monitors. 4K remuxes / encodes are only worthwhile if you have a 4K display. When we start seeing 4K Blu-ray movies consistently, maybe I'll change my mind, but I think that's a long ways off for trackers for the following reasons:ĤK monitors. The Blu-ray itself is already (almost always) a loss of quality from the original source recording, so I don't see the point in storing a 20 - 50 GB file when an 8 - 15 GB file will rival the quality at a level of 95 to 100% of the BR itself. Honestly I've rarely seen a difference in a remux vs.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |