Most will be 4K/30. There will of course be some action games which hit 60 and some multiplayer modes with striped back visuals (and some indie games) which hit 120 (most likely at lower than 4k resolutions).I'm going to make a bold prediction. I reckon that next gen consoles will be 4k60hz. I doubt that only a handful of games will to 120. PC games will take advantage of HDMI 2.1.
I tend to agree, 4K/120 on AAA titles is not realistic on the new consoles. And tbh 4K/60 looks awesome. Hell even Last of us part 2 which is locked to 1440p/30 on the PS4 Pro looks utterly amazing.Most will be 4K/30. There will of course be some action games which hit 60 and some multiplayer modes with striped back visuals (and some indie games) which hit 120 (most likely at lower than 4k resolutions).
The PS5 is a 9tflop machine. The Series X is 11tflop. That's nowhere near enough to run current gen games at 4k/60, let alone the inevitably much better looking next gen games.
4K/120 is marketing. Yes they can technically do it, but I guarantee you will never see a big graphically intensive single player game which targets it.
The picture quality on the tour broadcast this year has not been as good as previous years (watching the same feed on different channels has no impact).I had an intention to buy the sony oled A8.. But last Saturday I saw this A8 next to a Philips 855 oled in the shop. With 'Tour de France' via cable on it in 1080i.. The sony looked not good next to the philips which I checked was in standard-mode.. Sony looked very unsharp.. The philips looked much cleaner, perfect sharpness. Even the Hisense-Oled looked better than the sony. Dissappointment because I thought to buy the sony because of the sound coming directly from the screen..
But now I like the philips 855. I know, I should compare them better with maybe different settings. But the philips 855 also has a nicer stand which is at a nice height... Higher than 2019's 854 which was much too low to place a sounbar. And the swivel for the philips is very nice also.
Couldn't disagree more, you get up to 1400+ lines of motion resolution on a CX (vs 600 C8/C9) using 120hz/FPS BFI, trouble is people haven't experienced it, and no reviewer has ever tried it seeing virtually no resolution loss in games when any panning or movement is happening, and ZERO flicker is revelatory.Why? Because manufacturers want you to change your set every 2-3 years. In reality, most of us could and should keep our sets for 5-10 years, but are ‘persuaded’ to change for features that don’t really add a great deal to the viewing experience.
2020 sets are a case in point - most are a case of ‘old wine in new bottles’ and a number are a downgrade on their 2019 equivalents. Unless you absolutely need to buy, there is no reason to get a 2020 set other than as a ‘vanity’ purchase.
I believe it is in order to pass Dolby Atmos to a soundbar from the internal apps.A telly that has Dolby Atmos...how is that even a selling point? Why not omit it completely and knock a few hundred quid of the asking price which can then go towards a proper audio solution of some type.
It has been about 15 years since I last played a videogame but I remember 60fps being perfectly smooth. Somehow I doubt that the programmers will prioritize frame rate over graphic detail.Its for gaming really. If you don't game on it it's not a problem.
You'd have to ask the folks who play a lot of games!It has been about 15 years since I last played a videogame but I remember 60fps being perfectly smooth. Somehow I doubt that the programmers will prioritize frame rate over graphic detail.
Will 120fps make that much of a difference over 60fps?
Where is the self emitting blue ELQD, where is the transmissive blue QD, if inorgnic are so much more durable than OLED? Why Samsung Display using blue OLED than ELQD for QD-OLED?That's a BIG first. Please provide the science to support the claim organic are more durable than inorganic? I'm keen to learn more.
- Deep Red:
- 1931 CIE: (0.70,0.30), with a breakthrough narrow line shape of 43 nm FWHM
- EQE of 25% and LT95 55,000 hours at L0=1,000 nits
- 1931 CIE: (0.58,0.42), with a breakthrough narrow line shape of 36 nm FWHM
- EQE of 28% and LT95 200,000 hours at L0=1,000 nits
- Moving the bar on the efficiency-lifetime design space of Light Green for automotive applications:
- 1931 CIE: (0.42,0.56), with exciting advances in EQE with end use brightness and lifetime
- EQE of 25% and LT95 300,000 hours at L0=1,000 nits
Nothing in the above provides any evidence to support your claim. In fact you seem to be talking about possible future technology. Good effort though.Where is the self emitting blue ELQD, where is the transmissive blue QD, if inorgnic are so much more durable than OLED? Why Samsung Display using blue OLED than ELQD for QD-OLED?
That nonsense about no burn-in and longer liftime about QD is marketing speech from Nanosys and Samsung comparing QD-LED-LCD with an backlight with self emitting pixels. The word "organic" in OLED is the chemistry word for a carbonaceous emitter (nothing to do with organic in form of biological waste, vegetables, plants or something). Inorganic emitters are only crystalline.
New blue organic fluorescent emitter for 2021 (longer liftime than any blue inorganic emitter)
Long lifetime OLED´s by Universal Display:
Universal Display Corporation to Showcase Organic Vapor Jet Printing and Phosphorescent OLED Innovations at SID Display Week 2019Universal Display Corporation will exhibit and present at SID Display Week 2019, and showcase OVJP and PHOLED innovations.www.businesswire.com
Only 3.000hr lifetime LT95 @ 1000nits for the best red ELQD!!!! With a red OLED you get over 50.000hrs @ LT95 1000nits.
Perhaps you have heard this before, but the property that is really holding back EL-QLEDs is lifetime (see my blog from earlier this year about EL-QLED progress which is now mostly out of date based on recent results). Cd-based red EL-QLEDs are arguably already there, but green and blue still lag behind considerably.
The article makes a big deal about achieving one-million-hour lifetime, and an impressive result it is. But we must keep in mind that this reported lifetime is for T50 (time to 50% luminance) at 100 nits brightness. Using more realistic metrics and conditions these devices are not commercial-ready and are still a far cry from their Cd-containing cousins.
TCL presented data at the QD Forum 2019 of CdSe-based red EL-QLEDs achieving a T95 of >4,000 hours at 1000 nits. This Samsung paper did not share a comparable data point but based on T95 at 100 nits (615 hr) and T95 at 3,000 nits (86 hr) we can assume that at 1,000 nits the Samsung InP device it is not yet comparable to the Cd-containing devices that TCL boasts.
Red has always been the easiest nut to crack for EL-QLED, but we need to have green and blue to make a display! There is still room for improvement for lifetime as well. In order to be viable for a consumer TV, these devices will need to last 30k hours at 500-1000 nits, not 100 nits. And a more appropriate spec would be T95, not T50 as Samsung reported for the 1 million hour predicted lifetime. This will require continued optimization of the materials and device stack design.
It performs very well, unless you are watching something that has many dark scenes then you might miss out on some detail but it is no worse than my sony LED it replaced.Hi Phil
You recommend the A8 as a good TV for critical film watching, but how does it fare for watching TV programmes in a lit room
Thanks Dave, means it's still worthy of consideration along with my other two choices the AG9 & HZ1500, decisions decisions.It performs very well, unless you are watching something that has many dark scenes then you might miss out on some detail but it is no worse than my sony LED it replaced.
Agree with that. I has an AF8 just over a year ago and the DV performance was JUST OK but undoubtedly on the dim side. No such issues with the A8 which I've been living with for week now. I had a C9 in the middle and I don't think the DV is really any different from that.Seems like Sony has improved Dolby Vision Playback on the A8H. The A9G I had was still much darker than the LG C9 in DV, even with the 4.770 firmware. However, the A8H I have now ist actually slightly brighter than the LG CX, be it via the internal apps or via a fire TV stick 4K plugged into the Sony (even then it is brighter than DV dark on the LG using its internal apps.
Not sure if this an extreme case of panel variation, but I’m honestly surprised. If that applied to all Sony A8Hs, Sony would have caught up to LG in terms of DV (except for more dark scene posterization in a few Netflix titles)