Is the TV Industry Finally Conceding That the Future May Not Be 8K?
4 137"Technology companies spent part of the 2010s trying to convince us that we would want an 8K display one day..." writes Ars Technica.
"However, 8K never proved its necessity or practicality." LG Display is no longer making 8K LCD or OLED panels, FlatpanelsHD reported today... LG Electronics was the first and only company to sell 8K OLED TVs, starting with the 88-inch Z9 in 2019. In 2022, it lowered the price-of-entry for an 8K OLED TV by $7,000 by charging $13,000 for a 76.7-inch TV. FlatpanelsHD cited anonymous sources who said that LG Electronics would no longer restock the 2024 QNED99T, which is the last LCD 8K TV that it released.
LG's 8K abandonment follows other brands distancing themselves from 8K. TCL, which released its last 8K TV in 2021, said in 2023 that it wasn't making more 8K TVs due to low demand. Sony discontinued its last 8K TVs in April and is unlikely to return to the market, as it plans to sell the majority ownership of its Bravia TVs to TCL.
The tech industry tried to convince people that the 8K living room was coming soon. But since the 2010s, people have mostly adopted 4K. In September 2024, research firm Omdia reported that there were "nearly 1 billion 4K TVs currently in use." In comparison, 1.6 million 8K TVs had been sold since 2015, Paul Gray, Omdia's TV and video technology analyst, said, noting that 8K TV sales peaked in 2022. That helps explain why membership at the 8K Association, launched by stakeholders Samsung, TCL, Hisense, and panel maker AU Optronics in 2019, is dwindling. As of this writing, the group's membership page lists 16 companies, including just two TV manufacturers (Samsung and Panasonic). Membership no longer includes any major TV panel suppliers. At the end of 2022, the 8K Association had 33 members, per an archived version of the nonprofit's online membership page via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
"It wasn't hard to predict that 8K TVs wouldn't take off," the article concludes. "In addition to being too expensive for many households, there's been virtually zero native 8K content available to make investing in an 8K display worthwhile..."
4 comments
Yes but... (Score: 5, Funny)
by korgitser ( 1809018 ) on Monday February 02, 2026 @12:55AM (#65963630)
...maybe enough time has passed that 3d could be tried again?
Re:Yes but... (Score: 5, Funny)
by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Monday February 02, 2026 @01:59AM (#65963680)
>"...maybe enough time has passed that 3d could be tried again?"
It should be. 3D is not about resolution, but adding depth. While nobody will see any difference between 4K and 8K video (few can differentiate 2K and 4K at normal distance), EVERYONE will notice 3D. Some might not like it (I do), or want to bother with it, but it is certainly a major feature. And for content filmed correctly, it can add a lot to the experience.
3D failed in the market due to:
1) The lack of buyable content (3D Bluray).
2) The price-inflation of that content (shouldn't cost more).
3) The lack of OTA 3D content (antenna, cable, streaming).
4) Some content being poorly implemented or simulated 3D crap of 2D films.
5) For some it gave them headaches or a bad viewing experience.
6) Some didn't like wearing or dealing with the glasses.
7) Some earlier designs had displays too dark or slow to deal with 3D glasses (not a problem for a long time now).
Most of those issues can still be addressed and greatly improved. Although forced-perspective 3D will always cause viewing issues for some people.
Re:It should be 8K (Score: 5, Insightful)
by Erik Hensema ( 12898 ) on Monday February 02, 2026 @03:32AM (#65963762)
You're an outlier. Top 0.1% vision. Or better.
I've got very good vision. Diopt 0.0 in both eyes. Due to my age I will be needing reading glasses within a couple of years but for now I can still read fine without them.
For me, the difference between HD and 4K is visible but small. I can't resolve individual pixels on 4K at any reasonable distance.
Since most people will have worse vision than us, 4K will be beyond their limit. 8K is only adding cost without adding quality.
8K will of course be a thing, just not yet. (Score: 5, Interesting)
by arcade ( 16638 ) on Monday February 02, 2026 @03:25AM (#65963752)
Silly premise. The future will bring us 8K, and heck, much better resolutions than that too. There are quite a few things leading to it not being popular *yet*.
1. Something needs to drive it, without jitter. That means whatever storage medium the movies/series are on, needs to have enough processing power to decode the video and ship it to the TV. This is less of a problem now in 2025, but my original Popcorn Hour box had problems with 1024p. And that was in 2015.
2. There need to be enough bandwidth, everywhere, for folks to actually be able to watch content over streams. Sure, lots of us have GB connectivity and fiber et al - but that's far from everywhere. Even in 2025. If you don't have enough bandwidth - why would you be interested in this?
3. Even Blue-Ray would not be able to store a movie w/o heavy compression, and what's the point of 8K if you have compression artifacts all over the place? A 2 hour movie needs 100G+ , and if it's not compressed to hell and back - probably quite a bit more.
4. Connectivity. You need to be able to deliver this over a single cable, which needs to be standardized. This might have happened by now - but it needs to be everywhere. Specially designed non-standard stuff won't cut it.
5. Pricing. Very few people will fork out $2K+ for a TV. I still don't even have 4K TVs as they were too expensive last time I refreshed my TVs. Next TV I buy will of course be 4K - as the prices are now OK. For 8K TVs to become mainstream, prices needs to become reasonable.
But we'll get there. We just need the rest of the "delivery technology", standardization, etc. to catch up, in addition to prices to drop. Give it another 10 years.