Anybody actually managed to get Netflix working in 4K?

Forums › Online streaming services › Anybody actually managed to get Netflix working in 4K?

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#175273 23-Jun-2015 15:03

so to watch Netflix in 4K, you need a combination of the following

1) Netflix account on the top end plan $15.99/m NZD (or US account which is $11.99) Older, grandfathered $7.99 plans do NOT include 4K

2) A smart TV with 4K. You cannot stream 4K netflix to a browser or other device (e.g. PS4). It will only work on a 4K TV with either smart TV functionality (or a blu-ray with smart tv functionality, connected to a 4K TV)

3) watch content that is available in 4K. obviously not all that much actually is, but most new Netflix made content is available in 4K (e.g. House of Cards, OITNB)

4) Have fast enough broadband - Netflix say at least 25Mbps is required. That requirement might be higher if you are trying to stream from US servers.

more info here:
https://help.netflix.com/en/node/13444

So has anybody here on geekzone actually got the confluence of all these factors and actually tried streaming Netflix in 4K?

If so, can you report on the quality. What device did you use and was the difference noticable for you?

I'm thinking of getting a 4K TV, but not sure if I can justify the extra for it with so little content available. Unless Netflix 4K is worthy, then I'm not sure I will bother.

1 | 2

2096 posts

Uber Geek

#1329973 23-Jun-2015 15:13

Even if it looks amazing, are 3-5 shows enough to affect your purchasing decision?

What is your expected life of the TV and what is the price difference between 4k and not.

Also keen to hear if anyone has made it go.

richms

28168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1329983 23-Jun-2015 15:25

Works on my LG once I did a software update that was on the LG site, but the TV kept saying it had the latest on it from its menu.

Very small increse in quality over 1080. If you didnt know that it was 4k it doesnt scream out that its better like going from SD to 1080 does.

Best thing about the 4k panel is not looking like a screen door from 2 meters away like all the 60"+ 1080 screens do. HDMI 2.0 from the PC gets 4k for PC stuff, but my card cant handle it. Perhaps if I get a titan-x or a 980ti I will be good?

Richard rich.ms

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1329999 23-Jun-2015 15:30

wasabi2k: Even if it looks amazing, are 3-5 shows enough to affect your purchasing decision?

What is your expected life of the TV and what is the price difference between 4k and not.

Also keen to hear if anyone has made it go.

Probably 5-8 years. It seems you can either go with UHD LCD, or OLED at HD at the moment when buying a higher spec new TV. The blacks on the OLED tvs look amazing, but the sharpness of UHD TVs (although they repeat the same demo content instore). It probably won't be long before all larger model tvs will be UHD

timbosan

2159 posts

Uber Geek

#1330003 23-Jun-2015 15:37

richms: Works on my LG once I did a software update that was on the LG site, but the TV kept saying it had the latest on it from its menu.

Very small increse in quality over 1080. If you didnt know that it was 4k it doesnt scream out that its better like going from SD to 1080 does.

Best thing about the 4k panel is not looking like a screen door from 2 meters away like all the 60"+ 1080 screens do. HDMI 2.0 from the PC gets 4k for PC stuff, but my card cant handle it. Perhaps if I get a titan-x or a 980ti I will be good?

I was going to say 2 meters is REALLY close for a 60" screen, but the best viewing distance for 4K at 60" is only around 3-4 meters:

Which is something else the OP needs to adding to the list - a screen big enough at the recommended viewing distance for actually see 4K as 4K.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1330007 23-Jun-2015 15:47

4K is pointless as the above post shows. You either need a massive massive screen or to sit your couch right in front of a 55-65" screen

timbosan

2159 posts

Uber Geek

#1330012 23-Jun-2015 15:55

nathan: ..... or to sit your couch right in front of a 55-65" screen

I don't see the problem here.......

richms

28168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1330014 23-Jun-2015 15:57

timbosan:
I was going to say 2 meters is REALLY close for a 60" screen, but the best viewing distance for 4K at 60" is only around 3-4 meters:

Its actually a 65", no idea why I typed 60. Doh.

Cant go any bigger, as there is other stuff in the way, and cant go any furthur as thats the size of the bedroom. Its probably more like 2.5 meters away, but in anycase at that distance a 55" 1080 screen was unbarably screendoor like, particually with that split pixel thing that samsung do.

Richard rich.ms

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

garvani

1873 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1330015 23-Jun-2015 15:57

nathan: 4K is pointless as the above post shows. You either need a massive massive screen or to sit your couch right in front of a 55-65" screen

how big is your lounge!!? My couch is hardly right in front of it but would easily fall within 4 meters lol.

mclean

581 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

#1330105 23-Jun-2015 17:48

timbosan: I was going to say 2 meters is REALLY close for a 60" screen, but the best viewing distance for 4K at 60" is only around 3-4 meters.

IIRC that chart says 4K is not noticeable at more that 2 metres, and full benefit is at 1 metre.

richms

28168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1330108 23-Jun-2015 17:50

That chart is BS IMO. going by that there would be no point in 1080 for most peoples screen size and distance combinations, but there clearly is a change in quality between 720 and 1080.

Richard rich.ms

Behodar

10502 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1330109 23-Jun-2015 17:51

I have a 2.8k display ("retina" Mac) and there's very little noticeable difference between YouTube's 1080p and 2160p offerings; the picture is clearer but that's more to do with the higher bitrate than the resolution. I'm therefore not in any rush to go to Netflix's UHD service (although if it's not available on computers yet then that makes it a very easy decision).

timbosan

2159 posts

Uber Geek

#1330110 23-Jun-2015 17:55

richms: That chart is BS IMO. going by that there would be no point in 1080 for most peoples screen size and distance combinations, but there clearly is a change in quality between 720 and 1080.

Is based on the ability of the eye to resolve the details and you are right, most people cannot see the FULL resolution of 1080p, for example 42" across a 4m lounge. That doesn't mean there is NO difference above 720p.

timbosan

2159 posts

Uber Geek

#1330111 23-Jun-2015 17:56

mclean:
timbosan: I was going to say 2 meters is REALLY close for a 60" screen, but the best viewing distance for 4K at 60" is only around 3-4 meters.

IIRC that chart says 4K is not noticeable at more that 2 metres, and full benefit is at 1 metre.

I don't think you are reading it right, and it depends on your screen size.

timbosan

2159 posts

Uber Geek

#1330112 23-Jun-2015 18:00

I would also like to chime in and say that comparing a low-bitrate highly-compressed 4K stream (i.e. Netflix) to a high-bitrate low compression 2K stream (i.e. Blu-ray) shows very little difference in the tests I have seen (e.g. https://www.avforums.com/article/is-4k-netflix-better-than-blu-ray.10589 )

Resolution is not everything, there is bitrate, compression rate, compression algorithms, colour space conversions, and $$$ decisions in the production of any video.

Publius

276 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1330114 23-Jun-2015 18:03

Correct me if i'm wrong, but Netflix 4k doesn't work on any PC platform.

So yes, unless you have a specific TV and pay extra, and have bandwidth, and watch the right tv show, it aint happening.
Which is the point the first poster was making - 4k Netflix is still really a marketing gimmick.

1 | 2