News We just tested Samsung's first QD-OLED TV — and the results will surprise you

Apr 21, 2022
2
1
10
0
All this review demonstrates is that this site has no idea what they are doing with any HDTV. It's laughable.
 
Reactions: ray279
Jun 1, 2022
1
0
10
0
Rec 709???? ahahahahahahahahahah... Bwahahah Sweet mother of Fail! !!!
Seriously, is Tom's trying to take the crown from the Verge's "Computer build" all time fail memes?

For real guys... this can't be real, please tell us this is not real.
Oh.. and 501nits?? at what window size? Where did you even pull that number from when dozens of professionals calibrators have already measured well over 1,000nits on a 10%

For starters, maybe learn how to turn off the energy saver?
We would call this fail piece click bait, but that would be insulting to click bait.
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2022
1
0
10
0
For real guys... this can't be real, please tell us this is not real.
Oh.. and 501nits?? at what window size? Where did you even pull that number from when dozens of professionals calibrators have already measured well over 1,000nits on a 10%
Yeah this the most stupid thing I've read all day. 501 nit because they measuring it in SDR mode which limits brightness and even then the number isn't that accurate for the G2. Caring about Nits is SDR mode when movies in SDR are mainly graded at 100nits anyways is a big joke. Rec 709 "wide color gamut" ohhh boy. No mention that the QD OLED panels have an increase of 15%~ coverage on BT2020 over your OLEDs.. Waiting for Sony A95K to be released in my country and handing down my C1 and going to QD OLED panel. This article is so dumb that I actually registered an account to comment on how dumb it is Wonder how much LG paid for this article
 
Last edited:

Robert_356

Honorable
Jan 27, 2017
1
0
10,510
0
I literally thought this was a joke. Lg oled is 1/3 the color volume of qd oled. When in hdr the measurements are 1k nits I'm sure they simply measured sdr and called it a day simply lazy. Reality is even tho the lg g2 gets close in nits since it has a white sub pixel it literally turns bright yellows and reds white. So a fire doesn't look the same as qd oled. It will turn it white 🤦
 
Jun 1, 2022
1
0
10
0
I had to read this "article" twice to fully appreciate this amateurish attempt at a display review. 1) No professional website measures any display characteristic in vivid mode. 2) Both of these sets display just over 99% of the DCI-P3 xy/uv color gamut as measured by multiple professional calibrators. 3) The updated Rec.2020 color gamut measurement is designed for 4K/ 8K HDR content, which is quickly becoming the norm for film viewing. The Samsung S95B diplays 86-92% of this standard, while the LG G2 and all other WRGB OLED TVs on the planet struggle to reach even 77%, meaning the all-important color volume measurement of the QD-OLED exceeds conventional OLEDs by about 11% in DCI-P3 color gamut and almost 30% in the normalized Rec.2020 coverage ITP used in HDR streaming, HDR gaming, and UHD HDR Blu-rays. 4) I also registered an account just to comment on this article. Perhaps the "reviewer" should familiarize herself with basic display measuring tools and procedures before attempting to right anything further on this subject.
 
Last edited:
Jun 2, 2022
1
0
10
0
How does Samsung QD-OLED compare to LG OLED evo? Here's what our benchmarks say.

We just tested Samsung's first QD-OLED TV — and the results will surprise you : Read more

Please find someone that knows what they are doing.

  1. 99%sRGB is basically 100%. No display is perfect.
  2. SDR and HDR nits are not the same. The standard for good SDR is around 100 nits or more, while good HDR is 1000 or more nits.
  3. LG's OLEDs have a white sub-pixel that increases luminance at the cost of color accuracy. QD-OLEDs don't have a white sub-pixel, so even at high luminance, they can deliver superior color accuracy.
LGs OLEDs, may be able to compete on luminance, but not color accuracy at 1000 nits or above and viewing angles.
 
Jun 2, 2022
1
0
10
0
Is this real life? Considering respected outfits, professionals, calibrators, etc., have shown the proof that your article is completely bogus, I am blown away that you guys would publish something like this. Supposed to be a tech-focused website but literally have no finger on the pulse? Another post was correct in saying that labeling this as clickbait would be an insult to clickbait. LOL
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
admin Article Commentary 1
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 1
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 1
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 1
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0
admin Article Commentary 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY