Maybe their testing shows a less aggressive schedule for cycling is sufficient for normal use.
Best HDMI 2.1 4K+ HDR TV for Consoles [2023]
- Thread starter Silent_Buddha
- Start date
Maybe their testing shows a less aggressive schedule for cycling is sufficient for normal use.
I was fortunate to get an invite and attend the 2024 HDTV Test shootout this year. This is focused on video content but general principles apply to gaming also. Meaning the capabilities of the displays extends to gaming as well as normal content, post calibration.
TL: DR/DW. Samsung/Sony/LG are good. Panasonic miles behind. The HX3110 mastering monitor is absurdly good.
Panasonic's fall from grace has been more attributed from lack of R&D funds as it was losing market share left and right, almost getting acquired by TCL Europe at some point. Ironic their quality over profit mantra would ultimately eventually come to hurt their famed PQ. Still, build quality would still have Panasonic in favor as LG is still suffering from chrominance overshoot, tinting issue, HDMI 2 issue, Sony suffers from T-Con error that would eventually crap your TV out and would also lead to lower brightness, and also not so ideal ABSL as mentioned, Dolby Vision has black crush and tinting issue, Samsung has famous One Connect Box crap out issue affecting 1440p/4K 120Hz/144Hz, which my Panasonic GZ2000 suffers none of.
I also have the Samsung S95C purchased a few months ago, and overall picture quality I would still give it to the Panasonic. Compared to Panasonic, the Samsung simply lacks transformative HDR dynamic range experience on top tier HDR games like Star Wars Battlefront 2, Resident Evil 7, and Doom Eternal, and behaves closer to LCDs like Sony Z95A. The GZ2000 also has really good HDR upscaling, and while it's rare, there has been moments like "Wow, great HDR dynamic range performance, the dev must have done a great job with HDR works", only to find it does not support HDR (like Shenmue3) The S95C cuts too many corners on color accuracy to obtain exceptional display latency, and unfortunately increase in APL in HDR10+ mode is one of it, which is completely different from how the GZ2000 handles. (The GZ2000 supports not only Dolby Vision like LG and Sony, but also supports HDR10+ like Samsung)
I also have the Samsung S95C purchased a few months ago, and overall picture quality I would still give it to the Panasonic. Compared to Panasonic, the Samsung simply lacks transformative HDR dynamic range experience on top tier HDR games like Star Wars Battlefront 2, Resident Evil 7, and Doom Eternal, and behaves closer to LCDs like Sony Z95A. The GZ2000 also has really good HDR upscaling, and while it's rare, there has been moments like "Wow, great HDR dynamic range performance, the dev must have done a great job with HDR works", only to find it does not support HDR (like Shenmue3) The S95C cuts too many corners on color accuracy to obtain exceptional display latency, and unfortunately increase in APL in HDR10+ mode is one of it, which is completely different from how the GZ2000 handles. (The GZ2000 supports not only Dolby Vision like LG and Sony, but also supports HDR10+ like Samsung)
The "pixel clarity" (in lack of a better word) is so much better on OLED.
LCD/IPS look "smugded" in comparison.
Be it games or video.
DavidGraham
Veteran
This is related to the bandwidth of your connection (HDMI2.1/DP1.4), it has a maximum theoretical bandwidth it can not exceed. HDMI2.1 is generally caped at 4K@120Hz at max quality, going further than 120Hz required decreasing the quality, DP1.4 is the same. If you want higher quality you have to use a DP2.1 connection.
I see my graphic card only has HDMI2.1a and DisplayPort 1.4a.
I also see that Dispalport 2.1 has had some cable issues, so seems like going higher comes with caveats:
DisplayPort 2.1 has a serious issue with UHBR-certified cables — it could explain Nvidia sticking with DP 1.4 on RTX 40-series
DisplayPort 2.1 DP80 certified cables currently max out at 1.2m, DP40 can reach 3m, and DP54 cables don't exist.
Will be interesting to see what new graphics cards pick (HDMI 2.b / DisplayPort 2.1a) for their standards.
Cappuccino
Newcomer
What do you mean “pixel clarity”?
Resolution scaling is going to be the same process as on an LCD (IPS is LCD btw), they’re all fixed grids.
OLEDs have better GtG response times on average but high end miniLED sets these days match OLED on that. Plus a super fast response time tends to make low refresh rate content look bad. However neither of these are going to affect resolution scaling.
I was fortunate enough to observe two 32" screens from the same vendor right next to each other running the same flow in sync.
The colors and "pixel clarity" (perhaps "contrast" is a better word?) was so much better on the OLED...and OLED has true black (no backlighting).
That IRL A/B test made me buy OLED...I can never go back to LCD's again, I simply find them to lacking in image quality.
The picture is much more clear/sharp on an OLED, I now sigh everytime I am at work...because the black process line in windows is not black...it is "greyish" compared to my OLED.
The best MiniLEDs are so advanced that in many cases they result in Oled picture quality, even with seemingly completely black black. I can testify to this myself, I chose a high-end TCL Miniled TV instead of Oled, as I found it to be better in terms of brightness, its blacks are true blacks, and it excels in reliability. In my opinion, the high-end Miniled is better for gaming.
Mini-LED definitely wins if your main concern is brightness. You can get way brighter highlights in HDR, and you can get very deep blacks. They do exhibit haloing in high-contrast areas because of limited dimming zones. In terms of gray-to-gray performance, OLED is just way better in terms of near instant response but also no overshoot/underhoot. A 480Hz TN panel can't even match an OLED.
I see a small egde for OLED's, like in this article:
OLED vs Mini-LED: What’s the difference and is one actually better?
Is OLED vs Mini-LED display technology better?
But then again, my gaming setup is not close to any windows and the partner enjoys lying on a couach watching videos when I am not home, so for me OLED was the clear choice.
Cappuccino
Newcomer
I agree, if you mean contrast there’s no contest, actual true blacks are always going to be better than locally dimmed backlights.
However that’s not what pixel clarity means. Usually people say that when talking about text clarity and fringing which OLED is actually worse at due to its sub pixel structure.
Anyways neither of these concepts have anything to do with res scaling which was my original point. I used to use an OLED, it broke so now I use miniLED, same resolution setup essentially with the fixed grid. The differences are mostly in contrast and motion.
I stand corrected, I was thinking of input latency not response time. OLED is still the undisputed king for gtg.
As annoying as rtings is, this is a good illustration on how HDR perception actually works vs just windowed measurements. You can see the bravia 9 clearly blows away the s90d in windowed measurements but when you see actual scenes, the s90d is notable better. It really just comes down to not having enough zones.
In a windowed measurement, the measurement is taken just from the white box of a given size. The tv's processing that controls the backlight algo isn't having to do anything special and the measurement is impressive.
However when a real scene comes on, things become really complicated. The algo has to find a balance in how to dim each zone. Keep in mind, it's not a binary on/off. The zone is manipulated to find a balance in displaying detail. In each zone is a large number of pixels, each asking for different level of color and luminance. So what you get in a compromise across the zone.
Span that out across the entire screen and you're just wrestling with a level of balance the processing is trying to achieve. Ultimately, in a side by side what you'd see the Bravia 9 having less depth and three dimensionality to the image.
That's why LCD based tech has such a hard time translating measurements to real world. So next time when looking at numbers, pay attention to the actual scene measurements across multiple respectable outlets and don't just assume the windows reading is what you'll get in actual content.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
I don't know, to me it looks from those numbers that the Bravia 9 actually manages to stay pretty close to the OLED in 3 those scenes, while having much bigger advantage in those other tests. The hallway light test seems to be quite challenging for LCDs though. I'd like to see that test done on a 85" Bravia 9 as it has almost double the zones compared to the 65" model they tested.
On a separate note I took delivery yesterday on a 98" TCL X955 (QM851G), it's 65" model seems to be able to put some numbers on those tests.
The 98" also does have a quite a bit more zones. It certainly is not a perfect TV though and the nits probably drop quite a bit if you calibrate it to accurate.
My unit was also delivered defective... The entire right side of the panel is malfunctioning. Not entirely sure what causes it, but the backlight doesn't go dark or bright when it should, it kind of just stays in the middle.
Also if I turn the TV off, the screen flashes brightly. It requires a power plug removal until it "works" again for one power on...
Wouldn't this be nice to see every time you turn your TV on?
(it's quite bright in person, lot's of nits there!1!) 
Let's see how the RMA goes...
Last edited:
Similar threads
