nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

New tv for series x

rottie 11

What would be the best tv to buy for the new console ? I’m heating you’d probably want 120hz for the best experience for COD etc

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

shuffles03

Deleted User wrote: »

Lads the Qleds are amazing, trust me. You're not going to look at a Qled and think omg the blacks are sh!t I should have gone for an Oled.

I can't believe someone would buy a TV thinking I'm going to use the warranty in 4 years or take LG to the small claims court!!

I got myself a 75" Q70T for 2k. The 77" Cx was around 8k i think. Only negative is if you need more than one hdmi 2.1 port because it only has the one.

I have a 2018 Q6N 55". Would there be a noticeable difference in picture quality if I jumped to a 2020 Q80T?

I'm looking at the 75" model.

Also, I assume this has HDMI 2.1?? For the life of me I can't see it written anywhere on Samsung's spec sheet.

theteal

rottie 11 wrote: »

Just another question lads sorry I’m a bit clueless but what’s all this hdmi 2.1 about ? Are all 4 ports 2.1 on it the xh90 ?

Just 2 of the ports I believe. HDMI 2.1 is a new standard that provides much higher bandwidth. With that they can enable 120Hz, VRR, ALLM, eARC etc. etc.

Most would be seen as gaming centric video/display features but eARC enables the passthrough of multi channel lossless audio and should eradicate issues like lip sync

rottie 11

Just another question lads sorry I’m a bit clueless but what’s all this hdmi 2.1 about ? Are all 4 ports 2.1 on it the xh90 ?

theteal

Useful video. XH90 holds it's own against more expensive competition. Would be more interesting if Sony could get the full update out already.s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf1bSseyyDE

theteal

joe123 wrote: »

Ive always gone for TV's in the 400-500 bracket, it will do the job type thing but yeah, this time around with my last TV just breaking a month a head of GEN5 I'm thinking yep this time im going up a level.

It really is the burn in aspect that worries me though. Considering 1 game of FIFA takes ~20 minutes, I sometimes can easily play multiple macthes in one session over watching a tv show.

I think I'm at the point of looking at these 3. Omitting the LG CX/BX due to screen burn. I dont want to be faced with that issue in 4 years.

Samsung Q80T - Q950T
Sony XH950
Sony XH9005

Im probably over analysing it at this stage but for splashing big money I want to make sure its a good one

Am I right in saying the most important aspects in order are
1. Good HDR
2. HDMI 2.1
3. Dolby Vision

(Annoyingly none of the above TV's tick all the boxes outside of the LG)

Im assuming all these TVs would have very low refresh rate/latency in this price bracket.

My thoughts

Samsung Q9 (would not buy a lower model Sammy) - very good TV, best LCD on sale today but too expensive - no better than my Panny DX902 that was released in 2016.

Sony XH95 - really good all round TV and decent price but NOT getting the HDMI 2.1 updates. I would buy as a non-gaming TV.

Sony XH90 - slightly lower model than above so older processor but has already received it's first feature update (120Hz) with more to come (VRR etc). This is the one Sony are flogging as their "ready for PS5" model. As a primarily gaming TV, I would go for this - and most likely will around March/April time.

joe123

Ive always gone for TV's in the 400-500 bracket, it will do the job type thing but yeah, this time around with my last TV just breaking a month a head of GEN5 I'm thinking yep this time im going up a level.

It really is the burn in aspect that worries me though. Considering 1 game of FIFA takes ~20 minutes, I sometimes can easily play multiple macthes in one session over watching a tv show.

I think I'm at the point of looking at these 3. Omitting the LG CX/BX due to screen burn. I dont want to be faced with that issue in 4 years.

Samsung Q80T - Q950T
Sony XH950
Sony XH9005

Im probably over analysing it at this stage but for splashing big money I want to make sure its a good one

Am I right in saying the most important aspects in order are
1. Good HDR
2. HDMI 2.1
3. Dolby Vision

(Annoyingly none of the above TV's tick all the boxes outside of the LG)

Im assuming all these TVs would have very low refresh rate/latency in this price bracket.

theteal

rottie 11 wrote: »

Yes sorry arc lol ah right that’s handy. Can it not be used so for an Xbox etc ?

Yup, you can, if you've no sound system to connect it to, fire away.

wes

Deleted User wrote: »

Lads the Qleds are amazing, trust me. You're not going to look at a Qled and think omg the blacks are sh!t I should have gone for an Oled.

I have a 2018 Q8DN QLED, and it has local dimming. It has 40 local dimming zones, and while it is not as good as OLED, the black levels are pretty good and it is better for brightness than OLEDs. I know the newer models have more local dimming zones, so I don't think people will be disappointed in the black levels. Just make sure the model you get has local dimming.

Also, to consider are any mini led TVs, which have even more local dimming zones. Samsung doesn't have nay this year, but they will next year. Some brands have the mini led this year.

The reason I went for the QLED over an OLED is that I use my TV as a PC monitor, and so OLED was a non-starter as I didn't want my PC burning in the OLED screen.

[Deleted User]

theteal wrote: »

LG for a long time refused to acknowledge that burn-in could happen. Then due to the amount of complaints buckled and now give a mighty one year cover for burn-in and basically blame the user should it happen.

It matters not really as you'll walk a small claims case based on the item being not reasonably durable. If you cant watch a TV without it breaking itself, it's not fit for purpose.

Lads the Qleds are amazing, trust me. You're not going to look at a Qled and think omg the blacks are sh!t I should have gone for an Oled.

I can't believe someone would buy a TV thinking I'm going to use the warranty in 4 years or take LG to the small claims court!!

I got myself a 75" Q70T for 2k. The 77" Cx was around 8k i think. Only negative is if you need more than one hdmi 2.1 port because it only has the one.

rottie 11

theteal wrote: »

Are you sure it's not "ARC"? Audio return channel, that's the one you connect to a soundbar/amp. Itll pass the audio from everything connected to the TV to the soundbar/amp.

Yes sorry arc lol ah right that’s handy. Can it not be used so for an Xbox etc ?

theteal

rottie 11 wrote: »

I have 4 hdmi ports on mine, the third one down says ARK next to it though. What does that mean does anyone know ? I’m my Xbox just plugged into a normal port

Are you sure it's not "ARC"? Audio return channel, that's the one you connect to a soundbar/amp. Itll pass the audio from everything connected to the TV to the soundbar/amp.

rottie 11

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Can you confirm how many HDMI2.1 ports it has. I’m seeing some say the 65 has 1 vs the 55’s 2. Getting both the PS and Xbox so I’d need the two at least.

I have 4 hdmi ports on mine, the third one down says ARK next to it though. What does that mean does anyone know ? I’m my Xbox just plugged into a normal port

theteal

Maestro84 wrote: »

Would you not have a 5 or 6 year warranty that would cover that?

LG for a long time refused to acknowledge that burn-in could happen. Then due to the amount of complaints buckled and now give a mighty one year cover for burn-in and basically blame the user should it happen.

It matters not really as you'll walk a small claims case based on the item being not reasonably durable. If you cant watch a TV without it breaking itself, it's not fit for purpose.

Hey_Listen

Won't cover burn in. But you can buy special warranties at least in the UK specifically for burn in. Tests on eg rtings seem to say it's a none issue unless you have the TV on static content 24/7 and even then not for years. However they can only test a TV for this and not an average sample.

I said screw it. I don't watch much TV or game much but I got tired analysing and agonising over lesser TVs and I was tired of treating myself to second best

I figured I'd save time and sanity by just getting the OLED. Plus I bought local so helping the economy during the covid recession ... I was convincing myself

Analysis paralysis is a terrible thing.

For just over a grand I got the B9 for the same price as my previous TV. A Samsung 1080p LCD from 2008, which is still fine. If I get the same amount of time out of this I'll be delighted.

xtal191

Maestro84 wrote: »

Would you not have a 5 or 6 year warranty that would cover that?

Pretty sure burn in isn't covered

Maestro84

joe123 wrote: »

Saw some posts over on av forums where they discuss image burn. Mentioned you'd have 4 years or so before you'd notice it if you played games like FIFA regularly. Any game that has a regular static hud.

For the price I couldnt justify it as much as I'd love an Oled.

Would you not have a 5 or 6 year warranty that would cover that?

joe123

Saw some posts over on av forums where they discuss image burn. Mentioned you'd have 4 years or so before you'd notice it if you played games like FIFA regularly. Any game that has a regular static hud.

For the price I couldnt justify it as much as I'd love an Oled.

NeitherJohn

Hurrache wrote: »

Don't think it is. The CX rates better compared to the C9 but the main argument us that if you could have gotten the C9 at a discount the price jump to the CX wasn't worth it.. But in terms of gaming the CX seems to always rate better.

Aye, sorry to drop another link in here but Vincent Teoh compares both here!

Hurrache

theteal wrote: »

Iirc, the general consensus is that you're better off with the B/C9 than the newer variants. LG took more features out than improvements made.

Don't think it is. The CX rates better compared to the C9 but the main argument us that if you could have gotten the C9 at a discount the price jump to the CX wasn't worth it.. But in terms of gaming the CX seems to always rate better.

Hey_Listen

theteal wrote: »

Iirc, the general consensus is that you're better off with the B/C9 than the newer variants. LG took more features out than improvements made.

Good to know!
It's a minefield.
I see there is a BX now.
Still 300 more than the B9 I bought in the summer.

Also, I think the tech plateaus and they just start messing with features to pretend you are getting something new.

The new consoles should move everything along into 4K HDR 60 FPS low response times minimal standard. And at much lower prices. Which is a good thing.

I'm thinking people who don't have the latest TV should wait and see how things evolve in the next year or two. Definitely wait until the new consoles are tested against these TVs with next gen software.

theteal

Hey_Listen wrote: »

So if TV supports HDMI 2.1 then it supports VRR ?
And is this mostly equivalent to gsync and free sync ???
I'm totally confused about this.

I notice my Xbox One X says VRR now when connected to my LG OLED B9 and a freesync monitor. So I think the consumer label for this will be VRR going forward. All the advanced features from the one x are ticked green against this TV.

I got the B9 recently as it was discounted as it's last year's model. But by all accounts it looks fantastic and gets fantastic reviews. RDR2 looks stunning. Movies look stunning. Black is gorgeous on this. Beautiful natural picture. This is the best digital image I've ever seen.

I'm not upgrading to a next gen console just yet. But this TV should do VRR 60 FPS 4K HDR with a very fast response time. So I'm happy. It's got 4 hdmi 4.1 ports too! I think the only difference Vs this years models is slower processor so it won't do 120 FPS at 4K but I doubt many games will support that or will have compromises so I'm ok with that. Also the VRR support might be weaker but as I said , I'm in the dark about this.

Iirc, the general consensus is that you're better off with the B/C9 than the newer variants. LG took more features out than improvements made.

Hey_Listen

So if TV supports HDMI 2.1 then it supports VRR ?
And is this mostly equivalent to gsync and free sync ???
I'm totally confused about this.

I notice my Xbox One X says VRR now when connected to my LG OLED B9 and a freesync monitor. So I think the consumer label for this will be VRR going forward. All the advanced features from the one x are ticked green against this TV.

I got the B9 recently as it was discounted as it's last year's model. But by all accounts it looks fantastic and gets fantastic reviews. RDR2 looks stunning. Movies look stunning. Black is gorgeous on this. Beautiful natural picture. This is the best digital image I've ever seen.

I'm not upgrading to a next gen console just yet. But this TV should do VRR 60 FPS 4K HDR with a very fast response time. So I'm happy. It's got 4 hdmi 4.1 ports too! I think the only difference Vs this years models is slower processor so it won't do 120 FPS at 4K but I doubt many games will support that or will have compromises so I'm ok with that. Also the VRR support might be weaker but as I said , I'm in the dark about this.

joe123

I'll be keeping a keen eye on Black Friday sales.

At the moment it seems the number one choice to cover all GEN5 requirements is the LG CX. Very expensive though, the 55' is coming in around the €1500 range. The only concern here is the burn in that can occur on OLEDS. As I play a lot of FIFA and watch a lot of sports, its my main concern, but by all accounts it ticks all the boxes in terms of HMDI 2.1 and HDR quality.

After this the Sony XH905 is getting recommended quite a bit and the the Samsung Q80T.

Wonder what sort of price reductions we could see on the above. LG CX would be very tempting if it was around 1k.

ziggyman17

Gonzo wrote: »

got the XH90 55 here and it's absolutely stunning. Getting both PS5 and Xbox Series X so both hdmi 2.1 ports will be used up.

I am going to get the 65 inch version this week, was going to wait to see if it drops in price in the black friday sale, but for 1450 euros I cannot see it dropping in price.......

Gonzo

got the XH90 55 here and it's absolutely stunning. Getting both PS5 and Xbox Series X so both hdmi 2.1 ports will be used up.

heebusjeebus

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Can you confirm how many HDMI2.1 ports it has. I’m seeing some say the 65 has 1 vs the 55’s 2. Getting both the PS and Xbox so I’d need the two at least.

The xh90 has 2 Hdmi 2.1 ports but one is also the eArc port.

Oafley Jones

rottie 11 wrote: »

I ended up buying the 65 Sony Bravia XH90 today anyway , got it for 1400 in Harvey’s. Haven’t set it up yet but can’t wait to later on

Can you confirm how many HDMI2.1 ports it has. I’m seeing some say the 65 has 1 vs the 55’s 2. Getting both the PS and Xbox so I’d need the two at least.

[Deleted User]

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

OLEDs are by far the best TVs on the market. Nothing else comes anywhere close to their picture quality. Burn in is nothing to be concerned about, and LG have taken ample measures to make sure it it is practically non existent.

You will never regret getting an OLED, but you may regret choosing another type like QLED as in the back of your mind you will know OLED is the best. Just go to the richersounds forum, they all say get an OLED if you can and most of them have one.

I went with the Qled and I can assure you its not something I regret nor will I ever regret. This TV was designed for gaming.

Oled is better contrast but honestly Qled is more than plenty good enough to the point where I felt my money was better spent going for a bigger screen for the ultimate cinema experience.

I also got 50% off a sounbar so there was that too. That offer is still going if people are looking for a TV + Soundbar.

rottie 11

I ended up buying the 65 Sony Bravia XH90 today anyway , got it for 1400 in Harvey’s. Haven’t set it up yet but can’t wait to later on

[Deleted User]

Since OLED became reasonably affordable (you can get end-of-line LG 55" models for around 1200 regularly) nobody with a budget in that range should buy an LCD.

LCD still has it's place for bright day time viewing, people who leave the news running all day etc. Or just a cheap TV for the bedroom.