TCL - 55" Class - LED - 6 Series - 2160p - Smart - 4K UHD TV with HDR - Roku TV
Model:55R625 SKU:6367716
And I couldn't be happier with it. I was a little worried that the tv was too low budget and would have motion blur issues. So far very little issues gaming. I have a standard ps4 so maybe upscaling isnt as bad as true 4k gaming as far as motion blur goes. I even tried the dreaded Spiderman that was known to have heavy motion blur on some TVs. It doesn't on mine or I cant notice it. I wanted to give everyone a headsup if they are looking to upgrade to a 4k tv and are on budget and/or to save for ps5. It cost me $500. My only concern is the max 60htz instead of 120htz which may come into play on ps5. If an issue does come up I'll edit this post as I only had the TV for a week or so.
I’m back to using my old 32 inch 1080p TV. Play Tetris Effect and the PS4 pro fan didn’t kick in once. Definitely has less visual impact though.
I’ll hold off getting a replacement 4K TV until after the PS5 is out so we know for certain what features the next generation of games will actually use.
Looks like I'm going to be in the market over the next few months to upgrade my TV. I'm on normal HD at the moment (3D variant) and am looking to move into 4K.
Last TV I bought was about 5 years ago for about £800. I'm prob looking around the region of £1000-1200 now. Size wise I'm not so sure, I've got 48in so prob looking at around 55in. We live in a small space at the moment so TV will dominate the room too much but hoping to move to a bigger place in the next 12 months.
@icecube I plumped for an LG oled b9 around Christmas time and the picture is fantastic! Maybe you could get the c9 for around 1200 now? If you play lots of a game with an obnoxious logo repeatedly on (a la fifa) or watch lots of news channels then maybe think about a qled. Oleds can get screen burn from lots of repeated use. My tvs only on a couple of hours a day though so wasn't an issue for me.
Their is really two choices if you want the 'best' gaming TV and it really depends on whether you want OLED or LCD - both have their pro's and con's — so it really comes down to which technology suits you best and which con's are easier for you to accept.
The undisputed king right now is the LG C9 OLED. It comes with 4 HDMI 2.1 ports and all 4 are full bandwidth (48Gb/s) with all the features you will want - 4k/120, VRR etc. The newer CX (X as in Roman Numeral for 10) also has 4 HDMI 2.1 ports but only 40Gb/s - whether that will make a difference in a few years, I don't know but that is a 'slight' negative in compared to the C9. You get all the benefits of OLED - including incredible pixel response times - faster than basically all gaming monitors which have incredibly fast response times primarily because of scrolling through text - slower response leaves trails/blur...
If you want the best LCD, the current best is the Samsung Q range - most have very similar gaming performance and the higher the number, generally the better the HDR and Picture Quality will be. The 'newer' ones are better for gaming in my opinion as they have greatly improved the local dimming - last years was basically off so some dark areas were not as dark as they could be. However, they only have one HDMI 2.1 40Gb/s port - meaning that if you plan to buy the Series X (or any other HDMI 2.1 device) you will have to swap HDMI cables to get the 2.1 features. Its the same with many other LCDs or they don't have the best input lag, best HDR black level as they sacrifice black quality for viewing angles etc Not to say they are 'bad' and some may well be an improvement over your HD TV because HDR has put a bigger emphasis on Black quality and with the need to go much brighter for HDR, manufacturers have had to work on preventing the backlight affecting black quality - which has made SDR black quality overall better.
Of course there is a 'risk' of burn-in with OLEDs although the risk of burn in is incredibly small. What we are seeing though is uneven wear. As each pixel is made up of smaller sub-pixels, with certain content, it wears out the sub-pixels faster in some areas of the screen especially if you have a static coloured element (red, green, blue) as these would require a single sub-pixel to be on continuously and brightly using up more of its life span faster causing it to fade more and eventually fading enough to appear in content. It can look a bit like Burn in as you can see the shape of that element in the content but its really that the sub-pixels have worn more and it doesn't matter if that element was on screen for no more than 30mins a day, (like searching netflix for 10mins at a time 3x a day despite watching hours of content in between or just searching netflix for 30mins in one block), that adds up to 3.5hrs a week over 180hrs a year etc that the Netflix logo (all red and bright meaning just the red sub-pixel is on) will be wearing the red sub-pixel faster under the logo than the red sub-pixels across the rest of the screen and will eventually fade enough to become more noticeable and affect the colour accuracy and balance in that specific area.
The reason I am saying this is to let people know that is what can and will happen with certain static elements in certain colours as the individual sub-pixels wear at different rates. White is less risk because its made up of all 3 sub-pixels so its not working an individual pixel as hard. A single candle for example has to burn much brighter and faster than 3 candles to give the same brightness and its the same principal - Cyan, Magenta and Yellow are slightly lower risk as these are 2 sub-pixel colours. You are safe from burn-in by watching news with a red logo for 3hrs a day - you won't get burn in - especially if you also follow the guidelines for protecting against burn-in - but if you watch 3hrs a day, every day, that red logo will have been on screen 21hrs a week or 1095hrs a year. The red Sub-pixels will wear much faster where the logo is and so will eventually fade more than the red sub-pixels elsewhere leading to that logo becoming noticeable on a red slide and in some content because the colour balance is wrong (the red won't be working as well so on a white screen, you will see the logo in cyan (blue and green) - which is why it maybe seems like burn in.
being aware of what can happen with certain content, knowing how an OLED works and therefore what may cause problems years later due to wear, you can minimise or even eliminate that risk. If you think that you are safe by watching 3 or 4 hours of content with static bright single colour elements because of burn-in protection etc, which in fairness you are, you are still wearing those pixels out more than the rest so repeatedly displaying that day after day after month etc adds up and that wear will eventually be significant enough to become noticeable and the brighter you have your TV, the quicker it wears too. It maybe years and years before that uneven wear is noticeable -depending on how many hours you accumulate and how bright you have your TV set so its not an issue at all for some.
As I said, I want to make people aware so they have an informed decision and can decide if its the right TV for them, whether the risk is insignificant to their usage and/or what to be aware of to minimise that risk because it really is the best gaming TV on the market right now if you can manage that risk. People are right to say Burn in is basically a non-issue and has been proven that burn in is basically a non issue with general fair usage. The problems arise much later with an accumulation of wear so not technically burn in.
I don't want to tell people that the benefits outweigh the negatives - because for someone, that negative maybe too much for them, the risk too high for the cost and expectation they have - even if that uneven wear may not become visible for years and years and the PQ being exemplary, unrivalled for many years, they would rather go LCD to basically remove that risk at all and prefer some of the other advantages - like bright room HDR performance, Colour Volume etc. but right now, the best TV for gaming is the LG C9 by quite some margin with Samsungs Q series being the 'best' LCD option. Again that's not to say other OLEDs or LCD's won't be great gaming TV's with impressive input lag - maybe even better than they currently have. Some have strengths in other areas - like viewing angles for example so its not as simple as buy LG C9 or a Samsung Q series or have a TV that is 'bad' for gaming because many TV's offer less than 30ms input lag in game modes - a very respectable value and considered an Excellent performance but the LG C9 (best all rounder OLED for the money) and Samsung Q9 (best HDR and Gaming LCD TV) have the lowest input lag and best for gaming stats of all TV's currently available. Not everyone buys a big TV purely for gaming so other factors also need to be considered too of course and manufacturers these days are aware of the importance of good gaming performance. When I bought my first 4k TV, few (if any) were under 40ms input lag in game mode but now, few are over 30ms...
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@Kidfried I’ve got a Samsung too and love it. 4K makes more of a difference with movies than games imo. HDR is great when implemented effectively too, God of War was the first game I played on my Pro and the 4K HDR did look fantastic in Helheim.
@Kidfried If you really wanna be blown away watch some of the 4K stuff on YouTube. It is mostly just things like nature and architecture, but still mightily impressive. The best thing I've seen picture quality wise is the nature documentary Seven Worlds One Planet on BBC iplayer. You need an above average internet speed to watch it mind!
Life is more fun when you help people succeed, instead of wishing them to fail.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
i'm looking to get a ps5 ready tv aswell,thing is i can't decide if going for HDMI 2.1 for the 120 FPS is a waste of money or not. perhaps i'm better off with a regular 4k tv at 60 HZ?
@jdv95 It does feel like more games will be supporting it next gen, but like @Kidfried says it all depends on whether you notice stuff like that and if it is worth the extra dough. Me, not so much as I only tend to notice when there are sudden changes to frame rate, but I know some people that won't even play a games unless it is 60fps at least. Those are mostly PC gamers who are probably more accustomed to 60fps and higher.
I would prefer devs aim for a stable frame rate rather then for something higher which then drops now and again. If it is 30fps then so be it and they should not be hammered for it.
Life is more fun when you help people succeed, instead of wishing them to fail.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
I'm planning to get a new TV in the next few weeks, something that works perfectly for the PS5, about 50". I know I should look to get one with HDR, anything else I ought to take into consideration? Thanks.
Hey all, I got a an LG CX there in August and would recommend it. Especially if you play mostly in a dark room. The PS4 Pro is amazing on it, so can't wait to see what the PS5 is like as it'll be able to use freesync and 120 fps. Please note if playing during the day it is very reflective in dark scenes. I have a 100w bulb right behind me and it can be seen when darker images are on screen. Playing in the dark is another level though. The pure blacks make the TV look like its floating. I got a 5 year warranty with Currys and the sales guy said on video call that they cover burn in. Though to minimise and risk I have everything turned on and alternate my games.... Unless I'm playing ghost of tsushima. 😂 If leaving the TV for any time, even going to the bathroom, I turn it off. Any questions please ask.
@LieutenantFatman If you want the 'full' range of features the PS5 will offer, you NEED HDMI 2.1 as well. Without it, you won't get 120fps and chances are, you won't get Variable Refresh Rates - which mean unless the game is 30fps or 60fps, you will get screen judder or screen tear as the frame rate won't line up with the TV's refresh rate.
I think those are the two biggest game changers for next gen console gaming and displays. Gaming monitors have had 120+ refresh rates and Variable Refresh Rates for but these coming to next gen consoles and TV's is a big step. HDR came a few years ago so I think if that as more of a current gen innovation - I would certainly recommend getting the 'best' HDR screen you can - the greater the HDR performance, the greater the difference over SDR and bigger benefits it offers.
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BAMozzy thanks, that's very informative, I wasn't aware of that. I will definitely make sure it has than then, can't be having screen judder / screen tear.
Forums
Topic: 4k TV Recommendations
Posts 281 to 300 of 305
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.