My best TVs for next gen gaming 2020-21

IsaacRatch

Active Member
No no no :) A consistent frame rate means a consistent gaming experience. I may not be an expert on tv's as above shows LOL but ive produced over 180 games on every console from sega cd to PS4 and mobile . . hence the large number of titles.

All devs strife to work"in a frame" there's specialist programmers whose entire job it to keep the frame rate consistent. Its not about just visuals its about your inputs to. A consistent frame rate is the difference between ma\king the jump, shooting the target or hitting that critical.

Dropping frame is embarrassing and a failure of production. :)

Thats why the good devs have constant frame rates ..
You've probably got more knowledge than me but my grasp of VRR is that it isn't about dropping frames it's about enabling more depending on what's happening on the screen.

All devs should aim for a consistent bottom end rate let's say 60fps the games should never drop below this even in the most demanding scenes.

In the less demanding scenes the devs may be able to push a higher frame rate and VRR will allow this to happen.
 

turk3y

Well-known Member
After reading through this thread, I did want to point out that at least 2 games have already been confirmed at 4k120fps on the PS5.

Call of Duty Black Ops, and Rainbow Six Seige are both supporting 4k120fps at launch.

*EDIT* I'm not sure about Black Ops - most sources say 120fps, other says 60fps.
I think Siege had unlocked frame rate on Xbox One X and was getting around 100fps on terrorist hunt (maybe 1800p), probably not surprising next gen is topping out. Good to see tho, it will really benefit from it if they are making this across all modes.

Black ops will be like dirt 5 I suspect, 120hz mode will come at a visual cost, what that is is unclear atm. They won't have that as the default as 95% of players will be at 60fps wasting half their gpu power otherwise.

I don't think much will be much at full 4k120 but if your TV only supports 120 at lower resolution you will need to alter the output on the console between wanting to play at 120fps or at 4k due to the resolution cap. If your TV supports 4k120 it's set once and enjoy anything the console throws out. That simplicity really appeals to me.
 

turk3y

Well-known Member
No no no :) A consistent frame rate means a consistent gaming experience. I may not be an expert on tv's as above shows LOL but ive produced over 180 games on every console from sega cd to PS4 and mobile . . hence the large number of titles.

All devs strife to work"in a frame" there's specialist programmers whose entire job it to keep the frame rate consistent. Its not about just visuals its about your inputs to. A consistent frame rate is the difference between ma\king the jump, shooting the target or hitting that critical.

Dropping frame is embarrassing and a failure of production. :)

Thats why the good devs have constant frame rates ..
It's not frame rate you are describing it's frame time, if you have a consistent frame time you get consistent frame rate :smashin:, it does not always work in reverse.

It's possible to have consistent frame rate with judder due to inconsistent frame times. Halo 3 I think is a good example here, many UE 4 games also have this, poor frame pacing I think DF calls it.

VRR minimises the difference in frame times making them far more consistent than they normally are when the game misses it's frame time. Currently it's a 100% frame time penalty, that means a whole frame when controller input is not getting proper on screen feedback. With VRR it's only as long as that frame slipped by or as soon as it's ready, controller input is not affected in the same way. This can also make a consistent frame times and consistent frame rates that are not tied to multiples of 30 although it is inherently variable.

I have not experienced VRR but I have experience say 50fps on old CRT consoles as well as 60, they felt equally smooth due to consistent frame times and controller response. VRR could provide that fluidity between 40 to 60 , or for games pushing past 60.

I am being pedantic on terminology I think but I agree with both of you, and I think vrr is a great idea for all the reason you describe.
 

Xabi17

Active Member
I think Siege had unlocked frame rate on Xbox One X and was getting around 100fps on terrorist hunt (maybe 1800p), probably not surprising next gen is topping out. Good to see tho, it will really benefit from it if they are making this across all modes.

Black ops will be like dirt 5 I suspect, 120hz mode will come at a visual cost, what that is is unclear atm. They won't have that as the default as 95% of players will be at 60fps wasting half their gpu power otherwise.

I don't think much will be much at full 4k120 but if your TV only supports 120 at lower resolution you will need to alter the output on the console between wanting to play at 120fps or at 4k due to the resolution cap. If your TV supports 4k120 it's set once and enjoy anything the console throws out. That simplicity really appeals to me.
I like this post as it justifies me spending the money on the CX instead of getting a 'lesser' TV!
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I think games will have performance modes still where you can choose between higher fps or lower. They should also have different quality targets depending on the connected display. For example, if the console notices its connected to a non-VRR enabled TV it should default to a preset to push either 30 or 60.

We saw already what happens when the last consoles didn't do that in some titles, but hopefully thats behind us now.

With VRR though, it opens up the possibility to enjoy higher frame rates whilst also retaining good graphics all round. In some scenes you could push 120fps, but in more complicated ones as long as it runs at the min VRR range it should be smooth.

I do think they need to tune the min frame rate though, 40fps on 120hz models and 48fps on 60hz models is too high...and as far as I've seen no one really knows yet if there's any low frame rate compensation going on when they dip below that point.

With computer monitors LFC kicks in on displays using 144hz or higher, but not on displays running 60hz. My guess is it will be the same with TVs and one of the reasons I've recommended staying clear of the 60hz Samsung models with VRR and a limited 48-60fps range.
 
This is great - thanks @Dodgexander

I've been crashing b/w the Sony and LG threads in my search for a sub 50inch tv for the kitchen. Basically it a 48CX or the Sony 9505. The guys in the respective threads have been super helpful

I'm aware of the 'limitations' of the Sony in terms of HDMI2.1 - I'm not a hardcore gamer so not a major issue. However, I am getting a PS5 so want to get the best I can and not have to change my TV in 3-4 years

Think the supposedly poor viewing angles on the Sony could be problematic in the kitchen space... people walking around, watching stuff from tables or side chairs etc

I've got some light shining directly on the current TV (an old Samsung), and although I've got a LG B6 OLED in the living room, I'm concerned that the lighting situation in the kitchen would be incompatible with the CX. So...

-- did anyone on this thread pick up the 49inch Sony and think "christ, these angles are bad!"? I cant get to a store rn to look at one

-- im aware of how burn in can occur, but what about the effects of sunlight *onto* an OLED screen - a bad idea?

Cheers!
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Sunlight on any TV is a bad idea, let alone an OLED/Plasma.

Viewing angles are bad on the Sony, but to a layman they probably wouldn't notice. It's the kind of thing I'd be concerned about and notice myself, but people in my family wouldn't.
 
Sunlight on any TV is a bad idea, let alone an OLED/Plasma.

Viewing angles are bad on the Sony, but to a layman they probably wouldn't notice. It's the kind of thing I'd be concerned about and notice myself, but people in my family wouldn't.
I'm sure they can't be any worse than my 6 year old, £400 Samsung tbh!

Here's the current daytime light situation. It *feels* risk sticking an OLED there, which is a damn shame
 
Last edited:

Dodgexander

Moderator
If that is a sunroof and you get a lot of light due to the positioning of it I wouldn't want to risk putting anything other than a cheap TV there. I'd consider just shopping for a low end model. Sun will damage a TV over time. Positioning is key, can you change where the TV is? It's not a good idea having a TV with direct light even if its the best at handling reflections.
 
If that is a sunroof and you get a lot of light due to the positioning of it I wouldn't want to risk putting anything other than a cheap TV there. I'd consider just shopping for a low end model. Sun will damage a TV over time. Positioning is key, can you change where the TV is? It's not a good idea having a TV with direct light even if its the best at handling reflections.
Thanks for the advice - noted!
 

esco

Novice Member
Is there a reason you didn't add the Panasonic tx8000? It has 10.2ms input lag and for 40inch ish size seems to be best picture available? Would you say this 40inch TV for £500 on black Friday would be worth it? Its already £550 at costco now



?
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Is there a reason you didn't add the Panasonic tx8000? It has 10.2ms input lag and for 40inch ish size seems to be best picture available? Would you say this 40inch TV for £500 on black Friday would be worth it? Its already £550 at costco now



?
Do you mean the HX800? Its pricier and no better than cheaper Hisense in the guide. If you can't fit a 43" though it may be your only option.

Input lag not a concern with TVs any more, all are low enough and certainly all the TVs in this guide have low enough input lag.
 

esco

Novice Member
Do you mean the HX800? Its pricier and no better than cheaper Hisense in the guide. If you can't fit a 43" though it may be your only option.

Input lag not a concern with TVs any more, all are low enough and certainly all the TVs in this guide have low enough input lag.
Yes sorry the hx800

The hisense didn't get stellar reviews unlike the hx800 I mentioned, so I'm abit confused.


The Panasonic has very good reviews nearly every review you look at. Am I missing something? I'm just trying to learn as I usually check several review sources before making a decision and I thought trusted reviews and techradar were reliable....?
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
The hisense didn't get stellar reviews unlike the hx800 I mentioned, so I'm abit confused.
The HX800 is similar to last years GX800, got great reviews everywhere but was a TV selling for lots of money considering it only had budget specs. At the moment, almost twice the price.

I can't recommend it because its so damn expensive. If it was priced similar to cheaper Hisense models then great.

Another thing about the Panasonic is its tone mapping feature. One of the main selling points can't even be used in game mode. Is the extra price justified with the HX800? Not at all. The TV still uses a 60hz panel, still has only a wide colour gamut without any good HDR hardware and is still a low range TV. The difference is they are charging a lot of money extra for a small gain in picture processing compared to the Hisense models in this guide...picture processing which is of course turned off when gaming.

Frankly. I can't understand why its recommended given the price tag, and can only think people reviewers don't understand how expensive it is when they recommend it. You'd be stupid to spend as much money as the HX800 on a low end TV. Last year I saw deals of 55" true HDR models selling for less than the GX800 at 50/58/65" I just don't get it at all.

EDIT* on motion handling the HX800 like the Hisense models is poor, nothing gained there. Typically though any mention of motion in a review is irrelevant for gaming, and relates only to how the TV handles video content.
 
Last edited:

esco

Novice Member
The HX800 is similar to last years GX800, got great reviews everywhere but was a TV selling for lots of money considering it only had budget specs. At the moment, almost twice the price.

I can't recommend it because its so damn expensive. If it was priced similar to cheaper Hisense models then great.

Another thing about the Panasonic is its tone mapping feature. One of the main selling points can't even be used in game mode. Is the extra price justified with the HX800? Not at all. The TV still uses a 60hz panel, still has only a wide colour gamut without any good HDR hardware and is still a low range TV. The difference is they are charging a lot of money extra for a small gain in picture processing compared to the Hisense models in this guide...picture processing which is of course turned off when gaming.

Frankly. I can't understand why its recommended given the price tag, and can only think people reviewers don't understand how expensive it is when they recommend it. You'd be stupid to spend as much money as the HX800 on a low end TV. Last year I saw deals of 55" true HDR models selling for less than the GX800 at 50/58/65" I just don't get it at all.

EDIT* on motion handling the HX800 like the Hisense models is poor, nothing gained there. Typically though any mention of motion in a review is irrelevant for gaming, and relates only to how the TV handles video content.
Well im confused. I've asked richer sounds. Read comments in the related threads by owners. Checked reviews. Pretty much the general consensus seems to be the hx800 is clearly the better TV. I just want the best screen for the size I have available as I'll be sitting about 50inch or absolute max 60inches or so away at a push
 
Last edited:

Dodgexander

Moderator
Well im confused. I've asked richer sounds. Read comments in the related threads by owners. Checked reviews. Pretty much the general consensus seems to be the hx800 is clearly the better TV. I just want the best screen for the size I have available as I'll be sitting about 50inch or absolute max 60inches or so away at a push
What are you confused about? It may be a better TV, but it doesn't justify its price tag. Of course richer sounds are going to recommend you spend more money on the TV! they make more money selling a low end TV priced at £600 than one priced at £350.
My own opinion is it makes absolutely no sense to be spending a lot of money at smaller sizes because you aren't buying into anything worthwhile. Why would you pay almost twice the amount for a smaller TV, that still carries the same specifications and still has next to no HDR capabilities?
You can read about what I made of last years HX800 here: My best value TVs, 2019-2020 Edition

Although I did include it as a best buy at 40", but with a large disclaimer not to overpay for the TV because it was very expensive.

If you don't care about value, by all means its probably the best you can buy at smaller sizes, but that isn't because its a good TV, its only the best of a poor bunch available at smaller sizes. True HDR TVs start at 49" and over nowadays, as you'll see in this guide. You still carry the same limitations with the HX800 as with any budget TV. 60hz panel with poor motion, poor HDR picture quality due to low peak brightness and very poor local dimming with no way to separate light and dark bits of the picture.
 

esco

Novice Member
What are you confused about? It may be a better TV, but it doesn't justify its price tag. Of course richer sounds are going to recommend you spend more money on the TV! they make more money selling a low end TV priced at £600 than one priced at £350.
My own opinion is it makes absolutely no sense to be spending a lot of money at smaller sizes because you aren't buying into anything worthwhile. Why would you pay almost twice the amount for a smaller TV, that still carries the same specifications and still has next to no HDR capabilities?
You can read about what I made of last years HX800 here: My best value TVs, 2019-2020 Edition

Although I did include it as a best buy at 40", but with a large disclaimer not to overpay for the TV because it was very expensive.

If you don't care about value, by all means its probably the best you can buy at smaller sizes, but that isn't because its a good TV, its only the best of a poor bunch available at smaller sizes. True HDR TVs start at 49" and over nowadays, as you'll see in this guide. You still carry the same limitations with the HX800 as with any budget TV. 60hz panel with poor motion, poor HDR picture quality due to low peak brightness and very poor local dimming with no way to separate light and dark bits of the picture.
OK not including oled is this the best tv below 50inch for gaming you can get?


What kind of price would you anticipate it would go down to for black Friday by the way?
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
OK not including oled is this the best tv below 50inch for gaming you can get?
Yes, its a 2019 model but is end of life now, so I wouldn't expect it to see much, if any drop come black friday. In fact, I'm surprised its still available. Maybe if they still have stock by then it will drop.

Its closest replacement is the new 49XH9505. That model may see a drop. The XH9505 is a marginal improvement.
 

esco

Novice Member
Yes, its a 2019 model but is end of life now, so I wouldn't expect it to see much, if any drop come black friday. In fact, I'm surprised its still available. Maybe if they still have stock by then it will drop.

Its closest replacement is the new 49XH9505. That model may see a drop. The XH9505 is a marginal improvement.
I just discovered the Sony refurb thread here. Fingers crossed a 49 inch becomes available
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I just discovered the Sony refurb thread here. Fingers crossed a 49 inch becomes available
If one becomes available for the same kind of price as before and you get lucky and snap it up in time you'll be getting a TV that is larger, twice as good than the Panasonic, for less money. Even at £800 new the value for money of the 49XG9005 is massively better value compared.
 

esco

Novice Member
If one becomes available for the same kind of price as before and you get lucky and snap it up in time you'll be getting a TV that is larger, twice as good than the Panasonic, for less money. Even at £800 new the value for money of the 49XG9005 is massively better value compared.
Only thing I'm abit unsure about is gaming on a 49inch screen about 50 inch or so away.

How far back are you from your tv?
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
How far back are you from your tv?
About 100cm from my 65" Panasonic DX902. You need a big TV to make the most of UHD, but its subjective what is too close, or too far. You could try making a cardboard cutout with the dimensions of the TV to test how big it would look.
Thanks @Dodgexander This thread is really helpful - do you think that Sony 55XH90 for 845 EUR/766 GBP is a good price?
About what you expect to pay this time of year. Not great value for a TV that has shortcomings compared to other TVs higher in the guide. Especially with the Hisense U8Q which is usually around the same price or cheaper.
 

Xabi17

Active Member
If that is a sunroof and you get a lot of light due to the positioning of it I wouldn't want to risk putting anything other than a cheap TV there. I'd consider just shopping for a low end model. Sun will damage a TV over time. Positioning is key, can you change where the TV is? It's not a good idea having a TV with direct light even if its the best at handling reflections.
It's a risk but wouldn't this be usually covered by JL or RS warranty?
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Marantz SR7015 & NAD T 778 AVR + Mission LX2 MKII Speaker Reviews, AV & Film News and More

Latest News

Campfire Audio updates Vega and Dorado earphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Oppo launches S1 and R1 4K smart TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Lithe Audio AirPlay 2 ceiling speakers world's first
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Humax launches AURA 4K Freeview Play Recorder
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Fyne Audio adds new standmounts to F1 speaker range
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom