"Native Resolution" - Sony Bravia 32" FHD to LG 43" 4K / UHD, possibly?

[MarkusAurileus]

Hi, hope everyone is doing great. New to the forum and beginner in TVs. I've done some reading on 4K, and the basic "what to know" for buying a television. Also, I tried researching a clear answer before posting this, but fell short. Hopefully, I can get some clarification from this thread. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!


Question:
When a TV spec shows 3840x2160 as its 4k resolution, is that the native resolution?

I ask this because I'm currently viewing on a 32" Sony Bravia FHD KDL-32L5000, with my HTPC putting out at native resolution of 1360x768. Although the TV is a "1080" HDTV, the image at this "768" resolution provides the best picture, looking notably crisp at a viewing distance of 4-6 ft. Side bar - haven't had any discernible issues with input lag.

I'm looking at getting a 43" LG 4K UHD TV, and I'm curious if 3840x2160 provides the best image, or if it simply "accepts" the image but has a different native resolution. Or should I just get a 43" HD TV?

 

[Dodgexander]

Your current TV is not a FHD model which is why 1360x768 looks best on it. 768p is the native format of the TV, whilst sending 1080p means it gets downscaled and the image looks worse.

With a 4k TV you are correct the resolution is always 3840x2160 and since that is the native resolution it will be the sharpest.

To support 3840x2160p at 60hz your PC needs to have a graphics card with HDMI version 2.0. Otherwise you will be limited to 30hz at this resolution.

As for an UHD vs FHD TV. UHD models tend to be better quality nowadays, you should make the decision on how close you view and the kind of content you use though, since a FHD TV is going to be more impressive using poorer quality material, whilst a UHD one will be more impressive with higher quality material.

It also depends how close you view, most people don't view close enough to a 43" model to notice a difference between the two.

 

[MarkusAurileus]

@Dodgexander I really appreciate your response. Okay, that makes sense about my current TV. Yes, my GTX 1060 uses HDMI 2.0b thankfully.

On average, the content I watch is at 1080p, again viewed from 4-6 ft. Also, plenty gaming, although 4K max gaming is a pipe dream (at the most, I'll consider getting an 5700 XT, RTX 2070 Super, or RTX 3060 when available later).

Based on an article/chart I found on Crutchfield, I won't really notice the higher definition of 4K from my couch (6 ft). Maybe I should get a FHD, as you mentioned, but UHD can be so inexpensive these days - it's tempting lol. But, what do you mean by the following?

...you should make the decision on how close you view and the kind of content you use though, since a FHD TV is going to be more impressive using poorer quality material, whilst a UHD one will be more impressive with higher quality material.

Is it a problem of upscaling? If I use an output resolution of 1920x1080 to a 4K TV, will it look funny at the 6-ft sitting distance?

 

[MarkusAurileus]

Actually, your guides answered most of my questions lol. It's now just a matter of going to the showroom floor and looking at what is most visually appealing. Thanks!

 

[Dodgexander]

I think you'll be fine either way but if HD is your primary use you'd be better with a HD TV so the UHD one wouldn't have to upscale.

When upscaled to 4k you notice more imperfections with lower quality material, its the price you have to pay through to enjoy the latest quality 4k content. Think of it a little like it was years back when we first moved from SD TVs to HD. The HD TVs looked great with HD, but when we used SD on them, it looked pretty poor.

 

[MarkusAurileus]

That comparison clarifies things. Well I'm going to head into the direction of UHD and start watching 4K here and there. Now that I'm looking, it's surprising to me how much content there is to stream at this resolution. Thank you for your help!