This might be a deal for someone.
3 units left online
This is an 8K tv -- maximize your *ahem* pixels
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsu ... 0r-8k-qled
"The Samsung Q900 is an excellent TV for mixed usage. It has an impressive picture quality with good dark room performance that also remains accurate when viewed from the side. It has remarkable motion handling with very little motion blur and fast-moving content, like sports, is crisp. The input lag is very low and the TV responds immediately to your actions, which is great for gamers and those who will use it as a PC monitor."
Comparison with LG C9 OLED
"The Samsung Q900/Q900R 8k QLED and the LG C9 OLED are two different types of TVs, each with advantages and disadvantages. The LG has better dark room performance due to the perfect blacks of its OLED panel. The LG also has wider viewing angles, which is great if you have a large room. The Samsung, on the other hand, has an 8k resolution, can get significantly brighter (which is great for a bright room), and doesn't have the risk of permanent burn-in."
Nearby London Drugs locations:
Last edited by revjoeyjohn on May 22nd, 2020 10:20 pm, edited 5 times in total.
pooper wrote: ↑
I think you missed the point, let alone virtually zero 8k material and also this being one of the first gens.
It's just a bragging item. Useless in real life.
Sorry. When you were complaining about shipping, I thought your complaint was about shipping. I should have inferred it was that there is very little 8K content out there.
It's about 8K. Yes. It's a bragging item. Yep. Will 8K content continue to be added. Un-huh.
revjoeyjohn wrote: ↑
Sorry. When you were complaining about shipping, I thought your complaint was about shipping. I should have inferred it was that there is very little 8K content out there.
It's about 8K. Yes. It's a bragging item. Yep. Will 8K content continue to be added. Un-huh.
I meant I wouldn't plant 4.5k on something that got shipped to me without my direct involvement.
You're all entitled to your opinions, but this television can't be directly compared to any 4k television.
Simply put, this can display 8k, they can't.
This is the same argument that people put forward for 4k televisions vs 1080p. "You can't see the difference at ___ distance. They're dumb!" Look at us now.
revjoeyjohn wrote: ↑
You're all entitled to your opinions, but this television can't be directly compared to any 4k television.
Simply put, this can display 8k, they can't.
This is the same argument that people put forward for 4k televisions vs 1080p. "You can't see the difference at ___ distance. They're dumb!" Look at us now.
I suggest you watch the video. You may revisit your statement. The human eye can only see so much.
But if an OB 8k LCD floats your boat, enjoy! It's a nice TV.
revjoeyjohn wrote: ↑
You're all entitled to your opinions, but this television can't be directly compared to any 4k television.
Simply put, this can display 8k, they can't.
This is the same argument that people put forward for 4k televisions vs 1080p. "You can't see the difference at ___ distance. They're dumb!" Look at us now.
But that's not the argument. The argument is that there's no 8k content to even view on the tv. Pure 4K content is hard enough to get..
Not to mention this is an early 8K model, which will be quickly out performed by future models that will have features that this one will not.
You can compare to 4K televisions because why spend this much on an early model when you can get the best of the best 4K with vastly more content? If you're banking on 8K taking off over the next couple of years, you're still better off buying a high end 4K set since by then 8K sets will be much better than whatever entry 8K televisions are out right now.
Again, it's your choice, but there's definitely a reason to compare it to 4K TVs for those reasons. If you ONLY want 8K, then sure, but again you're left with no content for an 8K screen (you'll be displaying 4K content on it for the most part, and even then it'll most likely be upscaled 1440p)
This is a good deal for this TV if you have some sort of way to inspect the TV beforehand, having purchased demo or open box items from LD before its kind of hit or miss in terms of condition
pooper wrote: ↑
I meant I wouldn't plant 4.5k on something that got shipped to me without my direct involvement.
If you own a car, high end appliances, or pretty much anything that costs that much or more, you already have.
kimwoobingsu wrote: ↑
If you own a car, high end appliances, or pretty much anything that costs that much or more, you already have.
If you mean shipping from factory to dealer, vehicles or white goods aren't really part of this equation: Quality control processes are followed as they still belong to the maker / reseller.
Shipping from reseller to customer once sold, now that's where things get rather tricky....
PannTher wrote: ↑
You're barely going to notice a difference with 8k.
People said the exact same thing when 4K TVs debuted. Now basically no one would buy a main TV that's less than 4K as economies of scale have come into play and all but the cheapest of TVs (and mostly in the 40" and below category) are anything less. Regardless of whether it "makes a difference" it's the "next big thing" being pushed by TV makers...so people keep buying TVs. I'm not defending 8K as being something amazing or anything but within a few years most TVs will be 8K so don't matter if it "makes a difference" or not, it's just the way it will be.
Rtings has the B9 OLED at significantly better score:
LOL Rtings scores Get outta here with the Rtings number scores, they don't mean much. Read the other thread where I explained this or read the countless review comments on Rtings itself. Rtings is a great resource, don't get me wrong, but the number scores are not really that meaningful. The B9 has really poor HDR performance, for example and the Q900R kills it in brightness. The Q900R basically has every "2.1 feature" people are after including HFR, which the B9 does not support.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying this 8K TV is really worth buying but it is a deal as posted by OP. 8K has a bunch of other issues after the big cost. Best one, IMO, is not just that there's not 8K content or good ways to get 8K to the TV to begin with, but look at early 4K TVs. They lack so many features of later 4K sets. Earliest ones lack more recent HDCP support so can't even play UHD BDs without having to go to workarounds. Not only that, the early ones don't have HDR support and certainly not DV support either. I think some of them might not even have HDMI 2.0, but don't quote me on that. In other words buying a 4K TV back with the first ones was a bad idea--extremely high price and you wouldn't want to own or buy one of those today. Same for buying an 8K TV today. By the time 3-5 years go by there will be new content protection standards, new features, etc. that your 2019 8K TV does not support and will never support. You paid $4500 for it and yes it was a deal at that price at the time, but FFW to then and a TV with the same performance and support for all the other things they invariably will add, and cost about half that.
So being an "early adopter" is not a good idea IMO. But thumbs up to thread and OP because, regardless, it's still a deal for this TV.
ES_Revenge wrote: ↑
The B9 has really poor HDR performance, for example and the Q900R kills it in brightness. The Q900R basically has every "2.1 feature" people are after including HFR, which the B9 does not support.
... But thumbs up to thread and OP because, regardless, it's still a deal for this TV.
Thanks for the discussion. This is an early model 8K, but that doesn't equate to an entry-level. This is a premium tv with a premium price.
It does have some nice features that the Sony X950G doesn't -- like native HDMI 2.1 support. Sony isn't going to release an official update to support it, even though the hardware is capable. If they were, Sony wouldn't be moving to block "vulnerabilities" of firmware that let people put 950H firmware on the tv. Anyone who wants is gaming is going to want VRR, which is a likely feature of the PS5 and Xbox Series X.
The LG B9 does have native HDMI 2.1 support as well as VRR and a fantastic picture. However, there is the issue of burn-in (cue debate) as well as degradation of OLED brightness and colour over time. That's one reason that frequent gamers have sometimes opted for televisions like the Sony.
Lastly, I find it ironic that this deal gets downvoted like crazy when it is a *legitimate* deal on an 8K television at 40% off. On the same day, a thread is started for a $10k CPU (%14 off) and it gets upvotes. Does anyone need a 64 core AMD EPYC 7742?
revjoeyjohn wrote: ↑
Sorry. When you were complaining about shipping, I thought your complaint was about shipping. I should have inferred it was that there is very little 8K content out there.
It's about 8K. Yes. It's a bragging item. Yep. Will 8K content continue to be added. Un-huh.
By the time you have 1% of your content available as 8k, this tv will be 10 years old.
Get outta here with the Rtings number scores, they don't mean much. Read the other thread where I explained this or read the countless review comments on Rtings itself. Rtings is a great resource, don't get me wrong, but the number scores are not really that meaningful. The B9 has really poor HDR performance, for example and the Q900R kills it in brightness. The Q900R basically has every "2.1 feature" people are after including HFR, which the B9 does not support.
