RetroTink 4K All But Officially Announced ....

[Guspaz]

My HD Fury vrroom can upscale frl up to 8k. My jvc nz8 lowest lag mode is in 8k@60hz(frl6). With these new products I was hoping for frl2, then having my HD Fury vrroom take it to 8k/60hz

FRL2 has the same bandwidth limit as TMDS, so there's no reason or benefit to supporting it. The HD Fury VRROOM supports TMDS input.

[Bahn Yuki]

I have tried 1080p from an ossc. No upscale. However a rtx 3080ti outputting 1080p did upscale. The makers of the vrroom said its because Nvidia users frl on their gpus.

[Unseen]

FRL2 has the same bandwidth limit as TMDS, so there's no reason or benefit to supporting it.

It's still fixed-rate though which may reduce mode switching times and it looks like the HDFury VRRoom has some strange limitations where some features only work if the input uses FRL instead of TMDS.

As far as I know FRL uses a completely different physical layer compared to TMDS, so it's nothing that you could just enable in software later.

[Fudoh]

I have tried 1080p from an ossc. No upscale. However a rtx 3080ti outputting 1080p did upscale. The makers of the vrroom said its because Nvidia users frl on their gpus.

I doubt that. It's more likely that the Vrroom can't handle 1080p from an OSSC, because the OSSC's output isn't producing any standard timings for a 1080p signal. I'm sure you have other sources than a PC and an OSSC which you can try, haven't you ?

[Ricdeau]

I have tried 1080p from an ossc. No upscale. However a rtx 3080ti outputting 1080p did upscale. The makers of the vrroom said its because Nvidia users frl on their gpus.

I doubt that. It's more likely that the Vrroom can't handle 1080p from an OSSC, because the OSSC's output isn't producing any standard timings for a 1080p signal. I'm sure you have other sources than a PC and an OSSC which you can try, haven't you ?

While there is validity in the OSSC timing issues (I didn't get much use out of my OSSC on my projector for that reason), the real problem here is the VRRoom's ability to upscale to 8k. It requires FRL signals to upscale to 8k. If the source device is sending TMDS then the VRRoom will only upscale to 4k. He's got a projector like mine, and I went through this same thing when we all started receiving our projectors in late 2021/early 2022 and attempting to use the VRRoom to upscale sources to 8k for the latency advantage. The PS5 even has HDMI 2.1 but all I could ever get from the system was a TMDS signal so it would only upscale to 4k. I had a lot of back and forth with HDFury and ultimately, I sent the VRRoom back because of the limitations. The only source I could get 8k upscaling on was my 3080 at the time which did output FRL signaling.

Several of us on AVS Forum had discussions about this back then. Thankfully I don't really care enough about the latency gain by trying send an 8k signal over 4k so I'm pretty thrilled prospect of the RetroTINK 4k and Morph for use with retro systems in my theater room.

[Bahn Yuki]

I have tried 1080p from an ossc. No upscale. However a rtx 3080ti outputting 1080p did upscale. The makers of the vrroom said its because Nvidia users frl on their gpus.

I doubt that. It's more likely that the Vrroom can't handle 1080p from an OSSC, because the OSSC's output isn't producing any standard timings for a 1080p signal. I'm sure you have other sources than a PC and an OSSC which you can try, haven't you ?

While there is validity in the OSSC timing issues (I didn't get much use out of my OSSC on my projector for that reason), the real problem here is the VRRoom's ability to upscale to 8k. It requires FRL signals to upscale to 8k. If the source device is sending TMDS then the VRRoom will only upscale to 4k. He's got a projector like mine, and I went through this same thing when we all started receiving our projectors in late 2021/early 2022 and attempting to use the VRRoom to upscale sources to 8k for the latency advantage. The PS5 even has HDMI 2.1 but all I could ever get from the system was a TMDS signal so it would only upscale to 4k. I had a lot of back and forth with HDFury and ultimately, I sent the VRRoom back because of the limitations. The only source I could get 8k upscaling on was my 3080 at the time which did output FRL signaling.

Several of us on AVS Forum had discussions about this back then. Thankfully I don't really care enough about the latency gain by trying send an 8k signal over 4k so I'm pretty thrilled prospect of the RetroTINK 4k and Morph for use with retro systems in my theater room.

This is accurate, hence why I'm asking about FRL capability. Someone above said it can't be added via software, do you folks know if there is a feature request to the developers?

[Ricdeau]

This is accurate, hence why I'm asking about FRL capability. Someone above said it can't be added via software, do you folks know if there is a feature request to the developers?

As far as I know the device would need to be HDMI 2.1. HDFury claimed to me have to have some ability to convert TMDS to FRL with additional limitations. Here are some of the responses I got from support back in January 2022.

1080p or 4K > 8K is possible in op mode 1 and support TMDS > FRL upscale

4K30 444/RGB goes to 8K30 444/RGB
4K30 422 12b HDR goes to 8K30 422 12b
4K30 444/RGB 10b goes to 8K30 444/RGB 12b

4K60 420 10b HDR, should go to 8K60 420 10b HDR (this needs DSC support already and we don't know yet if TMDS > FRL/DSC is possible)
FRL passthru indeed works tested up to 8K60 444/RGB 10b already

We will need at least 2 more weeks to determine if TMDS upscale to FRL/DSC is possible. too new to confirm yet.

Yes so here you have 4k60 tmds coming in, max tmds is 8k30 420 8b

So either send 4k30 for tmds upscale
Or send 4k60 frl if you want frl 8k60 upscale

I think you are going to be out of luck with the RetroTINK, Morph, and OSSC Pro because I'm pretty sure all of them are using HDMI 2.0 and can only send TMDS.

[bobrocks95]

HDMI 2.1 transceivers are still too expensive for this level of hobbyist project I'd imagine. If I remember right, I was shopping A/V receivers recently and didn't see any with 48Gbps 2.1 ports, most I saw were like 2 or 3 inputs supporting 40Gbps and the rest maybe 28. And these were $1500+ 2022/23 units.

[Josh128]

If the Tink4K and Morph can only output 4K, whats the point of using a standalone upscaler to go from 4K to 8K? Lag? Chances are the $7,000+ 8K TVs are going to do that on their own just fine. Just feed them the 4K and they'll do the rest, no?

[Ricdeau]

If the Tink4K and Morph can only output 4K, whats the point of using a standalone upscaler to go from 4K to 8K? Lag? Chances are the $7,000+ 8K TVs are going to do that on their own just fine. Just feed them the 4K and they'll do the rest, no?

According to the projector manufacturer it has the lowest latency when being fed an 8k60 signal. I have a projector of the same lineup as the user asking about this. I didn’t do a lot of testing, but I couldn’t tell a difference. I’m not overly sensitive to latency though. I can say that in previous generations feeding the projector a 4k60 signal was fast than feeding a 1080p60 signal and then allowing the projector to upscale. So there very well could be merit in their claim. Just not overly realistic with current equipment on the market.

This is certainly an edge case. I accepted that I was fine with 4k60 on these current gen projectors, but I can’t fault him for chasing the best performance. With these devices being HDMI 2.0 the VRRoom won’t do what he’s after.

[bobrocks95]

Knowing how many 4K projectors just use pixel shifting I'm amazed anyone bothered to get an 8K one going. Are they 5 or 6 figures?

[Ricdeau]

Knowing how many 4K projectors just use pixel shifting I'm amazed anyone bothered to get an 8K one going. Are they 5 or 6 figures?

Most native 4k are 5 figures. There are certainly some 6 figure models out there but that’s pretty rare. I can say that my 4k pixel shift model before I got this new model with native 4k panels with 8k pixel shifting had its best latency when being fed a 4k60 signal. I was able to actually measure it so there probably is merit in the manufacturer claim that 8k60 signal gives the best latency. Feeding anything an 8k60 signal just isn’t very realistic presently with current hardware.

I don’t use the 8k pixel shift at all on mine, but the two higher end models have less drawbacks than my “entry” model (they are all eye wateringly expensive).

Like I said it’s a pretty extreme edge case.

[Bahn Yuki]

Nvidia's gpu scaling to 8k is great for games that can't use DLSS. I use it often on games that don't have a 120hz mode.

[VEGETA]

since motion smoothness is required, does it the tink4k (and morph) has capability to convert frame rate? why not just convert it to pure 60hz or 120hz? instead of BFI

[Josh128]

Nvidia's gpu scaling to 8k is great for games that can't use DLSS. I use it often on games that don't have a 120hz mode.

What for? 8K without DLSS should be very low frame rate even on a 4090 eh? You saying you post-process upscale games to 8K to display on a 4K TV?

[bobrocks95]

Bob from RetroRGB showed off the rotation feature on his stream for earlier today. Looked great! Should definitely be fully in before launch.

[ldeveraux]

Bob from RetroRGB showed off the rotation feature on his stream for earlier today. Looked great! Should definitely be fully in before launch.

I always thought YOU were Bob from RetroRGB!

[Mykaizer]

Can we get a 1080p vs 4k upscaled comparison shot of an assortment of retro games?

[bobrocks95]

Bob from RetroRGB showed off the rotation feature on his stream for earlier today. Looked great! Should definitely be fully in before launch.

I always thought YOU were Bob from RetroRGB!

Oh man I hope a lot of people don't think that! I just spout opinions on a forum that's about it.

[tongshadow]

Can we get a 1080p vs 4k upscaled comparison shot of an assortment of retro games?

Virtually identical. At the correct viweing distance I'm sure that everyone on this forum would fail at a blind test comparing both. 1080p would only look visibly worse if the TV does a poor job a upscaling it, but this isnt the 2010's anymore.

[fernan1234]

Virtually identical. At the correct viweing distance I'm sure that everyone on this forum would fail at a blind test comparing both. 1080p would only look visibly worse if the TV does a poor job a upscaling it, but this isnt the 2010's anymore.

The main benefit of going 4K is significantly more detailed CRT mask filters.

Don't think the sharpness difference will be as big as some may thing, but also not as negligible as you're implying, especially using an arbitrary factor like "correct" viewing distance.

[tongshadow]

Negligible, the difference between 1080p and 1440p can barely be noticed on this upclose shot, now Imagine sitting >6ft away from a 55" TV.
https://i.imgur.com/zsF95fr.jpeg

Only CRT filters could possibly benefit 2d sprite games to the 4k bump.

[ldeveraux]

I always thought YOU were Bob from RetroRGB!

Oh man I hope a lot of people don't think that! I just spout opinions on a forum that's about it.

Haha, that's what he does, except his is on his blog without a comment section

[Bahn Yuki]

Nvidia's gpu scaling to 8k is great for games that can't use DLSS. I use it often on games that don't have a 120hz mode.

What for? 8K without DLSS should be very low frame rate even on a 4090 eh? You saying you post-process upscale games to 8K to display on a 4K TV?

My projector uses 4x pixel shifting (240hz) to get 8k/60hz. Measured lag is 10ms. 4k/120hz is closer to 20ms, 4k/60hz is 26ms.

[Guspaz]

since motion smoothness is required, does it the tink4k (and morph) has capability to convert frame rate? why not just convert it to pure 60hz or 120hz? instead of BFI

The 4K can do various patterns of frame presentation and BFI. If you want to quadruple your 60 Hz signal to 240 Hz and accept the drop in resolution to 1080p, you can do that.

[orange808]

since motion smoothness is required, does it the tink4k (and morph) has capability to convert frame rate? why not just convert it to pure 60hz or 120hz? instead of BFI

The 4K can do various patterns of frame presentation and BFI. If you want to quadruple your 60 Hz signal to 240 Hz and accept the drop in resolution to 1080p, you can do that.

If possible, it would be convenient to offer double, triple, and quadruple input frame rate options (when frame lock is active and the output frame rate is possible) in the GUI. An override for the frame rate would save users from needing to create multiple "custom output resolutions"/modelines with specific frame rates.

[Blair]

Negligible, the difference between 1080p and 1440p can barely be noticed on this upclose shot, now Imagine sitting >6ft away from a 55" TV.
https://i.imgur.com/zsF95fr.jpeg

Only CRT filters could possibly benefit 2d sprite games to the 4k bump.

Hold on a second! Here is something you should think about.

A 1080p resolution monitor has a pixel density of 1920×1080, while a 1440p resolution monitor has a pixel density of 2560×1440. The higher pixel density of 1440p monitors means that images and graphics will appear sharper and more detailed on a 1440p display compared to a 1080p one. However, the image you linked doesn't make sense as a comparison because both resolutions are being upscaled to 4K by the LG TV's internal processing.

Therefore, all it tells us is that LG's processing of 1080p and 1440p looks very similar. The same may not be true if the same test were done with another display, such as Vizio or TCL, which typically have much worse scaling engines. In that case, the resolution difference could actually make a big difference, depending on the display and its internal scaling capabilities. Another important note is that not all consumer TVs properly support 1440p. Some can be forced to display a 1440p signal through editing the EDID info, but many won't even show the signal.

We need both direct capture, and off-screen capture of the Tink 4K in action verse various other processing solutions.

[Guspaz]

Hold on a second! Here is something you should think about.

A 1080p resolution monitor has a pixel density of 1920×1080, while a 1440p resolution monitor has a pixel density of 2560×1440.

That's resolution, not pixel density.

The higher pixel density of 1440p monitors means that images and graphics will appear sharper and more detailed on a 1440p display compared to a 1080p one.

1440p displays are not automatically higher pixel density than 1080p displays. A 24" 1080p display will have the same pixel density as a 32" 1440p display.

However, the image you linked doesn't make sense as a comparison because both resolutions are being upscaled to 4K by the LG TV's internal processing.

Pretty much all TVs on the market today are 4K TVs. How the image looks upscaled to 4K is extremely relevant, and when you're just displaying big blocky pixels, the only difference you'd notice is a very small difference in the sharpness of the edge of those pixels. Higher resolutions than 1080p for 240p content doesn't matter except as it applies to mask overlays and the like.

Therefore, all it tells us is that LG's processing of 1080p and 1440p looks very similar. The same may not be true if the same test were done with another display, such as Vizio or TCL, which typically have much worse scaling engines. In that case, the resolution difference could actually make a big difference, depending on the display and its internal scaling capabilities.

They would look similar. 240p to 1080p is already a 4.5x scale, to 1440p it's a 6x scale. It's not a big difference.

Another important note is that not all consumer TVs properly support 1440p. Some can be forced to display a 1440p signal through editing the EDID info, but many won't even show the signal.

All the more reason why, for most people, 1080p is fine, and the RT5X is a great solution regardless of if their TVs will accept 1080p or 1440p input.

We need both direct capture, and off-screen capture of the Tink 4K in action verse various other processing solutions.

The MLiG shots are off-screen captures.

[Unseen]

They would look similar. 240p to 1080p is already a 4.5x scale, to 1440p it's a 6x scale. It's not a big difference.

But it's a world of a difference for the adherents of the "only nearest-neighbour integer scaling is good scaling" religion ;)

[Josh128]

They would look similar. 240p to 1080p is already a 4.5x scale, to 1440p it's a 6x scale. It's not a big difference.

But it's a world of a difference for the adherents of the "only nearest-neighbour integer scaling is good scaling" religion

Forget about nearest-neighbour-- but integer scaling is where its at, I dont see how anyone could say otherwise. Without integer scaling there is always going to be some visible color banding or motion artifacts when scanlines or mask effects are used. Underscanning or overscanning to achieve integer scaling for 240p on a 1080p screen is an absolute must for most of us anal purists.

This is an example of non-integer scaled 240p. Looks fine at first glance, but then you notice the "waves" of uneven scanlines.

https://i.imgur.com/AUUZWpX.jpg