It's been a few years since I worked at [big tech retailer], but 8K TVs basically didn't sell at the time. There was basically no native content - even the demos were upscaled 4K - and it was very hard to tell the difference between the two unless you were so close to the screen that you couldn't see the whole thing. For the content that was available, either you were dealing with heavy compression or setting up a high-capacity server, since file sizes basically necessitated most of the space on what people would consider a normal-sized hard drive to store just a few movies.

The value just wasn't there and probably won't ever be for most use cases. XR equipment might be an exception, video editing another.

I got 4K TVs for both of my kids, they're dirt cheap-- sub $200. I'm surprised the Steam hardware survey doesn't show more. A lot of my friends also set their kids up on TVs, and you can't hardly buy a 1080P TV anymore.

If you look at the Steam hardware survey you’ll find the majority of gamers are still rocking 1080p/1440p displays.

What gamers look for is more framerate not particularly resolution. Most new gaming monitors are focusing on high refresh rates.

8K feels like a waste of compute for a very diminished return compared to 4K. I think 8K only makes sense when dealing with huge displays, I’m talking beyond 83 inches, we are still far from that.

First consumer 4K monitors came out more than a decade ago. I think the Asus PQ321 in 2013. That’s close to where we are now with 8K.

How many of the cards of that time would you call “4K cards”? Even the Titan X that came a couple of years later doesn’t really cut it.

There’s such a thing as being too early to the game.

Gaming isn't the only use-case, but Steam hardware survey says ~4% of users are using 4k screens. So the market is still small.