Print
It's been less than a year since YouTube gave the thumbs up to 1080p HD, but they seem determined to never fall behind again. On Friday at the VidCon 2010 conference the streaming video site revealed support for 4K video streams, a resolution that is more than four times the size of 1080p. To put this in perspective they claim the most ideal display for a native 4K video would be a screen measuring more than 25 feet across.
Many agencies reporting on this story have criticized the announcement as little more than posturing given that consumer adoption of 4K is still many years out, but you won't hear any complaints from us. After all, many of us are rocking 30" displays that have far too many spare pixels when watching 1080p anyway.
A sample video collection has been posted to the site for you to checkout, but make sure you come prepared. According to the YouTube blog you'll need a "super-fast broadband" connection, and half way decent hardware to enjoy the sample clips. My initial tests showed satisfactory performance with a 10Mbps cable connection, but it was nearly impossible to detect the difference on a 1920x1200 24" panel between 4K and 1080p.
Now that YouTube offers resolutions far an above everyone's native displays, maybe they could work on improving the bit rate. After all, 4K video is great, but not when it's riddled with compression artifacts. Scroll down to try one of the clips out for yourself. You’ll need to click on the video to access the “Original” resolution.
Comments are closed on this article
BigC
July 12, 2010 at 2:44pm
My computer can barely handle the 360p stream.
I guess its time for a upgrade
Scatmanbrandt
July 11, 2010 at 10:14pm
I'm not even going to complain since my computer is so old it can barely play 720p smoothly off a dvd let alone 4k streaming. Someone wanna help me buy a new gaming computer?
-----------------------------------------
Alienware M7700
3.8GHZ P4 Proc
Nvidia 7950
4GB Ram
Dead 12 cell Li-ion
Athlonite
July 11, 2010 at 7:08pm
HaHA LOL even with an near 15mbps connection this doesn't work
YouTube Video Speed History
Your average video speed at this location from June 12, 2010 to July 10, 2010 was 944 Kbps.
Video Speed Comparison (June 12, 2010 to July 10, 2010)
fuck i hate my ISP they charge like a wounded bull but fail to provide what we pay for
Play till it breaks then learn how to fix it!
mls067
July 11, 2010 at 9:30am
I have to agree with the others here. It was pure crap. Choppy, blocky crap. The 1080 was much smoother. I have a 25mb connection, for the record ;-)
Taz0
July 11, 2010 at 9:04am
Their so called "4K" video has such a low bitrate that it looks considerably worse than high-bitrate 720p video. That is just bullshit. Of course, YouTube's 720p and 1080p is just as bad, and shouldn't even be worthy of being called "HD" since the acronym means "High Definition", not "High Resolution", and their so called HD content, riddled with horrible macroblocking, is definitely not High Definition.
Vegan
July 11, 2010 at 10:43am
It is distressing, the emphasis put on resolution. I always have a hard time explaining to people why I always prefer a disc over Netflix Streaming. Sure, it may be "HD" but the bitrate is shit and the audio is stereo. As usual, the quality of technology takes a backseat to convenience. Just look at mp3s for a shining example of that.
NewGadgeteer
July 11, 2010 at 9:58am
I agree, Youtube has a horrible bit rate. They need to concentrate more at improving their current offerings performance before promoting higher rez videos.
