> Honest question, does 4K and up really make sense for private use ?
For big monitors I think it does. Even if 4k doesn't make sense, the increased bandwidth is a win as the previous HDMI spec couldn't drive a 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 monitor at 60hz, and those resolutions definitely make sense to me for computer monitors.
Yeah you are right, id definately adore it for computer monitors. Still, mainstream is stuck with 22 inch TN panel 1080p screens which are miserable, but consumer dont seem to really care. Theres only a handful of models that offer more than 1080p resolution in todays market.
That's interesting, because most of the high resolution monitors I've seen explicitly say you need to use DL-DVI to drive them at full resolution (for example the 27" Dell Ultrasharps.)
Many companies cheap out on the supporting electronics. In particular single-link DVI is electrically compatible with HDMI but is limited to ~1920 x 1200 @ 60Hz. Basically instead of properly implementing HDMI they route a single-link DVI transceiver through an HDMI connector and call it good.
For big monitors I think it does. Even if 4k doesn't make sense, the increased bandwidth is a win as the previous HDMI spec couldn't drive a 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 monitor at 60hz, and those resolutions definitely make sense to me for computer monitors.