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

Status
Not open for further replies.
ultragpu said:
Hot damn looks like Z9D still reigns supreme in Brightness (real scene, peak level in both HDR and SDR) and Local Dimming. Hard to imagine even the Q9FN is beaten by a two year old model.
The gist of it.
135p7q.jpg

4a140c68-2c23-4c68-b46d-580db525e372
Click to expand...

Cool, looking at their reviews of all those sets at the YouTube link, the LG C8 is still the best general purpose display and best gaming display out of the LG, Samsung, and Sony sets although the Sony A8F and A1E are very close behind. The OLED sets obviously fall behind in peak brightness, but excel in almost all other areas. Especially black uniformity, local dimming, pixel response, and input lag.

Brightness is good for the Z9D as you mentioned, but it is definitely showing its age falling quite far behind relatively speaking in many other areas compared to the other sets.

Regards,
SB
 
Silent_Buddha said:
Cool, looking at their reviews of all those sets at the YouTube link, the LG C8 is still the best general purpose display and best gaming display out of the LG, Samsung, and Sony sets although the Sony A8F and A1E are very close behind. The OLED sets obviously fall behind in peak brightness, but excel in almost all other areas. Especially black uniformity, local dimming, pixel response, and input lag.

Brightness is good for the Z9D as you mentioned, but it is definitely showing its age falling quite far behind relatively speaking in many other areas compared to the other sets.

Regards,
SB
Click to expand...

The risk of burn-in is a real buzzkill, though.
 
mrcorbo said:
The risk of burn-in is a real buzzkill, though.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm not ready to move away from LCD on my PC monitor or TV, mainly for this reason. Top brightness isn't an issue; OLED is plenty bright enough for me really, especially considering my apartment can be made dark as a Mordor pit even during a sunny day. ;) Burn-in though... That would make me real unhappy.
 
Silent_Buddha said:
Cool, looking at their reviews of all those sets at the YouTube link, the LG C8 is still the best general purpose display and best gaming display out of the LG, Samsung, and Sony sets although the Sony A8F and A1E are very close behind. The OLED sets obviously fall behind in peak brightness, but excel in almost all other areas. Especially black uniformity, local dimming, pixel response, and input lag.

Brightness is good for the Z9D as you mentioned, but it is definitely showing its age falling quite far behind relatively speaking in many other areas compared to the other sets.

Regards,
SB
Click to expand...
True. But for me Z9D excels at exactly where it matters:), which is real scene HDR brightness. On average it's about 2.5 times brighter than C8 in an UHD HDR film, HDR gaming and SDR medias. Without a certain level brightness you just don't get this pop from HDR. It also still has the best full array local dimming system in the industry bar Oled and combining with its astounding brightness the overall presentation is more impressive for me at least. That said there sure is room for improvement such as Native Contrast, Input lag and color gamut. But in real world viewing I feel like high brightness coupled with a sufficient enough Fald is the best way to go about HDR media.
 
Personally since we are gamers I would just exclude OLED from my choices. If you are not a gamer, then different story. That combined with LCD's being brighter anyway...means given a choice between equal LCD/OLED sets I'll choose LCD. Of course some will claim OLED burn in isn't any significant issue to worry about. I'm wary. I have seen my brothers old Samsung phone burn in, too. And Rtings is running a burn in test that shows yeah, it's a real thing.

A lot of people I see on forums treat OLED as without peer, non negotiable must have, anything less is not even worth bothering, or something, like the now defunct Plasma cartel about that technology, bollocks I say. It's all incremental.
 
But LCD and OLED aren't equal, unless you're going to use the TV only for gaming, not watching any movies or shows.

You never know, lot of younger people just watch on their phones.
 
But LCD and OLED aren't equal
Click to expand...

I guess I mean a similar quality range set of each. Like a high end LCD vs high end OLED.

It's weird to me Samsung doesn't dominate big screen OLED TV's like the rest of electronics, especially since they seemingly pioneered it in phones. Then again I'm not completely convinced LG isn't Samsung's minor league team.
 
Different type of OLED and manufacturing process.

Samsung can't scale up the mobile device OLED device to TV sizes and still get good yields.

They'd have to license it from LG and they're big rivals.

Chinese manufacturers may enter the OLED TV market too.
 
I love my LG Oled. Simply wonderful picture quality. Input lag is truly excellent as well, especially if you're also using 1080p signals. (at which point input lag bloody doubles for most other tv sets) Great UI as well. As for burn in. I decided not to worry about it. I'm not about to watch CNN for 10 straight hours every day after all. Never had any problems with it on my Vita or my phone either. Get plenty of pop in HDR as well. I'd imagine the capability of having a 780 nits pixel right next to 0 one helps quite a bit.

I'd probably not go for any of the other Oled brands, though. The markup for something with the exact same panel like the Sony A1 (which has ever so sligtly better upscaling yet loses out in other ways) or any of the Loewes (which are categorically worse in almost all aspects) is absurd.
 
Last edited:
Rangers said:
Personally since we are gamers I would just exclude OLED from my choices. If you are not a gamer, then different story. That combined with LCD's being brighter anyway...means given a choice between equal LCD/OLED sets I'll choose LCD. Of course some will claim OLED burn in isn't any significant issue to worry about. I'm wary. I have seen my brothers old Samsung phone burn in, too. And Rtings is running a burn in test that shows yeah, it's a real thing.

A lot of people I see on forums treat OLED as without peer, non negotiable must have, anything less is not even worth bothering, or something, like the now defunct Plasma cartel about that technology, bollocks I say. It's all incremental.
Click to expand...

Self-emissive pixels are an objectively better and more efficient way to create an image. The problem is, the tech for producing them has all had drawbacks in manufacturability and usability.

An OLED and an LCD really can't be equal. The base tech has different fundamental strengths and weaknesses. I can understand why someone would only ever consider an OLED and I can understand why someone would never consider an OLED depending on their IQ preferences and usage for the display.
 
Self-emissive pixels are an objectively better and more efficient way to create an image.
Click to expand...

Definitely.

My Samsung S8 vs any phone with an LCD I've ever seen isn't pretty. The AMOLED looks like it's made of water or something! I mean that in a good way. Another way I've heard it described is they look like stickers.
 
How good is that Freesync? I just bought a 24" QLED high refresh monitor but it only scales down on the high refresh modes and not very far - 120 Hz over HDMI scales down to over 60 Hz and no lower.
 
London-boy said:
I haven’t seen that in person, and YouTube videos don’t really convey the effect... but how does that actually look like in reality??
Click to expand...

I think all it does is repear frames twice when you go below the lower limit of your refresh. So a freesync display with a low limit of 48 Hz and LFC can operate down to 24 Hz by drawing frames twice, or that's how I understand it.
 
DF Article: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...amsung-adds-freesync-support-to-select-4k-tvs

Samsung adds FreeSync support to select 4K TVs
Tear-free, smoother action for AMD GPU and Xbox One owners.

Apparently there are a couple of compromises, however. The support only works at 1080p resolution and apparently some aspects of screen brightness may be affected. This means that PC and Xbox One X users may need to downscale their display outputs - effectively trading image quality for the FreeSync variable refresh effect. It's a good match for Xbox One and One S users though, where typically the console tops out at 1080p resolution anyway. The question of whether Xbox One X users should engage FreeSync or not is a little complex though - in our tests, the implementation on Xbox only matched the quality of the PC experience on a small number of titles, and Microsoft's implementation of the technology didn't remove screen-tearing, as it does on PC.

Given a choice between FreeSync at a downscaled 1080p or standard 4K output, we'd probably take the latter, given current results. However, with that said, the quality of the variable refresh rate experience depends very much on what is dubbed the 'FreeSync window'. Boiled down into simple terms, different screens only support the variable refresh effect at a specific frame-rate range - typically in the region of 40-60fps (though as our report says, Microsoft's implementation cleverly attempts to get results below this). Right now, it's unknown what kind of FreeSync range Samsung's TVs support, but we'll do our best to find out

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
Best HDMI 2.1 4K+ HDR TV for Consoles [2023]
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
dobwal
D
R
HDR settings uniformity is much needed
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
5K
Frenetic Pony
F
D
  • Poll
4k IPS vs 1440p IPS but with local dimming
Replies
3
Views
686
orangpelupa
orangpelupa
digitalwanderer
New monitor for my wife
Replies
11
Views
1K
Davros
D
W
New Qualcomm silicon for new Surface May 2024
Replies
11
Views
943
Pressure
P
Back
Top