This looks awesome. I can't wait to see it on a monitor that fully supports the native 4K res. It will be even better. Thank you RUclips for looking forward and not being stuck in the present.
For all those mentioning their video cards: Flash video does not pool any resources from video cards, the lag is entirely processor strain. The majority of artifacts are also your processor because it is likely being used above 80% of it's max load and is attempting to not strain itself by being less precise. The only step the video card handles is transferring the data to the monitor through your port.
for everyone that says its choppy its just your bandwidth, you internet isn't fast enough to keep up with the amount of data contained in each individual frame. works fine here on my T1 connection.
Went straight on the page, stuck it on Original and it played straight off for at least a minute before it stopped to buffer for a couple of second. Feelsgoodman.jpg
yes and actually it looks better to me even with the limitation of a 1080p screen, mainly because compressing down from 4k ends up with more detail than a lossy 1080p native playback that has been compressed more.
What is going on? and how much is the camera? can I use my Canon 550d and editing program Only to make movie on 4K with Pictures on only from RAW ? and upload to Yotube? Enybudy ? Reply Thanks. Peter
@MrDavidHarrison how did you setup flash player to make the gpu do all the work? My graphic cards (gtx 460 1gb sli) are not used at all when viewing this video while my i5 760 @ 3.8Ghz is at 50% usage.
Running real smooth for me. 27" iMac with the 2.8ghz i7. Plus my screen is one of the only ones out there to even come close to displaying it properly. 2560x1440, however it still falls very short.
@SeedlessProductions It's entirely about CPU. Flash 10.1 does not use GPU-acceleration with this video at all. At least it uses multiple threads, but it was still only getting 15-20fps for me.
@ivarquest dude this resolution is mostly only on theatre screens only. if ur watching this on ur tv which is atleast hd ready ull feel the difference although it still wont be pixel by pixel. i for one really found the quality of this video amazing compared to 1080p on my TV (connected to my laptop )
@kunpa100 if you have installed the latest drivers then the acceleration will activate from itself. but on 4k resolution it doesnt help so much. you also need a very good cpu. a quadcore should help ;)
@logdog321 I dunno what you're talking about my iMac 27" plays this back really smoothly. You just have to pause the video and wait for the entire thing to load.
@Badkidy RUclips in fact did is job : They provide 4K quality video. There are unfortunately two issues here. First : one need a 4K able screen. Second : the downscaling from 4K to screen resolution si done by the flash player (hardware assisted or not). This explain why the 1080p looks sharper.
i can't understand what u guys are complaining about, in my pc, youtube 1080p is almost perfectly sharp (my monitor is 1280x1024, can't be sharper), and the 4k is BETTER than 1080, i even took some screenshots comparisons.
Almost no one has the monitors, and there's few sources. If available, higher resolution always look great when you are closer, or if blown up on bigger sets. But mostly you won't be able to appreciate UD resolution on small sets unless getting really close. On a really big tvs like 82 and larger, it will likely help it to look more life like because when you blow up any picture, more detail helps. Our future will have very large TV's in ultra def. My 82 HD is great, but 4k UD would be better
i7 950 with GTS 450, at 4k resolution cpu usage is under 20% and gpu usage is under 25%. Video runs smoother then most other video's I've seen. Took forever to load though with my 1.5 Mb connection.
After 1080p, it just can't really get that much better without upgrading hardware significantly. There's a reason it's called HD. 4K is great if you like to watch RUclips on your home IMAX screen, but I don't see why it would be any better than regular HD if you're watching it on your computer.
@daharvster The highest resolution for a general-market computer monitor is 2560x1600, available in several 30" models. Less than 4096x3027, but significantly larger than 1920x1080. And for the record, this video looks pretty good on such a monitor, though the lack of GPU acceleration makes it fairly choppy.
@anormalno I am quite sure, when I saw all these comments I thought I may have missed an update to how the player works. Because it is true that Flash CAN use GPU, it doesn't very well without being forced and the RUclips player does not at all. I monitored my GPU usage and it didnt change at all while my CPU spiked to 90%.
No, it's 4K, the player is reporting it incorrectly. If you download the file they are streaming it is 4096x2304. 2048x1536 is a 4:3 aspect ratio that would show pillarboxing on RUclips.
You can still see a difference from the 1080p variant in 4k, because the 1080p one is compressed to a rather low quality and the 4k is downsized by your CPU. Runs fine for me, although I think that the 4k option will kill youtubes bandwith :D
i think theres a certain amount of rendering failure going on, if your macroblocks never mind everything else seem ultra blocky, no post processing is going on, perhaps gpu/driver not spec/able to handle 4k. after all. ...why would they at this point?
@damnu93 a resolution higher than 1080p, high end cameras record this stuff, but most people out there don't even have access to a monitor who's big enough to show that resolution.
i remember back in the day (2006,2007) everyone was complaining that youtube's video quality is crap! now every ones complaining thats its so good that the computer cant run it. i call blasphemy , off with their heads.
@Eric858 Ya, like I mentioned, an Atom processor will most likely not have the power to display 4k video, but your screen is probably going to be even lower than that, so RUclips would try to play it at 720p or 1080p. You probably still have problems displaying that, I would guess.
@Eric858 Does need much. I'm running it on an old Core 2 Dual 1.8g ASUS mother with integrated Intel GMA, G33 chipset, using ADSL and it runs original resolution and 1080p smooth as silk. Update your flash, and check for viruses or spy software.
Even with flash 10.2 beta, 4k resolution seems to turn off GPU acceleration. 1080p offloads to the GPU which i can see with GPU-Z's GPU load sensor, but with 4k resolution the GPU goes completely unused and its all on the processor. Once this is fixed I think it should have more than enough power to run this.
Don't know if I'm making an stupid question but.. how is it posible for me to watch 4k video resolution If my laptop is not a 4k capable device? I'm lost here..
@cohenthebarberian Same spec imac here, this 4k footage looks unreal !!! (in a good way) shame only a few of us can only begin to get close to the full 4k res. still looks great on the 27" imac tho, MAC FOR THE WIN!!
@Eric858 No, I doubt an Atom will run HD. You're using a "netbook", the most you'll get out of it is 480P video, I suspect. The Atoms are not dual processor, just runs more than one operation in parallel. The dual cores actually have essentially two tightly couple processors. Playing games is not the same as displaying video. Very few notebooks or netbooks will be able to run the HD video. System memory is also important. I've got 4Gigs of dual channel ddr2 memory.
Doesn't use much RAM, and video is very pixelated, because most computer graphics cards or monitors only support 1080p. It's very future proof though! =)
Holy crap! The clarity at 4K is just.... you have to see it to believe it!! Wow! Loved it!
looks amazing on the retina display
This looks awesome. I can't wait to see it on a monitor that fully supports the native 4K res. It will be even better. Thank you RUclips for looking forward and not being stuck in the present.
Wow the quality is absolutely stunning! Seems to run smoothly on my mac.
For all those mentioning their video cards:
Flash video does not pool any resources from video cards, the lag is entirely processor strain. The majority of artifacts are also your processor because it is likely being used above 80% of it's max load and is attempting to not strain itself by being less precise. The only step the video card handles is transferring the data to the monitor through your port.
man this is where my 50MB FIOS connection gets some use. looks stunning
that is a really high resulution!
awesome!
My i7 860 and gtx 260 1gb have no trouble playing this. Great video and very smooth for the rez being so high
the song is "New Tricks" by Great Northern
but the video has the instrumental version
this RESOLUTION is a REVOLUTION!
My MBP chewed through it like a boss. Looks amazing on a 2560x1440 screen.
awesome a 4k resolution slide show !!!!
This looks amazing
this is awesome
wow it looks so vivid in 4k....
omg even at 360p it look amazing
Really my Mac Pro eat it up like a snack but it was the best looking youtube video I have seen.
Man this looks so good on my 1080p monitor!
AMAZING
amazing!!
for everyone that says its choppy its just your bandwidth, you internet isn't fast enough to keep up with the amount of data contained in each individual frame. works fine here on my T1 connection.
this in 1080p makes this look absolutely amazing. i just wish i could watch it in 4k without it lagging terribly
Went straight on the page, stuck it on Original and it played straight off for at least a minute before it stopped to buffer for a couple of second. Feelsgoodman.jpg
runs smoothly and looks awesome if I let it buffer
nice slideshow!
Incredible quality. We'd need a 4K super monitor though :P
this is an awesome slide show to me...
yes and actually it looks better to me even with the limitation of a 1080p screen, mainly because compressing down from 4k ends up with more detail than a lossy 1080p native playback that has been compressed more.
Very Good!
LIKE
Feels like IMAX seeting close to monitor!
Finally a resolution big enough for my graph cards.
fantastic
Stutters for me with 2x GeForce 8700. 4k aside, though, I like the music choice here, the sync with the jellyfish was neat.
What is going on? and how much is the camera? can I use my Canon 550d and editing program Only to make movie on 4K with Pictures on only from RAW ? and upload to Yotube? Enybudy ? Reply Thanks. Peter
@MrDavidHarrison how did you setup flash player to make the gpu do all the work? My graphic cards (gtx 460 1gb sli) are not used at all when viewing this video while my i5 760 @ 3.8Ghz is at 50% usage.
I tried watching this video on original quality and my cpu has caught on fire and burnt down my whole house. Thanks to 4k i am now i am homeless.
This loaded in 4k for me, on a laptop, HP Envy j033tx. It took a while to buffer giving New Zealands internet speeds, but framerates weren't bad.
Works good for me on AMD Phenom II 965 and Ati HD 5830...! Cool stuff...!
Running real smooth for me. 27" iMac with the 2.8ghz i7. Plus my screen is one of the only ones out there to even come close to displaying it properly. 2560x1440, however it still falls very short.
it´s like whatching a double rainbow... slow but awesome
@SeedlessProductions It's entirely about CPU. Flash 10.1 does not use GPU-acceleration with this video at all. At least it uses multiple threads, but it was still only getting 15-20fps for me.
ready to rock this on my series 4 plasma..........hope this works smooth
@ivarquest dude this resolution is mostly only on theatre screens only.
if ur watching this on ur tv which is atleast hd ready
ull feel the difference although it still wont be pixel by pixel.
i for one really found the quality of this video amazing compared to 1080p on my TV (connected to my laptop )
@tambo3lite nice one man. diggin it
FINALLY something to watch on my ridiculously oversized tv!
imusing my projector wich projects in 3000ish x 2400ish and on a 100 inch screen omfg it looks amazing
loving macbook pro retina right now
Looks and runs very nice on my 27" (2560X1440) iMac.
But what camera is this shot with?
its scary how real that looks
@TheChikenburger What resolution do you have on your monitor? :o
I downloaded it with save video and it was running smoothly even if it skipped some frames.
@kunpa100
if you have installed the latest drivers then the acceleration will activate from itself. but on 4k resolution it doesnt help so much. you also need a very good cpu. a quadcore should help ;)
Yes, it is!
Great music for this video!
here in Brazil impossible watch in 4k! (bad internet)
@logdog321 I dunno what you're talking about my iMac 27" plays this back really smoothly. You just have to pause the video and wait for the entire thing to load.
@Badkidy RUclips in fact did is job : They provide 4K quality video.
There are unfortunately two issues here.
First : one need a 4K able screen.
Second : the downscaling from 4K to screen resolution si done by the flash player (hardware assisted or not). This explain why the 1080p looks sharper.
i can't understand what u guys are complaining about, in my pc, youtube 1080p is almost perfectly sharp (my monitor is 1280x1024, can't be sharper), and the 4k is BETTER than 1080, i even took some screenshots comparisons.
720p is the sweetspot at the moment for this stuff
Almost no one has the monitors, and there's few sources. If available, higher resolution always look great when you are closer, or if blown up on bigger sets. But mostly you won't be able to appreciate UD resolution on small sets unless getting really close. On a really big tvs like 82 and larger, it will likely help it to look more life like because when you blow up any picture, more detail helps. Our future will have very large TV's in ultra def. My 82 HD is great, but 4k UD would be better
i7 950 with GTS 450, at 4k resolution cpu usage is under 20% and gpu usage is under 25%. Video runs smoother then most other video's I've seen. Took forever to load though with my 1.5 Mb connection.
@Badkidy You should see it on a 4k resolution monitor. Wow!
After 1080p, it just can't really get that much better without upgrading hardware significantly. There's a reason it's called HD. 4K is great if you like to watch RUclips on your home IMAX screen, but I don't see why it would be any better than regular HD if you're watching it on your computer.
@1998adam8991 how much did it cost cause that sounds like my dream tv and who makes it? (sony?)
Looks superb at 2560 x 1600 30 inch ips screen wish they made a 4K monitor now I would have one.
on 1080p no lags or anything,but on 4000p it take about 3 minutes to load the full video,and the video lags even if it is full loaded!
I'm confused, is it actually in 4k if your screen has only 1920x1080p resolution?
No, it's actually the exact same as 1080p, might be slightly better due to the way RUclips compresses video.
I can play it (core i7, gtx275, full hd lcd) but 1080 actually seems a bit better on my screen somehow.
4.0GHZ AMD x6 core @ 40% LOOKS and RUNS AMAZING!!!
@daharvster The highest resolution for a general-market computer monitor is 2560x1600, available in several 30" models. Less than 4096x3027, but significantly larger than 1920x1080. And for the record, this video looks pretty good on such a monitor, though the lack of GPU acceleration makes it fairly choppy.
With a 1080p screen, will I see any difference from 1080p to original at all?
@anormalno I am quite sure, when I saw all these comments I thought I may have missed an update to how the player works. Because it is true that Flash CAN use GPU, it doesn't very well without being forced and the RUclips player does not at all. I monitored my GPU usage and it didnt change at all while my CPU spiked to 90%.
Can someone please tell me how to view 4k, should I leave it @ 480p or choose 720 or 1080 or ?
No, it's 4K, the player is reporting it incorrectly. If you download the file they are streaming it is 4096x2304. 2048x1536 is a 4:3 aspect ratio that would show pillarboxing on RUclips.
You can still see a difference from the 1080p variant in 4k, because the 1080p one is compressed to a rather low quality and the 4k is downsized by your CPU.
Runs fine for me, although I think that the 4k option will kill youtubes bandwith :D
i ran it flawlessly then again i have a brand new comp with a very good video card.
@zackes1990 I think your comment is solid proof that 4k resolution still needs a lot of work. That or they should just remove it overall.
I think the 1080p version has superior image quality to the 4K!
i think theres a certain amount of rendering failure going on, if your macroblocks never mind everything else seem ultra blocky, no post processing is going on, perhaps gpu/driver not spec/able to handle 4k. after all. ...why would they at this point?
Watching over ps vita!Looks nice
How come I'm not getting a "original" or 4K option for this one but did for the rest of the 4K playlist?
@Badkidy
thats because you need a huge screen to take advantage of higher resolutions than 1080p.
@AbSoluTc
Do you have a 4k monitor?
how can you possibly watch this? what screen has 4096 x 2304 resolution? mine is 1980x1020 and i thought that was big
i just downloaded a new driver to my screen card and now it works!!!
@damnu93 a resolution higher than 1080p, high end cameras record this stuff, but most people out there don't even have access to a monitor who's big enough to show that resolution.
i remember back in the day (2006,2007) everyone was complaining that youtube's video quality is crap! now every ones complaining thats its so good that the computer cant run it. i call blasphemy , off with their heads.
Flash doesn't seem to support my Radeon HD 4770, I bet if I upgrade my drivers it might help.
@Eric858 Ya, like I mentioned, an Atom processor will most likely not have the power to display 4k video, but your screen is probably going to be even lower than that, so RUclips would try to play it at 720p or 1080p. You probably still have problems displaying that, I would guess.
@Eric858 Does need much. I'm running it on an old Core 2 Dual 1.8g ASUS mother with integrated Intel GMA, G33 chipset, using ADSL and it runs original resolution and 1080p smooth as silk. Update your flash, and check for viruses or spy software.
What a nice slideshow! Oh wait...
How to see it at 3072p?
Cant see the option.... unless it doesnt show up in 1280x1024...
Even with flash 10.2 beta, 4k resolution seems to turn off GPU acceleration. 1080p offloads to the GPU which i can see with GPU-Z's GPU load sensor, but with 4k resolution the GPU goes completely unused and its all on the processor. Once this is fixed I think it should have more than enough power to run this.
Awesome, i download the original to my pc, then I tried to watch videos on my favorite video player, and my pc showed me the screen of death!
Don't know if I'm making an stupid question but.. how is it posible for me to watch 4k video resolution If my laptop is not a 4k capable device? I'm lost here..
@AbSoluTc
did you set the video to "original"?
@cohenthebarberian Same spec imac here, this 4k footage looks unreal !!! (in a good way) shame only a few of us can only begin to get close to the full 4k res. still looks great on the 27" imac tho, MAC FOR THE WIN!!
@iamericm
Yes, but I'd still rather them improve the bitrates for the more popular resolutions before going even higher.
ahhh lovely n smooth usin core 2 quad and a GTX460 :)
@Eric858 No, I doubt an Atom will run HD. You're using a "netbook", the most you'll get out of it is 480P video, I suspect. The Atoms are not dual processor, just runs more than one operation in parallel. The dual cores actually have essentially two tightly couple processors. Playing games is not the same as displaying video. Very few notebooks or netbooks will be able to run the HD video. System memory is also important. I've got 4Gigs of dual channel ddr2 memory.
Doesn't use much RAM, and video is very pixelated, because most computer graphics cards or monitors only support 1080p. It's very future proof though! =)