Support NeoGAF

[Ulysses 31]

Simply not true. I've owned two Samsungs, I works with graphics and I would never use a Samsung as a monitor and that translates to gaming to a certain degree as well. They are just good at marketing.

• Samsung in game mode flickers the backlight at 120hz regardless of frame rate of the game, this means that a game running at 60 fps will have the backlight flash 2 times during one frame. As your eyes are tracking motion on screen the image will get exposed at two different location on your retina, this will create a double image. At 30 fps you get 4. This is not necessarily super obvious to untrained or non critical eyes and is lessened by motion blur in games. But thin lines, like cables hanging will show a clear double following them when the view is panning. Most reviewers don't notice this as they only review based on Movie mode which does flicker at 480 or 960hz, this creates so many duplicates that they instead blend together.
• Over saturated colors and Chroma sub sampling 422 (half resolution of the color information). It's impossible to both display Sub Chroma 444 and sRGB/Rec.709 at the same time on any Samsung. With input set to PC you get 444 but NOT sRGB which is completely retarded when 99% of all content uses this color space, and is the most common color space used on PC, instead everything is locked to the displays Native color space which severely over saturates colors. With input set to any other input you get correct color saturation when using Color Space set to Auto but then only Chroma sub sampling 422 is available. This is bad for text and general sharpness of small details. It's not the end of the world if you are just watching movies/tv/youtube which is encoded with 422 any way and it's not super noticeable in games either but still soften the image a tiny bit.
• Black crush and dim small highlights on black backgrounds. This is a matter of taste, Samsung mitigates much of the problems with LCD Blooming by an over aggressive local dimming system. Crushing some dark colors in dark scenes and will dim small highlights on dark backgrounds. You are never sure if what you are seeing is the Creators Intent.
• Grey blacks in game mode. This has been a problem for a couple of years now, but it's much better now with their this years models but be aware. The local dimming algorithm has been much worse in Game mode than what people are lead to believe from reviewers that only measure contrast ratios and black levels in Movie modes.

All of these things are true and I've seen them with my own eyes on the sets I've owned (Q9FN and Q900) and in review. Sony on the other hand doesn't black crush, maintains it's excellent dimming algorithm and keeps chroma sub sampling at 444 in game mode while correctly displaying colors at their proper saturation levels. And the backlight flicker rate PWM (Pulse With Modulation) flickers at 720hz in ALL modes, virtually removing any image duplication.

To the untrained eye Samsung will be fine but if you know your stuff they are selling lipstick on a pig type of TV's. Sony is much better when it comes to image quality and motion handling.

You seem to ignore use cases of the TVs, each have their strengths.

You go with Sony/Panasonic if you want accurate portrayal of what content creators intended(might not always be a good thing, see Game of Thrones s8e3 ). Samsung editorializes content to make for more color pop. Owning both an LG OLED and Samsung QLED, I personally prefer the Samsung.

The 30 fps stutter is worse on OLED tech due to the nature of the tech so I don't really see how you see Samsung doing worse in that regard.
At least Samsung has game motion plus to greatly reduce the stutter for 30 fps content, LG( and Sony?) don't.

I don't know which TVs you're talking about, my Q950R didn't have grey blacks in game mode, my newer Q950TS doesn't either so perhaps you could be more specific about the TV model you're talking about(the cheaper ones with less dimming zones?).

Motion handling, Sony's best for movies, Samsung's better for sports and games.

 

[JeloSWE]

You seem to ignore use cases of the TVs, each have their strengths.

You go with Sony/Panasonic if you want accurate portrayal of what content creators intended(might not always be a good thing, see Game of Thrones s8e3 ). Samsung editorializes content to make for more color pop. Owning both an LG OLED and Samsung QLED, I personally prefer the Samsung.

Samsung is pretty good if you only watch TV and Movies but I don't like their approach to gaming and monitor usage. They falsely beautify colors while on Sony you get correct colors and you can also pump the saturation while on Samsung they are always wrong.

The 30 fps stutter is worse on OLED tech due to the nature of the tech so I don't really see how you see Samsung doing worse in that regard.
At least Samsung has game motion plus to greatly reduce the stutter for 30 fps content, LG( and Sony?) don't.

Technically It's called judder and yes it's generally better on LCD. But that is not what I'm talking about but rather Samsung's backlight flicker (PWM) of 120hz. It's super annoying In game mode when you know what to look for, I can't stand the image duplication it causes, I argue that they have worse motion handling for games than Sony because of this. If you are using any frame interpolation this effect isn't visible though but then you are adding to the input lag.

On this Blurbuster page you can test if you are getting image duplication due to backlight flicker, PWM or BFI. Remember to turn all image interpolation stuff off.

█_____█____█ <- The lines should look like this
|_|____|_|____|_| <- NOT like this.

Blur Busters TestUFO Motion Tests

Blur Busters UFO Motion Tests with ghosting test, 30fps vs 60fps, 120hz vs 144hz vs 240hz, PWM test, motion blur test, judder test, benchmarks, and more.

www.testufo.com

I don't know which TVs you're talking about, my Q950R didn't have grey blacks in game mode, my newer Q950TS doesn't either so perhaps you could be more specific about the TV model you're talking about(the cheaper ones with less dimming zones?).

Here is Vincent talking and showing the improved local dimming for newer Samsung models (12:05).

Motion handling, Sony's best for movies, Samsung's better for sports and games.

Sony has better motion handling in sports as well. Samsung though, has a unique game mode interpolation solution which is faste and simple, I don't like the extra input lag it adds and the interpolation doesn't look good enough for my eyes so I stopped using it. But it's there.

 

[Zato]

I got my LG OLED ready, HDMI 2.1 in the bag.

 

[RasAlGhoul]

This talk about stutter or judder in 30 FPS content has enlightened me. I never had problems with 30 FPS games until a few years ago. That’s when I bought an LG B6 OLED. Suddenly I started getting motion sick or headaches while playing certain 30fps games. Gotta figure the OLED stutter at that FPS is the issue.

 

[V2Tommy]

This talk about stutter or judder in 30 FPS content has enlightened me. I never had problems with 30 FPS games until a few years ago. That’s when I bought an LG B6 OLED. Suddenly I started getting motion sick or headaches while playing certain 30fps games. Gotta figure the OLED stutter at that FPS is the issue.

The game is stuttering, not the OLED. You were used to blurry LCDs compensating for it before. High framerate or death, I say.

 

[RasAlGhoul]

The game is stuttering, not the OLED. You were used to blurry LCDs compensating for it before. High framerate or death, I say.

I get that. But I also like my console gaming experience, which means I accept a lot of 30fps games. May be buying a new tv then moving the B6 to another room.

 

[V2Tommy]

I get that. But I also like my console gaming experience, which means I accept a lot of 30fps games. May be buying a new tv then moving the B6 to another room.

You know the new OLED models have good BFI that works in Game Mode, right? Unless you don't like the brightness drop at the highest levels. I tried it with Atelier Ryza and it was pretty nice (smooth 30fps on PS4 Pro). I didn't keep it on (stutter doesn't bother me, it is what it is) but it's definitely a thing some people would enjoy. A much better solution that buying a TV that's blurry on purpose.

 

[JeloSWE]

The game is stuttering, not the OLED. You were used to blurry LCDs compensating for it before. High framerate or death, I say.

OLED have incredibly fast pixel response and they switch to the next frame instantly while LCD has more of a smeary transition lessen the impact of low FPS judder.

 

[Bruno_Arrais85]

X900H baby

 

[V2Tommy]

OLED have incredibly fast pixel response and they switch to the next frame instantly while LCD has more of a smeary transition lessen the impact of low FPS judder.

Yes, that's what I said. Or are you just agreeing to spread the OLED faith?

 

[EverydayBeast]

SONY TV's are a rarity in American homes

 

[devilNprada]

I'll be honest... couldn't see shit playing GOT on my sony OLED. Bottom half the screen was way to dark in every building.

 

[JeloSWE]

Yes, that's what I said. Or are you just agreeing to spread the OLED faith?

I would be a fan of OLED if it weren't for burn in and weak HDR light out put. Other wise the tech is stellar. The future is micro-LED. But while we wait for that to mature Samsung Display is looking in to a type of Quantum dot OLED IIRC.

 

[RasAlGhoul]

You know the new OLED models have good BFI that works in Game Mode, right? Unless you don't like the brightness drop at the highest levels. I tried it with Atelier Ryza and it was pretty nice (smooth 30fps on PS4 Pro). I didn't keep it on (stutter doesn't bother me, it is what it is) but it's definitely a thing some people would enjoy. A much better solution that buying a TV that's blurry on purpose.

I don’t think mine does. But I’m messing with the tru motion settings which I can’t use because of input latency issues and games that made me sick before aren’t now. I always thought this was a me problem. Not an I bought too nice of a TV problem.

 

[JeloSWE]

I'll be honest... couldn't see shit playing GOT on my sony OLED. Bottom half the screen was way to dark in every building.

The contrast is to harsh in that game, dark details are completely crushed. I had to raise the ingame brightness to 70-80 and then it was alright. I then I had to increase saturation on my TV to restore colors. But now everything looks good.

 

[JeloSWE]

I don’t think mine does. But I’m messing with the tru motion settings which I can’t use because of input latency issues and games that made me sick before aren’t now. I always thought this was a me problem. Not an I bought too nice of a TV problem.

Only this years panels, eg LG CX have the new BFI mode. And you should only use the BFI on 60/120fps games or you'll get image duplication as those are the only rates LG supports. It can how every often be used with 24fps movies if using interpolation as well.

 

[01011001]

Since it's Sony I would always wait for input latency tests for their TVs, because most of them had absolutely awful latency and only a handful of their more current models are in the acceptable 10ms to 20ms range

 

[V2Tommy]

I don’t think mine does. But I’m messing with the tru motion settings which I can’t use because of input latency issues and games that made me sick before aren’t now. I always thought this was a me problem. Not an I bought too nice of a TV problem.

Sure, yeah. but Black Frame Insertion is not frame interpolation. At the highest settings, it doubles 30fps content to 60fps by displaying every frame twice with black frames in between.

 

[JeloSWE]

Since it's Sony I would always wait for input latency tests for their TVs, because most of them had absolutely awful latency and only a handful of their more current models are in the acceptable 10ms to 20ms range

True, I always check Rtings for that. I also have two Leo Bodnar lag testers my self. My TV ZF9 is 20ms in 1080p/4K and it's fine. But I would love to have even lower. Using 120hz you get 10ms and that feel really great.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Technically It's called judder and yes it's generally better on LCD. But that is not what I'm talking about but rather Samsung's backlight flicker (PWM) of 120hz. It's super annoying In game mode when you know what to look for, I can't stand the image duplication it causes, I argue that they have worse motion handling for games than Sony because of this. If you are using any frame interpolation this effect isn't visible though but then you are adding to the input lag.

On this Blurbuster page you can test if you are getting image duplication due to backlight flicker, PWM or BFI. Remember to turn all image interpolation stuff off.

█_____█____█ <- The lines should look like this
|_|____|_|____|_| <- NOT like this.

Here is Vincent talking and showing the improved local dimming for newer Samsung models (12:05).


Sony has better motion handling in sports as well. Samsung though, has a unique game mode interpolation solution which is faste and simple, I don't like the extra input lag it adds and the interpolation doesn't look good enough for my eyes so I stopped using it. But it's there.

RTINGS says judder is an irregular pattern of jerkiness caused by inconsistent frame cadence. I know Samsung and LG call their settings De-Judder which makes things a bit confusing.

Samsung has a LED Clear Motion setting for "pure" 60 Hz but introduces annoying flickering in my eyes that's not there in 120 Hz. Are you saying you prefer the OLED stutter to the image duplication/interpolation of Samsung? That seems more like a personal preference than something you can definitely declare to be better motion handling, the stutter is worse IMHO. Or are you saying Sony has a motion interpolation solution that eliminates the stutter and doesn't show visible image duplication?

Are you really noticing the 10-11ms extra input lag with game motion plus when total lag is still under 25ms@4K(on a 2020 QLED)?
With VRR the input lag will decreases even further in the XSX/PS5/RTX 30X0 era.

Personally I see game motion plus has a means to reduce 30 fps stutter, not something to improve motion(that's getting destroyed by stutter anyway).

 

[R6Rider]

8K TV is completely pointless.

 

[Ulysses 31]

I always thought this was a me problem. Not an I bought too nice of a TV problem.

B6 is from 2016, right? Ouch, I have a LG EF950V from 2016 with burn in and terrible game mode for 30 fps games.

The CX is a clear improvement.

 

[Ulysses 31]

8K TV is completely pointless.

A.I. upscaling can bring out details less noticeable on native 4K.

 

[MDSLKTR]

I got my LG OLED ready, HDMI 2.1 in the bag.

Which one you got?

 

[R6Rider]

A.I. upscaling can bring out details less noticeable on native 4K.

Details you won't be able to notice at TV viewing distances.

 

[RasAlGhoul]

B6 is from 2016, right? Ouch, I have a LG EF950V from 2016 with burn in and terrible game mode for 30 fps games.

The CX is a clear improvement.

Yeah I bought it as a refurb in late 2017. I haven’t had any burn in issues but I’ve had 30fps issues that I’ve thought were just me for years now though.

Now the question is do I go up to 75 or 85 inches.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Details you won't be able to notice at TV viewing distances.

Probably true. When RTX 3090's out, I can see how 8K@60Hz gaming is like.

 

[V2Tommy]

For those people that don't want an OLED, why are you sleeping on the upcoming Vizio Quantum X? I wouldn't buy a gaming TV until reviews of that come out.

 

[JeloSWE]

RTINGS says judder is an irregular pattern of jerkiness caused by inconsistent frame cadence. I know Samsung and LG call their settings De-Judder which makes things a bit confusing.

Fair enough, but judder is often the cause of playing 24p movies on a screen that has the refresh rate set to 60hz or 120hz. It's a uneven but recurring pattern of Three-two pull down. Stutter for me is more of a irregular random nature than just uneven frame pacing. Samsung De-Judder is for frame rates under 60hz to be interpolated and De-Blur is for material above as I understand it. So you can have motion interpolation activated for movies frame rates but not for sport 60fps material or vice versa.

Samsung has a LED Clear Motion setting for "pure" 60 Hz but introduces annoying flickering in my eyes that's not there in 120 Hz. Are you saying you prefer the OLED stutter to the image duplication/interpolation of Samsung? That seems more like a personal preference than something you can definitely declare to be better motion handling, the stutter is worse IMHO. Or are you saying Sony has a motion interpolation solution that eliminates the stutter and doesn't show visible image duplication?

I prefer neither as my Sony doesn't have either of those problems. But if I had to chose I think I prefer OLED fast pixel transitions over image duplication.

Are you really noticing the 10-11ms extra input lag with game motion plus when total lag is still under 25ms@4K(on a 2020 QLED)?
With VRR the input lag will decreases even further in the XSX/PS5/RTX 30X0 era.

Personally I see game motion plus has a means to reduce 30 fps stutter, not something to improve motion(that's getting destroyed by stutter anyway).

I don't have the Samsung any more, and I haven't tried the latest version, a 10ms difference is fairly noticeable but it if can interpolate at 25ms I would say that is quite impressive and possible useful for non reaction based or competitive games. But the interpolation is still more basic than the one used for movies and it looked horrible, on my previous TVs, when running over grass fields on my Switch in Xenblade 2.

 

[JeloSWE]

For those people that don't want an OLED, why are you sleeping on the upcoming Vizio Quantum X? I wouldn't buy a gaming TV until reviews of that come out.

Not available in EU or outside of US I think. I would be very interested other wise.

 

[Saaleh]

X900H and Z8H both support both true 4K/120hz due to HDMI 2.1

I'm not well versed into tv tech but when I use my instincts, Usually when I see comparisons, sony TVs may not have a tick on every latest tech but their images always look way more accurate, their designs always feel balanced. Whereas Samsung and others feels like they oversaturate whatever they suck at.

X900H is 1000$ whereas Z8H is 6000$ which is still crazy.

If my budget is 1000 to 2000$ , you still recomend X900H or do you know something better?

Really thank you, I learned a lot from you guys.

 

[Ulysses 31]

I'm not well versed into tv tech but when I use my instincts, Usually when I see comparisons, sony TVs may not have a tick on every latest tech but their images always look way more accurate, their designs always feel balanced. Whereas Samsung and others feels like they oversaturate whatever they suck at.

X900H is 1000$ whereas Z8H is 6000$ which is still crazy.

If my budget is 1000 to 2000$ , you still recomend X900H or do you know something better?

Really thank you, I learned a lot from you guys.

If size doesn't matter, I'd go 48/55" LG CX if you plan to do lots of gaming(and are in a dark room).

 

[Paulxo87]

For me personally it's coming down to either the X900H or the 2021 model of the vizio quantum X.. reviews are due for that model in the next two weeks.

I am looking for a 75" by years end and do not want to pay more than 1800-2000 so a choice between these two are it...

 

[Classicrockfan]

S the x900h smallest size is a 55in,?

 

[DeepEnigma]

S the x900h smallest size is a 55in,?

Yes.

 

[JeloSWE]

I'm not well versed into tv tech but when I use my instincts, Usually when I see comparisons, sony TVs may not have a tick on every latest tech but their images always look way more accurate, their designs always feel balanced. Whereas Samsung and others feels like they oversaturate whatever they suck at.

X900H is 1000$ whereas Z8H is 6000$ which is still crazy.

If my budget is 1000 to 2000$ , you still recomend X900H or do you know something better?

Really thank you, I learned a lot from you guys.

It's a bit rough this year as Sony hasn't fully transitioned to 2.1 so they are lacking in the upper mid segment.

If you are in the US I would also take a look at Vizio and maybe TLC if you want to go the LCD rout, if OLED is on the radar LC CX is great. But as you said Sony is on point when it comes to color accuracy and image quality. I can afford and spend so much time in front of my TV I will either get the Z8H or wait till next year as I think most TVs will have 2.1 by then.

The biggest reasons to get an LCD over an OLED is. No risk of burn in. Can ge much brighter in HDR and has no ABL (dimming of full screen bright scenes). If the LCD has equaling price and HDR nits output under 900 nits (OLEDs max out at around 700 nits) then an OLED isn't a bad alternative bar the ABL. If I were to buy a new TV, I would only get one with at lest 1500 nits or more but anything above 1000 nits is a must in my eyes.

Sonys menus are very responsive and easy to use these days. But I wish they pushed more for new tech.

 

[Rikkori]

This talk about stutter or judder in 30 FPS content has enlightened me. I never had problems with 30 FPS games until a few years ago. That’s when I bought an LG B6 OLED. Suddenly I started getting motion sick or headaches while playing certain 30fps games. Gotta figure the OLED stutter at that FPS is the issue.

This is the difference

 

[Kokoloko85]

How much is the OLED and does it have 4k-120- hdmi 2.1?

 

[Classicrockfan]

Yes.

Damn guess I’ll just get the lg 49in oled instead.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

If you have the money I would take a look at Sony's Z8H as it will support HMDI 2.1 120hz (VRR is not confirmed) with an upcoming firmware. I'm considering it for my next upgrade. Vincent of HDTVTest is going to have a review of it in a couple of weeks.

It only supports one not full featured HDMI 2.1 port. So I decided against it.

 

[BluRayHiDef]

Does anyone think that OLED TVs are overrated? I understand that they have an infinite contrast ratio due to each of their pixels producing their own light and therefore being able to appear as a particular color or being able to completely shut off independently of neighboring pixels. I also understand that they have the best response times, maintain their contrast ratio and brightness levels at all viewing angles, and have very thin panels due to their lack of backlights and other components.

However, they have two major drawbacks, one of which nullifies all of their advantages: they're prone to burn-in and they don't get nearly as bright as LED LCD TVs.

I'm aware that the latest OLEDs have pixel-refresh mechanisms that minimize the possibility of burn-in to a significant degree; however, despite how effective these mechanisms are, they're not perfect and therefore the risk of burn-in still exists. Having said this, burn-in is not a drawback that would deter me from getting an OLED TV if there were not the second drawback: the low brightness levels.

OLED is an acronym for Organic Light Emitting Diode, which means that an OLED TV's sources of light are organic and therefore degrade much faster than the LEDs of LCD TVs, typically due to wear and tear and exposure to ambient oxygen and moisture. To maximize their lifespan, the maximum level of brightness at which they're programmed to operate is only a fraction of their natural maximum; this enables them to last for about ten years.

However, this maximum level of brightness is only 800 nits or so; for example, the LG CX, which is the most premium OLED TV released by LG this year, has a peak brightness of 813 nits, which it can reach when displaying a highlight that comprises 10% of its screen space. On the other hand, TCL's flagship TV of 2019, the Q825, can attain a brightness level of a whopping 1,822 nits when displaying a highlight that comprises 10% of its screen space; however, it can get even brighter when displaying a highlight that comprises 25% of its screen space, reaching 1,884 nits.

My current TV, which is a TCL 55R617 - an LED LCD TV, is a budget TV and can attain a peak brightness of 1,009 nits when displaying a highlight that comprises 10% of its screen space. Furthermore, it can attain an even higher level when displaying a highlight that comprises 25% of its screen space: 1,173 nits. Due to being a budget TV, it cost me only $707.65 (including tax and shipping) when I bought it from Amazon back in June of 2018. On the other hand, the LG CX costs $1,600 on Amazon before tax and shipping costs are calculated.

Considering the low maximum levels of brightness that OLED TVs possess, do you think that they're overrated? The true black level, which they can produce, is incredible; however, they're conversely low maximum levels of brightness render them unsuitable for use during daytime, when ambient light is shining through uncovered windows or even only through the spaces of window blinds.

I reckon that the increasing miniaturization of LEDs will render OLED obsolete within the next five years or less; micro LEDs will be able to produce levels of brighness that are even higher than 1,844 nits while being small enough to independently turn off and therefore produce true black for very small shadows, the space between celestial bodies in outer space, and black objects.

 

[RasAlGhoul]

No. They aren’t.

 

[Rbk_3]

My mother told me not to buy the Sony X900F, because she doesn't want me to spend so much money on a TV. And she told me not to get the TCL R615 | 617 because she read the comment section of a YouTube-video review of it and learned about its high rate of Dirty Screen Effect.

Will she even notice? Those kind of things bug the shit out of me, but my parents wouldn’t even be able to see them if I tried to point them out to me. My wife and parents thought I was crazy when I returned 2 TVs to find one with ok uniformity

 

[Rbk_3]

Does anyone think that OLED TVs are overrated? I understand that they have an infinite contrast ratio due to each of their pixels producing their own light and therefore being able to appear as a particular color or being able to completely shut off independently of neighboring pixels. I also understand that they have the best response times, maintain their contrast ratio and brightness levels at all viewing angles, and have very thin panels due to their lack of backlights and other components.

However, they have two major drawbacks, one of which nullifies all of their advantages: they're prone to burn-in and they don't get nearly as bright as LED LCD TVs.

I'm aware that the latest OLEDs have pixel-refresh mechanisms that minimize the possibility of burn-in to a significant degree; however, despite how effective these mechanisms are, they're not perfect and therefore the risk of burn-in still exists. Having said this, burn-in is not a drawback that would deter me from getting an OLED TV if there were not the second drawback: the low brightness levels.

OLED is an acronym for Organic Light Emitting Diode, which means that an OLED TV's sources of light are organic and therefore degrade much faster than the LEDs of LCD TVs, typically due to wear and tear and exposure to ambient oxygen and moisture. To maximize their lifespan, the maximum level of brightness at which they're programmed to operate is only a fraction of their natural maximum; this enables them to last for about ten years.

However, this maximum level of brightness is only 800 nits or so; for example, the LG CX, which is the most premium OLED TV released by LG this year, has a peak brightness of 813 nits, which it can reach when displaying a highlight that comprises 10% of its screen space. On the other hand, TCL's flagship TV of 2019, the Q825, can attain a brightness level of a whopping 1,822 nits when displaying a highlight that comprises 10% of its screen space; however, it can get even brighter when displaying a highlight that comprises 25% of its screen space, reaching 1,884 nits.

My current TV, which is a TCL 55R617 - an LED LCD TV, is a budget TV and can attain a peak brightness of 1,009 nits when displaying a highlight that comprises 10% of its screen space. Furthermore, it can attain an even higher level when displaying a highlight that comprises 25% of its screen space: 1,173 nits. Due to being a budget TV, it cost me only $707.65 (including tax and shipping) when I bought it from Amazon back in June of 2018. On the other hand, the LG CX costs $1,600 on Amazon before tax and shipping costs are calculated.

Considering the low maximum levels of brightness that OLED TVs possess, do you think that they're overrated? The true black level, which they can produce, is incredible; however, they're conversely low maximum levels of brightness render them unsuitable for use during daytime, when ambient light is shining through uncovered windows or even only through the spaces of window blinds.

I reckon that the increasing miniaturization of LEDs will render OLED obsolete within the next five years or less; micro LEDs will be able to produce levels of brighness that are even higher than 1,844 nits while being small enough to independently turn off and therefore produce true black for very small shadows, the space between celestial bodies in outer space, and black objects.

Absolutely not. I have owned several high end LED and Plasmas over the years and the C9 is vastly superior in every way.

You’re way overstating the issues with brightness in the day time. It is perfectly fine. Did you have issues in the lack of brightness in the past with older LED/Plasma/CRTs? Because these high nit LEDs are a very recent development. And I have the KS8000 which can hit up to 1600 nits, but HDR is significantly better on the Oled. You’re underestimating the effect the infinite contrast ratio has on HDR. 800 nit highlights against complete blacks Vs the elevated blacks on an LED is significant.

You could always buy from Costco and have 90 days to decide if you like it and it works for you.

 

[dotnotbot]

they don't get nearly as bright as LED LCD TV

People overlook the fact that HDR is mainly about contrast, not necessarily sun-level brightness. Screen should be able to show as big difference between bright and dark objects as possible (hence High Dynamic Range). LCDs need much higher brightness to achieve as good HDR effect as OLEDs. Diffuse white brightness in HDR is mastered to about 100-200 nits and only highlights should be above that (sun glare, fire, etc.) so the fact that OLEDs can't get brighter than 200-300 on a large screen area isn't a big problem.

That being said OLEDs in a dark room can give you a picutre that is overall closest to reference, despite brightness limitations. If a sun glare is displayed at 700 nits instead of 1000 it will still look blindingly bright to your eyes. Most important thing is that this glare should be much brighter than the surrounding darker details. OLED is able to show all those surrounding details as faithful as possible and struggles only with brightest highlights.

 

[V2Tommy]

Does anyone think that OLED TVs are overrated?

No. They’re underrated, if anything. Do you not have a modern phone with OLED display? Compare it against one that isn’t. It’s a dramatic difference in darker settings.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

People overlook the fact that HDR is mainly about contrast, not necessarily sun-level brightness. Screen should be able to show as big difference between bright and dark objects as possible (hence High Dynamic Range). LCDs need much higher brightness to achieve as good HDR effect as OLEDs. Diffuse white brightness in HDR is mastered to about 100-200 nits and only highlights should be above that (sun glare, fire, etc.) so the fact that OLEDs can't get brighter than 200-300 on a large screen area isn't a big problem.

That being said OLEDs in a dark room can give you a picutre that is overall closest to reference, despite brightness limitations. If a sun glare is displayed at 700 nits instead of 1000 it will still look blindingly bright to your eyes. Most important thing is that this glare should be much brighter than the surrounding darker details. OLED is able to show all those surrounding details as faithful as possible and struggles only with brightest highlights.

That doesn't work vs a good FALD.
My Z9D is a night and day better HDR performing tv.
Significantly brighter screen,much more details with bright and dark scenes(no black crush like oled)
HDR is getting brighter and brighter OLED can't keep up.

 

[dotnotbot]

That doesn't work vs a good FALD.
My Z9D is a night and day better HDR performing tv.
Significantly brighter screen,much more details with bright and dark scenes(no black crush like oled)
HDR is getting brighter and brighter OLED can't keep up.

Properly calibrated OLED doesn't have black crush. Times when OLEDs struggled with dark details are long gone. Also, your Z9D is an extreme example, much more expensive than OLED. It's not a "good FALD", it's extremely expensive, high quality FALD and probably the best LCD Sony has ever realesed in terms of contrast (newer models sacrificed a lot in favour of better viewing angles). You can't even buy it anymore. And it will still slightly overbrighten details that surround brighter obejcts, because it's dimming zones aren't as small as one pixel.

 

[Rbk_3]

Properly calibrated OLED doesn't have black crush. Times when OLEDs struggled with dark details are long gone. Also, your Z9D is an extreme example, much more expensive than OLED. It's not a "good FALD", it's extremely expensive, high quality FALD. And it will still overbrighten details that surround brighter obejcts, because it's dimming zones aren't as small as one pixel.

My C9 had bad black crush out of the box due to mura. A 5% slide was completly dark and a 10% slide was dark in over half the screen. After a pixel refresh, it was perfect. Now 1% and 2% slides are not even crushed at all.

Edit
Here was a 10% black slide before and after I did a couple pixel refreshes.

and here is my 5% slide after. When I got the TV it was just completely dark like the TV was off.

I think anyone complaining about black crush do not have enough hours on the TV

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Properly calibrated OLED doesn't have black crush. Times when OLEDs struggled with dark details are long gone. Also, your Z9D is an extreme example, much more expensive than OLED. It's not a "good FALD", it's extremely expensive, high quality FALD and probably the best LCD Sony has ever realesed in terms of contrast (newer models sacrificed a lot in favour of better viewing angles). You can't even buy it anymore. And it will still slightly overbrighten details that surround brighter obejcts, because it's dimming zones aren't as small as one pixel.

I have seen them properly calibrated and still find the blacks to be to black especially when playing games.
Over brighten details? More like show more details in much much brighter scenes.