Maybe I need to brush up on my math but 3840 does not equal 4096. But , if there is no discernible difference, then I guess it doesn't matter. As far as HDMI 2.0 goes, that is not true. The problem that HDMI.org is having is that some mfrs are displaying the HDMI 2.0 logo when in fact their sets do not fully comply with the complete 2.0 specs. What HDMI.org wants the mfrs' to do is list which HDMI 2.0 features their devices have instead of just advertising HDMI 2.0. The HDMI chipsets that are capable of 4:2:2, 8, 10, or 12-bit, 17.82 Gbps aren't available yet (as far as I know of) in the 2014 tv's. Sony has a HDMI 2.0 upgrade for their tv's this year but that's only at about 8.91Gbps which is certainly part of HDMI 2.0 but does not mean full compliance. What about CEC Extensions, Dual-view, multi-stream audio, 21:9 aspect, dynamic auto lip-sync? It's a marketing game that the mfrs are doing to lure folks in which, imo, is a bit deceptive. This is one of the few things that I agree with HDMI.org about. The mfrs should list which features that their "HDMI 2.0" tv's have. CEC Extensions alone is worth knowing about if your tv has it for sure or not.