TCL: 3L for no local dimming, 400 nits tv.

[Infamous]

I just considered LD OFF == non FALD

Yes and taking the TCL 2020, you said this is what non FALD TVs would look like. I am just saying it's not always like that. Hence, gave the TCL 2019 example which doesn't look as bad when LD is off.

I will give a non FALD example as well to be more clear. This is the X750H. Way better than that LD turned off TCL.
My point is for people who can only afford a non FALD TV.
They shouldn't see your TCL example and think this is what every non FALD TV will look like.

We are discussing in the TCL thread which by itself in the indian context is low cost/low bar.
Consensus is, if you find 2 TVs in the vicinity (like within 5k) and one provides shady details and other provides DCI-P3 numbers crossing 90% and other does not, preference should be to the one with better numbers. This should have more priority than say the TV is few nits brighter. (Not sure how much weightage RTings gives to nits, anything there?)
LG, Sony, Samsung of today should all satisfy but I cannot be so sure. This is for the oneplus, nokia, iffalcon, toshiba, TCL, hisense etc. Few are here to dump old technology for not only low price but also low value. Low price, high value is what to look for in that range.

Don't move the goal post man. You were giving a general TV buying guideline and told to look for OLED/FALD/High DCI-P3. And wrt I brought up this point. And my point was just that rtings doesn't give that a lot of importance compared to other parameters.

Why do people here take it so personally when I am just bringing up a counter point by a reputed source? I am not saying you guys are wrong. Look back at my statements if you want. My intention is to just discuss the reasons why Rtings may be thinking this way. But instead of discussing why they may be doing that, you are just doubling down on your point and trying to prove Rtings wrong.

Rtings aren't the gospel word. And neither are you guys. So, at the end of the day, let's focus on learning something. Or atleast gain a different perspective.

 

[lightgamer]

Today buying anything less a 4k TV is meaningless.

Not really. If all you're watching is DTH content with some 1080p OTT content, there's absolutely no point going for a 4k TV. The 2013 Sony 42" 1080p TV I have(currently on bedroom duty) looks excellent and much better than the budget 4k TVs selling today.

And a lot of people buy 4k TVs for bright room viewing and a 100-200nit vs 500nit in bright room makes a huge difference even though the content is only mastered for 100 nits.

True, no arguing there.

My question was, have all the 2020 TVs crossed a certain threshold like 300-400nits for SDR to make it irrelevant as a measure?

Even most decent 2015 TVs would pass 300 nits as brightness. I don't think SDR brightness means much beyond this.

There is difference between a TV with 500 nits HDR and 100 nits SDR vs 500 nits for both. Till some years ago the former was mainstream. Not sure of today.

Is there such a TV? If a TV panel can reach 500 nits, they wouldn't just hamstring the SDR performance by limiting it to 100 nits. That's just stupid. The SDR v/s HDR brightness difference majorly stems from either OLED who'd want to preserve their panels or high brightness LCDs who would like to not sear your eyes with SDR content.

Generally, for low brightness LCDs (300-400 nits) they would have the same brightness for SDR or HDR.

I went to the rtings.com archives and found the worst and oldest TVs they tested (remember that even the 25-30k Hisense/TCL TV of today will beat this).

This is the review from 2017:

TCL 1 Series/D100 Review (32D100, 40D100, 49D100)

The TCL D100 is a basic 1080p TV with decent picture quality. It lacks many of the features found in higher end TVs to improve the picture quality further, and h...

www.rtings.com

The review mentions that the TV doesn't get very bright and yet it reaches 250 nits or so.

 

[BLASTO]

Yes and taking the TCL 2020, you said this is what non FALD TVs would look like. I am just saying it's not always like that. Hence, gave the TCL 2019 example which doesn't look as bad when LD is off.

I will give a non FALD example as well to be more clear. This is the X750H. Way better than that LD turned off TCL.
My point is for people who can only afford a non FALD TV.
They shouldn't see your TCL example and think this is what every non FALD TV will look like.


Don't move the goal post man. You were giving a general TV buying guideline and told to look for OLED/FALD/High DCI-P3. And wrt I brought up this point. And my point was just that rtings doesn't give that a lot of importance compared to other parameters.

Why do people here take it so personally when I am just bringing up a counter point by a reputed source? I am not saying you guys are wrong. Look back at my statements if you want. My intention is to just discuss the reasons why Rtings may be thinking this way. But instead of discussing why they may be doing that, you are just doubling down on your point and trying to prove Rtings wrong.

Rtings aren't the gospel word. And neither are you guys. So, at the end of the day, let's focus on learning something. Or atleast gain a different perspective.

While I will answer your other questions, who is taking things personally here and what makes you think so? Are you in the past pitted against such a situation? Why would I take anything personal when we are discussing TVs?

 

[BLASTO]

Yes and taking the TCL 2020, you said this is what non FALD TVs would look like. I am just saying it's not always like that. Hence, gave the TCL 2019 example which doesn't look as bad when LD is off.

I will give a non FALD example as well to be more clear. This is the X750H. Way better than that LD turned off TCL.
My point is for people who can only afford a non FALD TV.
They shouldn't see your TCL example and think this is what every non FALD TV will look like.

The example you gave is still blue screen with clouds which is what FALD will avoid. There is no one who can afford a Sony x750 who cannot afford a Toshiba U79 because it is cheaper and a FALD. It is better from what I wrote. If anyone wants the picture processing and better lasting components of sony TV, they are going to buy the sony anyway. And X900/X950 is not far if hell bent on a sony. It is much better TV with FALD.

Below are ratings from Rtings. It is inline with my statement.

Sony X750H Review (KD-55X750H, KD-65X750H, KD-75X750H)

The Sony X750H is a decent budget 4k TV. It's a significant shift from its predecessor, the Sony X750F, as it has a VA panel this time around to provide a signif...

www.rtings.com

Hisense H8F Review (50H8F, 55H8F, 65H8F) - RTINGS.com

Don't move the goal post man. You were giving a general TV buying guideline and told to look for OLED/FALD/High DCI-P3. And wrt I brought up this point. And my point was just that rtings doesn't give that a lot of importance compared to other parameters.

Why do people here take it so personally when I am just bringing up a counter point by a reputed source? I am not saying you guys are wrong. Look back at my statements if you want. My intention is to just discuss the reasons why Rtings may be thinking this way. But instead of discussing why they may be doing that, you are just doubling down on your point and trying to prove Rtings wrong.

Rtings aren't the gospel word. And neither are you guys. So, at the end of the day, let's focus on learning something. Or atleast gain a different perspective.

Not taking anything personal. Rest of the post is irrelevant.

 

[BLASTO]

Not really. If all you're watching is DTH content with some 1080p OTT content, there's absolutely no point going for a 4k TV. The 2013 Sony 42" 1080p TV I have(currently on bedroom duty) looks excellent and much better than the budget 4k TVs selling today.

I agree but it is from 2013 when there was no 4k or probably prohibitively high priced comparatively.
Will you get a 1080p tv today or 4k ones for few thousands more even if you are watching only OTT content considering next 5 years?

Is there such a TV? If a TV panel can reach 500 nits, they wouldn't just hamstring the SDR performance by limiting it to 100 nits. That's just stupid. The SDR v/s HDR brightness difference majorly stems from either OLED who'd want to preserve their panels or high brightness LCDs who would like to not sear your eyes with SDR content.

Generally, for low brightness LCDs (300-400 nits) they would have the same brightness for SDR or HDR.

Interesting. I stand corrected. OLEDs have typically half brightness for SDR content. And it is clearly visible in mine.

Even most decent 2015 TVs would pass 300 nits as brightness. I don't think SDR brightness means much beyond this.
I went to the rtings.com archives and found the worst and oldest TVs they tested (remember that even the 25-30k Hisense/TCL TV of today will beat this).

This is the review from 2017:

TCL 1 Series/D100 Review (32D100, 40D100, 49D100)

The TCL D100 is a basic 1080p TV with decent picture quality. It lacks many of the features found in higher end TVs to improve the picture quality further, and h...

www.rtings.com

The review mentions that the TV doesn't get very bright and yet it reaches 250 nits or so.

Apparently not.
It is surprising having the below TVs from samsung and sony with brightness <=300 nits for 2020.
There are current TVs sold as H0RD capable. No wonder a dud at their prices.

Samsung TU7000 Review (UN43TU7000FXZA, UN50TU7000FXZA, UN55TU7000FXZA, UN58TU7000FXZA, UN65TU7000FXZA, UN70TU7000FXZA, UN75TU7000FXZA)

The Samsung TU7000 is an okay entry-level TV from Samsung's 2020 lineup. Sold as the Samsung TU700D at Costco and Sam's Club, it's a budget-friendly TV with okay...

www.rtings.com

Samsung TU8000 Review (UN43TU8000FXZA, UN50TU8000FXZA, UN55TU8000FXZA, UN65TU8000FXZA, UN75TU8000FXZA, UN85TU8000FXZA)

The Samsung TU8000 is an entry-level budget TV from Samsung's 2020 lineup, also sold as the TU8200 at Walmart. Despite lacking a local dimming feature, it displa...

www.rtings.com

Sony X750H Review (KD-55X750H, KD-65X750H, KD-75X750H)

The Sony X750H is a decent budget 4k TV. It's a significant shift from its predecessor, the Sony X750F, as it has a VA panel this time around to provide a signif...

www.rtings.com

 

[BLASTO]

One general question, Are the RTings ratings absolute or cost compensated?
Eg: Hisense H9G is 8.4 and and Sony X90 is 8.0 means H9G is absolutely better or better for the price? It is a real feat if it is absolute. The difference was very wide just 2 years ago. Wonder how well Hisense TVs perform 2 years from now. Might overtake the likes of sony?

 

[harryneopotter]

One general question, Are the RTings ratings absolute or cost compensated?
Eg: Hisense H9G is 8.4 and and Sony X90 is 8.0 means H9G is absolutely better or better for the price? It is a real feat if it is absolute. The difference was very wide just 2 years ago. Wonder how well Hisense TVs perform 2 years from now. Might overtake the likes of sony?

From what I have seen, it's absolute and not related to the cost.
And yes, H9G punches way above its weight and goes toe to toe with Q90T, which says a lot.

 

[Rane-2020]

One general question, Are the RTings ratings absolute or cost compensated?
Eg: Hisense H9G is 8.4 and and Sony X90 is 8.0 means H9G is absolutely better or better for the price? It is a real feat if it is absolute. The difference was very wide just 2 years ago. Wonder how well Hisense TVs perform 2 years from now. Might overtake the likes of sony?

The way i see it.Rtings can be useful tool in making decision.But its not the ultimate.for example if someone looking for 4k 120 gaming then X900H is better tv for sure than H9G.

There is no size fit for all in TV.Now coming back to your point yes H9G has changed the game.You can get so much value now with H9G.Its good for consumers.

 

[BLASTO]

I think the likes of Hisense and TCL from USA context are the ones going in the right direction.
The likes of Samsung are just milking the people with unrealistic prices for flagship 4k and 8k TVs.
In a year or 2 from now, samsung, the king of buzz words should really be worried or invent more meaningless buzzwords to keep afloat.

It is a shame that TU7000 and TU8000 are the TVs competing with the likes of H9G and TCL6/8s if you see in that context.

 

[Infamous]

Hisense H9G is 8.4 and and Sony X90 is 8.0 means H9G is absolutely better or better for the price?

Yeah as per the overall score termed as "Mixed Usage" which is like if you are trying to have it all, the H9G is better. But if you are focused on (say) gaming, you will have to check out scores for the motion section of these TVs.

And I'd encourage anyone looking at Rtings to not just look at score of a category but also read through the entire review. The devil is in the details as they say. Case in point, the Hisense H8F (Toshiba U79) is 7.4 on mixed usage. If sports and/or video games are important to you, you will check their overal rating for these things which is 6.4 and 6.9 respectively. They may seem average but if you dig deeper, you see the motion rating of this TV is 3.4/10! Literally bottom tier to say the least. Software tricks help here but only so much. So thorough reading is a must.

 

[lightgamer]

And I'd encourage anyone looking at Rtings to not just look at score of a category but also read through the entire review. The devil is in the details as they say. Case in point, the Hisense H8F (Toshiba U79) is 7.4 on mixed usage. If sports and/or video games are important to you, you will check their overal rating for these things which is 6.4 and 6.9 respectively. They may seem average but if you dig deeper, you see the motion rating of this TV is 3.4/10! Literally bottom tier to say the least. Software tricks help here but only so much. So thorough reading is a must.

Can't agree more to this! Similarly, if your usage is purely on movies or TV shows, the U79 is competitive with much better 'overall' TVs like the X900H. For 24/30 fps content, the poor response times don't matter at all since you need to render a frame in 42/33 ms which is very easy.

Even for sports in India we have broadcast of cricket only at 30fps. Response time would matter only for 60fps broadcast for fast sports like football/squash, or if you're gaming/using with PC.

 

[lightgamer]

I agree but it is from 2013 when there was no 4k or probably prohibitively high priced comparatively.
Will you get a 1080p tv today or 4k ones for few thousands more even if you are watching only OTT content considering next 5 years?



Interesting. I stand corrected. OLEDs have typically half brightness for SDR content. And it is clearly visible in mine.


Apparently not.
It is surprising having the below TVs from samsung and sony with brightness <=300 nits for 2020.
There are current TVs sold as H0RD capable. No wonder a dud at their prices.

Samsung TU7000 Review (UN43TU7000FXZA, UN50TU7000FXZA, UN55TU7000FXZA, UN58TU7000FXZA, UN65TU7000FXZA, UN70TU7000FXZA, UN75TU7000FXZA)

The Samsung TU7000 is an okay entry-level TV from Samsung's 2020 lineup. Sold as the Samsung TU700D at Costco and Sam's Club, it's a budget-friendly TV with okay...

www.rtings.com

Samsung TU8000 Review (UN43TU8000FXZA, UN50TU8000FXZA, UN55TU8000FXZA, UN65TU8000FXZA, UN75TU8000FXZA, UN85TU8000FXZA)

The Samsung TU8000 is an entry-level budget TV from Samsung's 2020 lineup, also sold as the TU8200 at Walmart. Despite lacking a local dimming feature, it displa...

www.rtings.com

Sony X750H Review (KD-55X750H, KD-65X750H, KD-75X750H)

The Sony X750H is a decent budget 4k TV. It's a significant shift from its predecessor, the Sony X750F, as it has a VA panel this time around to provide a signif...

www.rtings.com

I always knew that the big 3 had mediocre TVs apart from their top end lineup, but this is plain unacceptable. What's pathetic is that these TVs are called as 'best TV for 70-80k' by Indian reviewers and perform like crap.

If people voted with their wallets and stopped buying this garbage, companies would stop releasing these kind of products. India has become dumping ground of reject products as of late.

 

[iambatman28]

The way i see it.Rtings can be useful tool in making decision.But its not the ultimate.for example if someone looking for 4k 120 gaming then X900H is better tv for sure than H9G.

There is no size fit for all in TV.Now coming back to your point yes H9G has changed the game.You can get so much value now with H9G.Its good for consumers.

X900H has pathetic peak brightness so not really. I'd buy H9G anyday over X900H. HDMI 2.1 is good to have but imagine paying 1L for a TV with sub 500 nits brightness.

 

[Rane-2020]

X900H has pathetic peak brightness so not really. I'd buy H9G anyday over X900H. HDMI 2.1 is good to have but imagine paying 1L for a TV with sub 500 nits brightness.

I said it for aspecific case.can you do 4K 120fps on H9G?

 

[iambatman28]

I said it for aspecific case.can you do 4K 120fps on H9G?

Sacrificing picture quality for 120 fps makes zero sense. If it's that important to you, sure go knock yourself out. But what the hell are you going to do with frames if your games look nowhere near as good as they should.

 

[Rane-2020]

Sacrificing picture quality for 120 fps makes zero sense. If it's that important to you, sure go knock yourself out.But what the hell are you going to do with frames if your games look nowhere near as good as they should.

I am not saying i am buying this tv for myself.i was making a specific point that no tv is perfect.It totally depends upon your requirements.

I dont like to get into one tv vs other.thats a silly thing to do..I like to make factual statements about whatever little i know about tvs.also my position on H9G is very clear from my past posts.If you dont know I was the first or may be one of the first to put out about toshiba U7980 on this forum.I remember you were anti hisense back then?you even shared a link about how people are dissatisfied with Hisense.guess you are having a change of heart now.

Anyways coming back to your statements.according to you people should forget this tv and buy H9G as that is more suited for gaming. Congratulation you are the first person who said frames are not important in gaming.you must be a serious gamer?

yes you are correct games "will not look good" on sony x900h.as H9G has better picture processing than MT5895,Better color accuracy.better out the box picture,better local dimming algorithms.correct EOTF,better gradient etc etc.

its clear that x900h is a trash tv.people should be banned from buying x900h

 

[iambatman28]

I am not saying i am buying this tv for myself.i was making a specific point that no tv is perfect.It totally depends upon your requirements.

I dont like to get into one tv vs other.thats a silly thing to do..I like to make factual statements about whatever little i know about tvs.also my position on H9G is very clear from my past posts.If you dont know I was the first or may be one of the first to put out about toshiba U7980 on this forum.I remember you were anti hisense back then?you even shared a link about how people are dissatisfied with Hisense.guess you are having a change of heart now.

Anyways coming back to your statements.according to you people should forget this tv and buy H9G as that is more suited for gaming. Congratulation you are the first person who said frames are not important in gaming.you must be a serious gamer?

yes you are correct games "will not look good" on sony x900h.as H9G has better picture processing than MT5895,Better color accuracy.better out the box picture,better local dimming algorithms.correct EOTF,better gradient etc etc.

its clear that x900h is a trash tv.people should be banned from buying x900h

Most people game on their TV with consoles which anyways will do 120 fps in a handful of games. I'd be surprised if they even manage 4k 60 after couple of years.
X900H is a pretty terrible TV imo and I'd personally never spend 90k-1L on it even for gaming. For gaming, CX is the way to go for a feature rich experience along with good PQ. If you're not willing to spend as much then get the panel with the best quality and picture quality.
I'd personally never recommend anyone to get a much worse TV solely for 4k 120.
I personally won't spend 1L on Hisense either but it can't be denied that it's a much better TV than X900H.

 

[Rane-2020]

Most people game on their TV with consoles which anyways will do 120 fps in a handful of games. I'd be surprised if they even manage 4k 60 after couple of years.
X900H is a pretty terrible TV imo and I'd personally never spend 90k-1L on it even for gaming. For gaming, CX is the way to go for a feature rich experience along with good PQ. If you're not willing to spend as much then get the panel with the best quality and picture quality.
I'd personally never recommend anyone to get a much worse TV solely for 4k 120.
I personally won't spend 1L on Hisense either but it can't be denied that it's a much better TV than X900H.

I was giving an example.I was not recommending it.i was only saying buy tv according to your needs.CX is offcourse better but its 50% more expensive.1.6 for x900h vs 2.4 for CX.

X900H is a good mid ranger tv. all the sony goodies which i mentioned above with 700nits brightness.Its not a trash as you said it is.There are only few tvs in india which beat it in terms of PQ.The problem is the way sony has priced it in india.Ideally it should be around 70-75 for 55 and around 1.1-1.2 for 65.

Anyways No point in going back n forth on this point.I will not engage in this discussion further.

 

[iambatman28]

I was giving an example.I was not recommending it.i was only saying buy tv according to your needs.CX is offcourse better but its 50% more expensive.1.6 for x900h vs 2.4 for CX.

X900H is a good mid ranger tv. all the sony goodies which i mentioned above with 700nits brightness.Its not a trash as you said it is.There are only few tvs in india which beat it in terms of PQ.The problem is the way sony has priced it in india.Ideally it should be around 70-75 for 55 and around 1.1-1.2 for 65.

Anyways No point in going back n forth on this point.I will not engage in this discussion further.

I agree with you on this. X900H would've made more sense at the prices you said but its plain overpriced atm.

 

[BLASTO]

I was giving an example.I was not recommending it.i was only saying buy tv according to your needs.CX is offcourse better but its 50% more expensive.1.6 for x900h vs 2.4 for CX.

X900H is a good mid ranger tv. all the sony goodies which i mentioned above with 700nits brightness.Its not a trash as you said it is.There are only few tvs in india which beat it in terms of PQ.The problem is the way sony has priced it in india.Ideally it should be around 70-75 for 55 and around 1.1-1.2 for 65.

Anyways No point in going back n forth on this point.I will not engage in this discussion further.

Every year, either the prices should come down or the technology should improve for the same price.
The X90 series is neither. X90H is not much different from the X90E of 3 years ago and prices have increased over this time. That alone makes it a less value. X90E was a great value in its time X90H is ok ok. It is a good value for 75k.

If you take the TCL or Hisense example, they have moved on so much in the same period.
Evolution of 6 series is clear.
DLED (2017) -> Full array Local Dimming DLED (2018) -> Full array Local Dimming QLED (2019) -> Mini LED based Local Dimming QLED. (2020)
All this for same or marginal price increase well justified.

Similar path can be traced for Hisense H8/H9.

Above all, these are direct picture quality improvements. Not junk like edge lighting to male slimmer or glossy screen to appear dynamic or plain aesthetic changes like narrow bezels..

Where are the mini LED TVs from big 3? Where is the 1000/2000nits TV from sony?

Big3 can only think they are gimmicks and turn away for so long. They have clearly started showing results.
No wonder TCL and Hisense became 2nd and 3rd most selling in US while LG and Sony were pushed back.
I am sure, next year will be a bigger blow. Wont be surprised if they take the number 1&2 spots.