Best 4K HDR TV's for One X, PS4 Pro [2017-2020]

[mrcorbo]

The 2017 Vizio M series was supposedly last years P series at a lower price.

No. Last year's P-series is also this year's P-series at the same price. This year's M-series is last year's P-series with bits chopped off so they can justify not selling the P-series at a lower price.

What's the deal about one HDMI 2.0 port btw? Why is that important?

If you're buying a set to do 4K HDR, I'd think you'd want to be able to receive that content from more than one external source. Especially if this is intended to be in service for the long haul. As I said, though, it's more that having multiple HDMI 2.0 ports should be a standard feature on a set selling for that price at this time and the fact that this set doesn't feature that is an immediate indication that they are re-purposing old parts for this design.

 

[Rangers]

If my budget is $700 do you have a better idea? It's good to know but offhand I'm not seeing a reason I will care.

The article I read about HDMI 2.0 said streaming apps bypass the HDMI anyway and talk directly to the TV so HDMI 2.0 doesn't matter there. Does this mean only internal TV apps bypass the HDMI, or like a external roku box as well?

If I can maintain the same Xbox only one HDMI setup it wont be a factor. At worst OK I have to unplug the Xbox and plug in a roku or something. Maybe not ideal but OK.

Also what did they cut back on M Series? Just the FALD zones right? I can live with that because at least it has FALD unlike anything else in this range except maybe the 2017 TCL that isn't out yet and sounds too good to be true...and WCG too I believe! The Vizio's are crazy value.

 

[mrcorbo]

If my budget is $700 do you have a better idea? It's good to know but offhand I'm not seeing a reason I will care.

The article I read about HDMI 2.0 said streaming apps bypass the HDMI anyway and talk directly to the TV so HDMI 2.0 doesn't matter there. Does this mean only internal TV apps bypass the HDMI, or like a external roku box as well?

If I can maintain the same Xbox only one HDMI setup it wont be a factor. At worst OK I have to unplug the Xbox and plug in a roku or something. Maybe not ideal but OK.

Also what did they cut back on M Series? Just the FALD zones right? I can live with that because at least it has FALD unlike anything else in this range except maybe the 2017 TCL that isn't out yet and sounds too good to be true...and WCG too I believe! The Vizio's are crazy value.

TCL are the largest panel manufacturer in the world. It's not "too good to be true", really. Now how aggressive they want to be on margins and where they choose to cut corners to deliver on those features at the target pricing remains to be seen. And features don't always equal performance. The best course, though, is to wait until everything is out and has been tested in like for like testing and see what measures up the best. rtings are going to be getting all of these in for testing eventually. I'd mention HiSense as well, but they whiffed this round too by making FALD and WCG either/or in their lower-end product lines. Last year's H8C was such a good value (55" got down to $499), all they had to do was add WCG and punch up the brightness a bit and they would have another winner (from a value standpoint) on their hands.

And yes, they are talking about the internal streaming apps. Anything coming in over HDMI that's HDR will have to go in over an HDMI 2.0 port.

 

[Rangers]

The 2017 TCL P-Series looks like one to watch. An AVS editor got one and just informed the brightness measured at 600 nits which is very good for the price. For 2016 models they all were quite dim around 300 nits for the $600-700 range for a 55". Of course a full review needs to be waited for but, looking good. The TV has 72 zones FALD. Which is much more than Vizio M series at 32 for the 55" I believe. Of course, raw zones are not everything, hence another reason to wait on review. Not only that but the Roku OS on the TCL tends to earn rave reviews vs the smartcast junk on Vizio being widely hated (that could change in 2017). I do find it funny we now have firmware updates and OS's on TV's...

http://www.tclusa.com/products/home...lass-p-series-4k-uhd-hdr-roku-smart-tv-55p607

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y6FSV5Q?ref_=sr_1_2&tag=slickdeals&ascsubtag=5c96e66040f611e7aa4deac75121984d0INT&qid=1495673179&sr=8-2&keywords=tcl 55p607&pldnSite=1

Which is $649 for the 55", was evidently on sale for 599 but Amazon currently has it at 799 for some reason.

That and the 2017 Vizio M series, need reviews...

Given some discounts eventually I may be able to get that TV for $500. Sell my old set on Letgo or offerup for around 200, $300 net cost, not bad for an upgrade. I'd still love to move up in size to increase the all important initial upgrade wow factor, but it's currently looking cost prohibitive.

Course I dont even have an Xbox S to tie me over till Scorpio, so it'd probably be another $100 in upgrade cost for that....

Edit: There's been some more discussion on AVS and apparently the street/non promo price of the TCL 55 p series 2017 is going to be 799. So barring discounts, it might not be such a crazy deal. Also not shipping until July or August, allegedly.

 

[mrcorbo]

The 2017 TCL P-Series looks like one to watch. An AVS editor got one and just informed the brightness measured at 600 nits which is very good for the price. For 2016 models they all were quite dim around 300 nits for the $600-700 range for a 55".

I just wanted to provide some context for that 620 nits measurement. That is a sustained, fullscreen measurement. In rtings peak brightness table (check the "HDR Sustained 100% Window" score) there are only two TVs that have a higher number, the Sony X940E at 740 nits (cd/m²) and Sony's Z9D at 673. That 620 is oustanding.

The 72% color volume measurement is just OK. The 2016 Vizio P series got 74% (so the 2017 M series will probably get similar if not exactly the same).

 

[London Geezer]

However 100% white window measurements is completely useless. Unless you plan to look at your TV while displaying a full white screen, which isn't how I'd expect people to spend their time.

 

[mrcorbo]

However 100% white window measurements is completely useless. Unless you plan to look at your TV while displaying a full white screen, which isn't how I'd expect people to spend their time.

Sure, but that's the measurement that the reviewer shared, so it was important to place it in context.

 

[Rangers]

It came up for preorder on Amazon for 599. (The TCL). Also Amazon says it wont ship until August but word is it will be more like June, maybe even June 5.

Anyways due to Amazons no charge till ship policy I preordered one. Should be reviews out before it actually ships so I can make up my mind. Dont want it to sell out in the meanwhile.

 

[London Geezer]

Sure, but that's the measurement that the reviewer shared, so it was important to place it in context.

My point is that, from personal experience, you must look at these TVs playing real content. And choose the one that is great at playing the content that you personally use the most. Movies? Games? Sports? HDR? Each of them requires something specific. And generally speaking, only very expensive TVs excel at all of them simultaneously. While some expensive TVs do not.
These synthetic tests - especially Rtings, which I like a lot as a website - are almost meaningless after a certain point, if you ignore real life situations.

 

[mrcorbo]

My point is that, from personal experience, you must look at these TVs playing real content. And choose the one that is great at playing the content that you personally use the most. Movies? Games? Sports? HDR? Each of them requires something specific. And generally speaking, only very expensive TVs excel at all of them simultaneously. While some expensive TVs do not.
These synthetic tests - especially Rtings, which I like a lot as a website - are almost meaningless after a certain point, if you ignore real life situations.

As far as I can tell, rtings specifically and most resources I've used for evaluation don't ignore real-life situations. They try to approximate them as best they can while allowing for consistent repeatable testing that can objectively compare different products. My own experience is that people are terrible at making these types of evaluations based on their own perception. This is why TVs have "showroom" settings and music is consistently being mixed louder with less dynamic range.

Give me comprehensive testing using the scientific method all day every day.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

My own experience is that people are terrible at making these types of evaluations based on their own perception.

That's very backwards. You're saying individuals are no good at knowing what they like and need a scientific evaluation to tell them what they should like. Joe Schmo may like over-saturated colour and contrast and whatnot, and a TV may be technically crap compared to another, but their own perception tells Mr. Schmo what they like, and in buying a TV they should buy the crap one with the over-saturated colours and contrast and whatnot and not the scientifically proven superior TV that they subjectively don't like as much.

So as LB says, you should see it yourself, not read a spec sheet. It's the lack of a decent means to see the TVs that requires a scientific comparison to be made for comparison's sake. If you can, look at two TVs in an appropriate setting showing the content that interests and pick the one that looks better to you, ignoring all and every number!

 

[mrcorbo]

That's very backwards. You're saying individuals are no good at knowing what they like and need a scientific evaluation to tell them what they should like. Joe Schmo may like over-saturated colour and contrast and whatnot, and a TV may be technically crap compared to another, but their own perception tells Mr. Schmo what they like, and in buying a TV they should buy the crap one with the over-saturated colours and contrast and whatnot and not the scientifically proven superior TV that they subjectively don't like as much.

But what people like isn't fixed. People's perception of "correct" and "better" are informed and by their prior experience and are continually altered by continuing experience. You learned to like what you like and you can just as easily learn to like what is objectively better and correct by exposing yourself to more of the latter. I see a great benefit in starting with a known correct and objectively better baseline and then letting subjectivity take over from there.

In your example above, if Joe Schmo had a professional calibrator come in and set up his TV and he saw content on that TV every day for a year, if you were to then put his TV back to his prior preferred settings they would probably look "off" to him.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

In your example above, if Joe Schmo had a professional calibrator come in and set up his TV and he saw content on that TV every day for a year, if you were to then put his TV back to his prior preferred settings they would probably look "off" to him.

In that situation, he'd have paid a professional calibrator lots of money and yet be no happier than using the crappy setup he was comfortable with.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

But what people like isn't fixed. People's perception of "correct" and "better" are informed and by their prior experience and are continually altered by continuing experience.

I completely subscribe to this. Steve Jobs often said "consumers don't know what they want, you need to show them". It's a trite statement but it's correct in that most people are not objective and can't really think (or sometimes comprehend things) outside of the boundaries of experience with which they are already familiar. But that's how most people work, they don't immediately understand things they've not experienced themselves.

People can better comprehend things outside of their experience when it's put on a scale with which they can relate, even through ironically, they can rarely conceptualise it realistically. But as a method to demonstrate differences, it's a good as it gets.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Give people numbers and all they can compare are the numbers. The set with the bigger numbers is better. What you can't put a (convenient) number on is perceived quality doing what you want it to. Ergo you need to see the set. A set with a lower number may end up looking better than another. Kinda like people trying to determine which console is best based on the number of flops. You can't determine on-screen results from paper specs and need to see the actual results to see which is better for you.

For some things like photography, if you go to a proper review they'll look at lens resolving power rather than just dumb megapixel counts. But even then, a load of photos is enough to show you if the camera will take the photos you want, whether you know the specs or not.

 

[London Geezer]

You can't make a decision based on numbers alone. Heck, Steve Jobs would be the first to say that. Apple never played the numbers game, apart from very vague "our system is 2x more powerful than that system" for this very reason.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Give people numbers and all they can compare are the numbers. The set with the bigger numbers is better. What you can't put a (convenient) number on is perceived quality doing what you want it to. Ergo you need to see the set. A set with a lower number may end up looking better than another.

Let me recant my Starbucks theory. I am fortunate in that I like the taste of Starbucks coffee. Is this because Starbucks coffee is better than other coffee? No. But it's what I'm used too after many years. Anything that isn't Starbucks coffee tastes different. Is it better or worse? Hard to say, but different is generally not good compared to something you are used too. People are very much creatures of habit of our standards of acceptance become very ingrained and are also very hard to change later. But unlike the taste of coffee, TV settings are easily changed.

You can't make a decision based on numbers alone.

I agree. But numbers can resolve an otherwise difficult decison. If conventional wisdom is that number B is better higher, that two products are otherwise copmparable but your second choice item has a higher number B then B is likely going to win. Because people generally will rationalise based on discernible criteria all other factors being equal. This is why differences capabilities are often conveyed on a scale, even if the actual technology is not something the consumer can understand, some numbers are better higher and others lower.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I agree. But numbers can resolve an otherwise difficult decison.

It would if the numbers were fully meaningful. However, they are shortcuts that rarely represent the full picture.

If conventional wisdom is that number B is better higher, that two products are otherwise copmparable but your second choice item has a higher number B then B is likely going to win.

However, that's not always the case. In fact it often isn't. PS3 had bigger numbers than XB360, but XB360 produced the better quality more often than not, because the numbers aren't the complete picture. To have the complete picture, you'd need more numbers than you can really follow. Only engineers and hard-core professionals will research that much. To the layman, manufacturers shoot out a few choice numbers to try to present a comparison. You see it in store in side-by-side summaries of products. It's typically bollocks (MHz, anyone?) The one that really caught me was Samsung's horse-shit about RGBW when I bought a Galaxy NotePro. Lots of scientific numbers and rave reviews, yet the screen couldn't actually represent a true yellow. All my research went to pot. Of course, I should have researched even more, and looked up a colour calibration test. Or I should have ignored the numbers and marketing spiel and gone look one up in a store (which actually was hard to do because no-one stocked the things!).

Or you get caught out by switches. eg. You read many reviews about a TV set, only to find the manufacturer uses different panels and the one you buy isn't as good as the reviews. Don't have that problem if you see the set in store and it looks good and you buy one from the same batch. Or you read many, many reviews saying a camera records 1080p30 and 1080p60 only to find when you buy it that Sony have decided to limit you to 1080p25 and 1080p50 and now when you try to record your 60fps material you get miserable flicker. Don't have that problem if you ignore the numbers and just try the camera with the content.

 

[orangpelupa]

so this is like people in my country that like stretched images.

• 
  
• in TV (4:3 shows stretched to 16:9)
• in MS Word and PowerPoint (photos stretched to various weird ratios)

those are objectively wrong. But they like it.

as for TV, so many people i know prefer their TV on "torch mode" rather than the correct mode. The only exception are gamers when they have problem seeing things in the dark and i changed their TV out of torch mode.

 

[mrcorbo]

so this is like people in my country that like stretched images.

• 
  
• in TV (4:3 shows stretched to 16:9)
• in MS Word and PowerPoint (photos stretched to various weird ratios)

those are objectively wrong. But they like it.

as for TV, so many people i know prefer their TV on "torch mode" rather than the correct mode. The only exception are gamers when they have problem seeing things in the dark and i changed their TV out of torch mode.

so this is like people in my country that like stretched images.

• 
  
• in TV (4:3 shows stretched to 16:9)
• in MS Word and PowerPoint (photos stretched to various weird ratios)

those are objectively wrong. But they like it.

as for TV, so many people i know prefer their TV on "torch mode" rather than the correct mode. The only exception are gamers when they have problem seeing things in the dark and i changed their TV out of torch mode.

so this is like people in my country that like stretched images.

• 
  
• in TV (4:3 shows stretched to 16:9)
• in MS Word and PowerPoint (photos stretched to various weird ratios)

those are objectively wrong. But they like it.

as for TV, so many people i know prefer their TV on "torch mode" rather than the correct mode. The only exception are gamers when they have problem seeing things in the dark and i changed their TV out of torch mode.

Did your cat get a hold of your login info?