Oh I agree whole heartedly. If I was buying a new tv I'd buy 4k

I still stand by my opinion of fuck 4k gaming if we can't even do 60fps.

I don't agree with you therefor you are wrong.


I wouldn't. Because lack of content and arbitrarly spending more to future proof doesn't seem wise. I would consider the fact that most people don't only own one TV. If 4k content proliferates the market I could always buy into then and for less to replace my 1080p TV. All things considered I would probably get both for less then buying a 4k now.

This post was edited by ROM on Nov 22 2016 02:57pm

You keep saying lack of content......but that's entirely untrue.

4K movies have been out for a while.
Netflix is doing a pretty great job.


I think you just make poor financial decisions. Especially since you're still not listening to the fact that 4K tvs are NOT expensive, nor at the moment, priced any higher than 1080p was several years ago.


4K tvs are NOT expensive. How many times must I say it.


Go research, please.

One platform hardly constitutes as there not being a lack of content. How many UHD blurays do you see when you go into a big box store?

A not 4k TV is less money then a 4k TV. They are not the same. I don't to do research to prove myself that point.

- I shed some examples. My TWO examples are not all there is. (I happened to list two VERY large platforms)
-I don't usually go into retail stores to buy dvds, my purchases come from Amazon, and on amazon, 4K has been widely available this year.


You are a complete fucktard and can't comprehend anything. 4K tvs are priced LOWER than 1080p tvs were priced several years ago.

Yes, 1080p is cheaper today, but the margin is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller.

4k is the standard. Period.




now, where is my warn?

This post was edited by stupidkid282 on Nov 22 2016 03:11pm

https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN55KU6300-55-Inch-Ultra-Smart/dp/B01E69WHP6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1479849222&sr=8-1&keywords=55%22%204k%20samsung





https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN55J6200-55-Inch-1080p-Smart/dp/B00U9U983Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1479849256&sr=8-1&keywords=55%22%201080p%20samsung


first link is a 2016 4k
second link is a 2015 1080p
Same size, similarish model numbers.

First link is cheaper. (4k)

Go figure.

This post was edited by stupidkid282 on Nov 22 2016 03:24pm

https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN65J6300-65-Inch-1080p-Smart/dp/B00U9U9F7U/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479849256&sr=8-2&keywords=65%22%201080p%20samsung


look here, a 2015 1080p 65" for $2800



The 2016 4k model of similar model numbers.......$1000



you're completely wrong, guy.

This post was edited by stupidkid282 on Nov 22 2016 03:24pm

Now prove to me that there aren't any cheaper 1080p TVs then 4k.
I can comprehend that 4k TVs are cheaper then they used to be. I won't delude myself into think that's saving money.

You can buy s 1080p right now with a lack of 4k content, wait to see if it proliferates, and get a 4k TV if it does for cheaper then buying a 4k now. So no I don't agree arbitrarly buying 4k now to future proof is a good use of money.

This post was edited by ROM on Nov 22 2016 03:50pm

I honestly think that if anyone wants to pick up a new TV, 4K would be the smarter choice
They are about the same price if not the same price already
If you want to watch 1080p you can do that on a 4K tv np
What's the point of skipping 4K and picking up another 1080p now when they are the same price?

There are cheaper 1080p, it's about $50-100 difference.


Which is pretty meaningless. If you're buying a new tv, why in the world would you purchase a "side grade" instead of an upgrade for similar price ( lesser or very slightly more)?

But I gave you examples of OLD model 1080p tvs being more expensive than current model year 4k tvs. What does that tell you? Oh, let me tell you, it tells you that 4k is the standard and no longer "expensive."


You have to have everything fed to you with a spoon. Be more independent and look shit up yourself.

This post was edited by stupidkid282 on Nov 22 2016 04:17pm