Samsung QN900 (QE75QN900A) Neo QLED 8K TV Review & Comments

Steve Withers

Reviewer
Am I correct in thinking that this display will not pass Dolby Atmos via E Arc for onboard apps to your enabled surround system ?
No you're not, and I specifically address this in the sound section. The TV can't internally decode Dolby Atmos, but it can pass lossy Atmos via Dolby Digital Plus and lossless Atmos via Dolby TrueHD using eARC.
 
D

Deleted member 507786

Guest
Yup I'm quite surprised it got a score of 8 considering its price, OOTB PQ and lack of DV support for what is a premium display .

But the review does state that one can get a lot more from other displays for much less of an outlay.
It also only got 5 for value which is really a bad rating.
 

Gordon2147

Active Member
Not that I am ever going to be in the market for a £7.5k TV and of course I always miss the point when new tech is released, which has to attract a dollop of premium pricing, but I cannot believe this TV is not knocking Steve's socks off.

Also, the fact that he mentions on a couple of ocassions " picture quality is not the only......". Don't get me wrong I haven't seen the TV, but as Steve says the price is OTT and the picture performance is not significantly better than anything.

As most of you already think 8K is nowhere at the moment as a format to watch much of, and to put out a TV that is not substantially better than a 4K version, makes me laugh quite frankly. Likely behind this, is that LED is near the peak of it's capability and that without near perfect FALD, isn't going to knock socks off.

Although without 8K tv's to play the format on, there really needs to be a much better tie up with the content creators before bringing out this kind of flagship.Also as mentioned, the technology behind the screen should be able to draw consumers in.

I might be long in the tooth but I see this as a numbers exercise and trying to stay ahead of the competition for no real or meaningful reason (barely any content and even then only the olympics to tease people into buying one).

8k isn't bringing any new technology (yet) and there appears to be nothing after HDR and WCG other than trying to match OLED with the mini and micro LED backlighting.

Can't wait to see one in the flesh with native 8k though :cool:o_O
 

steve sph

Well-known Member
Honestly can't see anyone forking out seven and a half bags of sand for one of these - other than the 'more money than sense' Sonos brigade.
In the unlikely event anyone on here is daft enough, give it until autumn and dealers will be falling over themselves to get rid of excess stock with a substantial discount.
I get that the pandemic has left folks stuck at home for a year with bugger all to spend their money on, but this is just extracting the urine.
 
Last edited:

Josito77

Standard Member
What's more: If you check the price in samsung Spain you will find something unbelievable.
UK 65'' QN900A £5999, less promotion,- 500= £5499
Spain 4999€ ,less promotion, -620 =4379€ ( xe converter applied today ) £3771
Can anyone explain me the reason for that?
 

Sir QD oled

Well-known Member
The average global income of Spain is much lower then in the Northern European countries and Britain no longer member of EEG makes it easier for Samsung to adjust their price to their profits:censored:
 

ozzzy189

Distinguished Member
I’d much rather streaming and TV companies concentrate on improving bitrate, bandwidth and encoders etc than look at 8k. It's a complete waste of time and money.
Remember when BBC HD was 20mbps? It was stunning. Now it just looks sd and soft most of the time.
4k can look so much better, that's where investment needs to go but I understand that won't sell new tellies.
The world is all wrong.
🤔😔
 
Last edited:

Raitziger

Member
What's more: If you check the price in samsung Spain you will find something unbelievable.
UK 65'' QN900A £5999, less promotion,- 500= £5499
Spain 4999€ ,less promotion, -620 =4379€ ( xe converter applied today ) £3771
Can anyone explain me the reason for that?
Likely Brexit taxes and stuff.
 

Zag

Active Member
id much rather streaming and TV companies concentrate on improving bitrate, bandwidth and encoders etc than look at 8k. It's a complete waste of time and money.

🤔😔
I agree. I've come to the same conclusion now. Virtually all the content I watch now is streamed and even the best streaming services look poor compared to 4k Blu-ray. There's no point spending big money on a TV now when the limiting factor all the time now is the streaming quality. 4k/8k MicroLED could be all singing and dancing, look fantastic on 4k Blu-ray but most of the time will look no different, than a much cheaper TV. I've given up on the idea of upgrading now, until streaming bandwidth improves dramatically.
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
Yea like total recall no banding/pixelated in Dolby Vision compared to standard HDR.

You got it wrong mate. Studio Canal DV enhancement layer which ups the bit rate masks the compression artifact you see on HDR10 layer.

In fact, its got nothing to do with HDR, its just incompetent encoding aka bit starving.
 

ozzzy189

Distinguished Member
I agree. I've come to the same conclusion now. Virtually all the content I watch now is streamed and even the best streaming services look poor compared to 4k Blu-ray. There's no point spending big money on a TV now when the limiting factor all the time now is the streaming quality. 4k/8k MicroLED could be all singing and dancing, look fantastic on 4k Blu-ray but most of the time will look no different, than a much cheaper TV. I've given up on the idea of upgrading now, until streaming bandwidth improves dramatically.
Absolutely 100% agree, isn’t it annoying?
I have no sources, just streaming, same for my music, and it really isn’t right when goods we spend a lot of money on can’t fulfill their potential because they’re gimped by poor quality sources.
i know there’s uhd br but it stupidly expensive and most folks just want to watch tv and series etc with as good pq as possible and uhd br can’t give you that for the most part.
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
I agree. I've come to the same conclusion now. Virtually all the content I watch now is streamed and even the best streaming services look poor compared to 4k Blu-ray. There's no point spending big money on a TV now when the limiting factor all the time now is the streaming quality. 4k/8k MicroLED could be all singing and dancing, look fantastic on 4k Blu-ray but most of the time will look no different, than a much cheaper TV. I've given up on the idea of upgrading now, until streaming bandwidth improves dramatically.

Please let me know the streaming services you are referring to.

Streaming platforms work on lowest common denominator model.

For 4K HDR, 15 Mbps is the baseline. This is good enough for most content when viewing from a reasonable viewing distance.

Bir rates employed by established streaming services for 4K HDR contents:

Average - Peak (Indicative):.

1. Netflix - 16- 24 Mbps
2. Disney+ - 16-28 Mbps. Sometimes 38 Mbps.
3. iTunes movies - 15-24 Mbps or 23-31 Mbps
4. MoviesAnywhere (USA) - 24-33 Mbps
5. Prime - 10-14 Mbps

iTunes and MoviesAnywhere are very close to 4K disc (not by numbers but real world viewing). The rest aren't but they are good enough from a streaming context.

Sony Bravia Core is streaming up to 80 Mbps for select films on their catalog but as it's new and exclusive to Sony TVs, the longevity of this service is unknown.

Coming to Samsung, they are simply riding on their paat laurels and brand name for years and most folks with commonsense know the Q in QLED is a s&&m. Hoping they turn the tables from 2022.
 
Last edited:

bongo123

Member
£7500 for a TV that scored an 8.... for £7500 i want the TV to come with at least a 9.5 and a calibrator in the box to set it up, that's a ridiculous amount of money for a TV with no Dolby Vision/Atmos and an utterly useless resolution.. 8K, Christ almighty we still have TV channels in non HD *** and Samsung are pushing 8K.. well fools and their money are easily parted my old nan used to say
 

tausifs

Well-known Member
So a little blooming still apparent with miniLED. OK , I’m over that

The lack of DV support I cannot get over.

I will await miniLED from other manufacturers that do support DV.
I assume this would include LG , Panasonic and Sony.

By the way my current Tv is 5 yrs old , a curved Edge lit Samsung QLED. At least it has no blooming - if no DV support ! Being that old, the latter could be excused.

to be honest , it seems blooming will always be an issue with FALD/miniLED.

Is there no market for premium edge lit TVs ?
 

stblob

Well-known Member
Seems that the general consensus is that this Samsung TV is missing some very basic features and is way over priced. Not for me I'm afraid.
 

Loopthrough

Member
Absolutely pointless, just like 4K (beyond up close gaming and XL projectors).
Let's face it, 4K and now 8K are just ways of keeping LCD prices inflated.

What should really have happened was 2K + a clear HDR / WCG standard.

Advanced 2K might actually have been deliverable by streamers, broadcast and disc formats at mass-market friendly prices.

Then, innovation could have been directed to reduced OLED burn in, Micro LED and Dual Cell/MegaCon panels.
 

fluxo

Distinguished Member
9 pixels suffice to show a human face. To a minimalist, even that is decadent extravagance.
 

TROYBOY

Active Member
Really? DV is only THE most important of the HDR formats for picture quality so without it Samsung is DOA.
That is one of the most mental statements Ive seen on these forums and that says alot o_O
 

Zarf2007

Active Member
That is one of the most mental statements Ive seen on these forums and that says alot o_O
Ok so the fact that most major streaming services have adopted it means nothing? Clearly you need to go to spec savers, I would say DV is as important as 4K resolution itself for PQ.

samsung TVs have had their time, both LG and Panasonic have both surpassed them for PQ.
 

Jay53

Well-known Member
Is DV important now...No
Is DV important going forward.... possibly

Why?

There are videos around from content creators that aren't in the pockets or the TV mfrs that compare DV to others and the difference just isn't there.

But
DV supports 12bit - brilliant, but no TV currently has a 12 panel
It's supports 10k nits. Great very few films/shows even reach 1000 as most seem to have a MaxFall of 600-700. So again currently pointless. And despite its name HDR10+ supports up to 4000nits which will easy cope with TVs for a few more iterations yet.

Support of DV, Xbox does but there ar NO TVs that can utilise DV at 4k/120 and not all TVs even from mfrs other than Samsung support it at 4k/60 either so we are not there yet with currently available TVs. As far as I am aware the PS5 does NOT support DV/HLG/HDR10+ currently so clearly Sony don't think DV is as important at 4k for PQ

I am not disputing these features will become relevant in the future but current TVs just aren't equipped to properly take advantage of DV hence my opening statement :)
 

Sir QD oled

Well-known Member
Is DV important now...No
Is DV important going forward.... possibly

Why?

There are videos around from content creators that aren't in the pockets or the TV mfrs that compare DV to others and the difference just isn't there.

But
DV supports 12bit - brilliant, but no TV currently has a 12 panel
It's supports 10k nits. Great very few films/shows even reach 1000 as most seem to have a MaxFall of 600-700. So again currently pointless. And despite its name HDR10+ supports up to 4000nits which will easy cope with TVs for a few more iterations yet.

Support of DV, Xbox does but there ar NO TVs that can utilise DV at 4k/120 and not all TVs even from mfrs other than Samsung support it at 4k/60 either so we are not there yet with currently available TVs. As far as I am aware the PS5 does NOT support DV/HLG/HDR10+ currently so clearly Sony don't think DV is as important at 4k for PQ

I am not disputing these features will become relevant in the future but current TVs just aren't equipped to properly take advantage of DV hence my opening statement :)
When a Hdr format is almost everywhere and it's competitor almost vanished it's a bitter pil to swallow for Samscum and it's fanbase. Throwing overpriced premium tv's at customers without the main Hdr format is like selling a car with no gps and radio in it. Selling that overpriced tv at 50 procent off 9 months later . Tell me like been robbed ? Even without DV:D
Making promises and never deliver ( q90r earc ???) brutal statements like oled is sh*t and we with Qled displays are the next best thing . What a letdown and with no shame they make a U turn and sell oleds or QD oleds (however they will name it). Glad they have a amnesia public that can sell them anything even a display without the necessary enjoyment of DV. Sponsor of Xbox one x without DV gaming :rotfl::rotfl:For your intrest low nits displays do make advantage of DV . the tone mapping is much better in that format. Look it up , YT video's even Vincent made one of the Panasonic Gx 800 . About your statement of the 4000 hit mark of hdr+ it as irrelevant as the 10000 mark of DV. (Great very few films/shows even reach 1000 as most seem to have a MaxFall of 600-700) :p
 

Jay53

Well-known Member
If you reread my post it wasn't about Samsung iit was about DV in general

I buy what ever tech i feel fits my criteria at the time. Just look at the avr forum as I haven't bought either Denon/marantz/Yamaha as none of them fit the bill with the hdmi 2.1 bug lol

This time around when purchasing a tv it was a Samsung but did consider after reviewing & downloading manuals and LG oled too. Couldn't justify the price difference (same year model for both) of the oled at the time. Hardly the voice of Samsung fanboy. Shrug


DV is not the main HDR format....yet. HDR10 still has the far bigger base as practically every film issued with DV also has an HDR10 variant and why all TVs support it. The opposite is far from true. If you said dynamic metadata format then I would agree ;)
 
Last edited:

Sir QD oled

Well-known Member
If you reread my post it wasn't about Samsung iit was about DV in general

I buy what ever tech i feel fits my criteria at the time. Just look at the avr forum as I haven't bought either Denon/marantz/Yamaha as none of them fit the bill with the hdmi 2.1 bug lol

This time around when purchasing a tv it was a Samsung but did consider after reviewing & downloading manuals and LG oled too. Couldn't justify the price difference (same year model for both) of the oled at the time. Hardly the voice of Samsung fanboy. Shrug


DV is not the main HDR format....yet. HDR10 still has the far bigger base as practically every film issued with DV also has an HDR10 variant and why all TVs support it. The opposite is far from true. If you said dynamic metadata format then I would agree ;)
Dynamic metadata ok then :D
 

TROYBOY

Active Member
Ok so the fact that most major streaming services have adopted it means nothing? Clearly you need to go to spec savers, I would say DV is as important as 4K resolution itself for PQ.

samsung TVs have had their time, both LG and Panasonic have both surpassed them for PQ.

not sure you realise how the world works but if that works for you so be it:thumbsup:
 

The latest video from AVForums

AVForums Movies Podcast: Streaming Theatrical Releases And The Future Of Cinema
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Sky reveals content lineup for 2022
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Panasonic TVs now feature Apple TV+
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Magico announces Titan 15 subwoofer
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Ajax Systems adds UK Socket to expand smart home options
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Best TVs of 2021 - Editor's Choice Awards
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom