You can't get more detail or faster response without more GPU horsepower to drive the pixels.
Regarding video, there are cheap [~$30-$40] Android boxes that do play 4k video at 4k rez @60. My miniPC will only output 4k @30, but that's because it's not HDMI 2 -- there's allegedly a trick or 3 using different players to get to 60, but I've not bothered, sticking with 1080p & letting the TV upscale, because I don't have 4k content I need to play on the miniPC [I can stream 4k using the TV's built-in apps, but 4k discs are too few & players too expensive].
SO there's some stuff that the Xbox One S can do just by updating the specs to HDMI 2. There's also a boost in graphics horsepower, but going by the few reviews I've stumbled across, it's nothing earth shattering. The Xbox One S will play 4k Blu-ray [for about the same price as a 4k Blu-ray player] so it may be that Microsoft's banking on that to help drive sales until next year when Scorpio comes out, and really not pushing developers too much on 4k *yet*.
I expect that the Xbox Scorpio [whatever it's called when released next year] will have enough added horsepower to matter. I don't know what level though -- if we're talking about full tilt 4k or just decent enough capabilities -- but it should prompt some real 4k games, at least initially until they see if 4k is worth it in terms of sales [4k hasn't been worth it to content owners, because that content is still pretty rare compared to the movies available at 1080p].
But by then there should be more 4k PC monitors out, which should mean better pricing, which would mean more people using them, plus gamers buying the next generation cards will almost guaranteed buy 4k games to help justify the cost.
It's been my experience that games ported from consoles have horrible graphics on a PC
I've no idea personally, but the mini reviews & mentions I've read on the latest big name titles ported over to Steam &/or 10's Store haven't been disappointed by that aspect -- they've quibbled about other stuff, but not that that I've seen.
Maybe we're going back to 14" monitors?
:) For 4k displays the minimum I imagine is 32", preferably larger. And that's after you increase the size of Windows text display. They'll likely use 4k TV panels without the added electronics, at least at 1st.
A BTW sort of thing, that can bite some folks buying 4k... UHD is often used nowadays interchangeably with 4k, but they're 2 different things. UHD expands the color range between pure black & pure white, & requires a special sort of panel that can physically show that greater range. There are also two common standards, so things today are a bit like the format war between Blu-ray & HD DVD. It's easy to buy into the wrong format [who knows what will win?], & it's easy to buy into UHD hype, then realize later that the display you bought doesn't really have the needed special panel.
