5 reasons why QLED, not OLED, might be the future of TVs!

cscs3

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2000
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
115
Since it’s the same why spend so much on QLED? Get a tv with Nano Cell can already right?

Different brand has different design, color processor, OS interface, also different in panel design eg hard panel vs soft panel.

So finally, is buyer decision.

For example, if you need wall mount and do not want to have many cables going up to TV panel. Then QLED series is a good choice as only one fiber/cable up from control unit to panel and basically the control unit can be some distance from panel.
 

cscs3

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2000
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
115
Hi FinalTidus,

Please don't copy the full article in the forum... it's just bad ethics. Plus, there's a good chance they will write to us to remove duplicated content.

Thanks!

Actually, article may be copy right. So is best not to copy paste it.
 

Mscheapo

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
137
Reaction score
0
Yes true, is buyer decision but spending so much on QLED that it’s nothing new like not value for money.

If one connect box is good, why only Q series has it? And not all Samsung models?

Different brand has different design, color processor, OS interface, also different in panel design eg hard panel vs soft panel.

So finally, is buyer decision.

For example, if you need wall mount and do not want to have many cables going up to TV panel. Then QLED series is a good choice as only one fiber/cable up from control unit to panel and basically the control unit can be some distance from panel.
 

rahul49

Master Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
2,776
Reaction score
0
Sounds a bit like a paid article. Sponsored trip for Techradar journalist to Samsung factory, must write good stuff.

Hardly a fair comparison done in some test lab.
 

FinalTidus

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
34,490
Reaction score
598
Hi FinalTidus,

Please don't copy the full article in the forum... it's just bad ethics. Plus, there's a good chance they will write to us to remove duplicated content.



Thanks!

Hi Vijay!

Sure. I will take note of that in future posting. :)
 

trickle_on

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Messages
19,669
Reaction score
9
By the time microLED becomes affordable, OLED tech would likely have matured to the point where burn-in, etc are a thing of the past.

Nevertheless, very exciting times. More competition, we win.
 

xiangzeng

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
275
Reaction score
7
This guy’s expression is as dead as plasma technology
Precisely. This reviewer is definitely out of job if he were to come to sg to work. Not a moment of stirring up the interest of viewers to the products he was explaining. He was saying the obvious facts, LPPL.
 

cscs3

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2000
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
115
Yes true, is buyer decision but spending so much on QLED that it’s nothing new like not value for money.

If one connect box is good, why only Q series has it? And not all Samsung models?

This kind of debate is meaningless else there would not be people buying OLED when the price is some much different from current LED/LCD TV.

For the group of people who appericate technology. Price is usually not the primary consideration. Else there would not be people jump in when new procut is launched from day one.

You kind of conflicting within your own ideal. Sure, one connect box technically can be in every model. But price? Does it match your concept of value for money and if everyone need the same design?
 

cscs3

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2000
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
115
What’s your point?

Answer is simple, the technology is not originally from Sony. (How Sony name it - yes).

You should know, manufacturer like Sony, Panasonic does not make their own panel anymore.

Even for LG or Samsung. Not all series of TV used panel manufacture by there own. If you dont believe it, open up the TV and check it.

All you are paying is the brand name.
 

petetherock

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
9,634
Reaction score
834
Answer is simple, the technology is not originally from Sony. (How Sony name it - yes).

You should know, manufacturer like Sony, Panasonic does not make their own panel anymore.

Even for LG or Samsung. Not all series of TV used panel manufacture by there own. If you dont believe it, open up the TV and check it.

All you are paying is the brand name.
Most of the panels may be from a limited number of factories but the video chip and algorithms are what makes the difference.
The number of LEDs and other finer details also differ.
 

trickle_on

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2000
Messages
19,669
Reaction score
9
Perhaps his aim is to inform instead of entertain.

Although what each of us finds entertaining/interesting is totally subjective.

Precisely. This reviewer is definitely out of job if he were to come to sg to work. Not a moment of stirring up the interest of viewers to the products he was explaining. He was saying the obvious facts, LPPL.
 

congster2

Supremacy Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,679
Reaction score
2,512
Answer is simple, the technology is not originally from Sony. (How Sony name it - yes).

You should know, manufacturer like Sony, Panasonic does not make their own panel anymore.

Even for LG or Samsung. Not all series of TV used panel manufacture by there own. If you dont believe it, open up the TV and check it.

All you are paying is the brand name.

I find your comments really patronising. I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure I've better knowledge then you on this topic.

My sony uses a rarer 240Hz PSA panel that is similar to PVA, I doubt it's from Samsung. Even Samsung doesn't always manufacture it's own panels. My previous Samsung uses panels from AUO. They outsource because they choose to focus on other aspects of the technology.

But that's besides the point.

The panel type and quality is important. But it isn't everything.
Case in point - LG supplies oled panels to it's competitors including Sony.But after you factor in Sony's technology in video processing, the resultant product that Sony produces using LG's panels could be superior to LG's own flagship offerings.

Regardless, I suggest you take the marketing hype with a pinch of salt.
The reason why samsung pushes the so called "Qled", is obvious to anyone following display technology over the last few years.

Samsung lost the oled war, as it could not bring its oled manufacturing technology to match the yield of LG's. Given the rivalry with LG, Samsung is obviously reluctant to procure LG's oled panels. Without its own oled panels, Samsung had no choice but to repackage existing quantum dot led/lcd technology, and market this as something that is oled sounding, hence qled.

Samsung obviously hopes that the unassuming consumer will get confused, and start to think that qled is something that could be 'equivalent' to LG's oled. If samsung had continued to sell its TVs as just plain old LEDs, they might lose market share, and perhaps more importantly, deal with the embarrassment of not having it's own self-emissive panel TV.

But surely we should know better. Can led/lcd panels, with or without quantum dots, produce a good picture? Obviously there are still some benefits - no burn-in, higher levels of brightness exceeding 1,000 nits giving more headroom to handle HDR without a need for tone mapping, and so on. But ultimately, to achieve comparable contrasts without sacrificing details, you need a high zone count FALD, like Sony's ZD9. Can samsung match up? Yes, if it stops fooling around with its HDR eotf, and increase its dimming zones on its led TVs, coupled with its non-reflective technology + newly achieved wider viewing angles, perhaps. But until then, Sony to me, is still king when it comes to led/lcd TVs.
 
Last edited:

xiangzeng

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
275
Reaction score
7
I find your comments really patronising. I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure I've better knowledge then you on this topic.

My sony uses a rarer 240Hz PSA panel that is similar to PVA, I doubt it's from Samsung. Even Samsung doesn't always manufacturer it's own panels. My previous samsung uses panels from AUO. They outsource because they choose to focus on other aspects of the technology.

But that's besides the point.

The panel type and quality is important. But it isn't everything.
Case in point - LG supplies oled panels to it's competitors including Sony.But after you factor in Sony's technology in video processing, the resultant product that Sony produces using LG's panels could be superior to LG's own flagship offerings.

Regardless, I suggest you take the marketing hype with a pinch of salt.
The reason why samsung pushes the so called "Qled", is obvious to anyone following display technology over the last few years.

Samsung lost the oled war, as it could not bring its oled manufacturing technology to match the yield of LG's. Given the rivalry with LG, Samsung is obviously reluctant to procure LG's oled panels. Without its own oled panels, Samsung had no choice but to repackage existing quantum dot led/lcd technology, and market this as something that is oled sounding, hence qled.

Samsung obviously hopes that the unassuming consumer will get confused, and start to think that qled is something that could be 'equivalent' to LG's oled. If samsung had continued to sell its TVs as just plain old LEDs, they might lose market share, and perhaps more importantly, deal with the embarrassment of not having it's own self-emissive panel TV.

But surely we should know better. Can led/lcd panels, with or without quantum dots, produce a good picture? Obviously there are still some benefits - no burn-in, higher levels of brightness exceeding 1,000 nits giving more headroom to handle HDR without a need for tone mapping, and so on. But ultimately, to achieve comparable contrasts without sacrificing details, you need a high zone count FALD, like Sony's ZD9. Can samsung match up? Yes, if it stops fooling around with its HDR eotf, and increase its dimming zones on its led TVs, coupled with its non-reflective technology + newly achieved wider viewing angles, perhaps. But until then, Sony to me, is still king when it comes to led/lcd TVs.
This is the main reason I chose to buy Sony 55x8500E this month. Not top of range but decent to let me watch tv and youtube at value price. This tv has good picture quality. I had thought of buying LG 55UK7500PTA at $2299 but I decided to buy this tv instead.
 

congster2

Supremacy Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,679
Reaction score
2,512
This is the main reason I chose to buy Sony 55x8500E this month. Not top of range but decent to let me watch tv and youtube at value price. This tv has good picture quality. I had thought of buying LG 55UK7500PTA at $2299 but I decided to buy this tv instead.

Yes. I thought that overall, the average PQ has gone up, and prices, relative to size, have gone down. 10 years ago, 55" was considered very large, but today it's mainsteam. So mainstream TVs today are quite good. I recently bought an entry level 55" Samsung for my parents, for casual viewing. Even then, I thought the PQ was quite decent and blacks were respectable, when fed with a HD signal.

I'm just waiting for another 2-3 years or so, when my Sony is about 7-8 years old, then perhaps I can start looking around for another TV. Jury is out on whether it would be an oled, led, or some kind of new technology. Size wise, there is more certainty - definitely need to go up. :D
 
Last edited:

cscs3

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2000
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
115
I find your comments really patronising. I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure I've better knowledge then you on this topic.

My sony uses a rarer 240Hz PSA panel that is similar to PVA, I doubt it's from Samsung. Even Samsung doesn't always manufacture it's own panels. My previous Samsung uses panels from AUO. They outsource because they choose to focus on other aspects of the technology.

But that's besides the point.

The panel type and quality is important. But it isn't everything.
Case in point - LG supplies oled panels to it's competitors including Sony.But after you factor in Sony's technology in video processing, the resultant product that Sony produces using LG's panels could be superior to LG's own flagship offerings.

Regardless, I suggest you take the marketing hype with a pinch of salt.
The reason why samsung pushes the so called "Qled", is obvious to anyone following display technology over the last few years.

Samsung lost the oled war, as it could not bring its oled manufacturing technology to match the yield of LG's. Given the rivalry with LG, Samsung is obviously reluctant to procure LG's oled panels. Without its own oled panels, Samsung had no choice but to repackage existing quantum dot led/lcd technology, and market this as something that is oled sounding, hence qled.

Samsung obviously hopes that the unassuming consumer will get confused, and start to think that qled is something that could be 'equivalent' to LG's oled. If samsung had continued to sell its TVs as just plain old LEDs, they might lose market share, and perhaps more importantly, deal with the embarrassment of not having it's own self-emissive panel TV.

But surely we should know better. Can led/lcd panels, with or without quantum dots, produce a good picture? Obviously there are still some benefits - no burn-in, higher levels of brightness exceeding 1,000 nits giving more headroom to handle HDR without a need for tone mapping, and so on. But ultimately, to achieve comparable contrasts without sacrificing details, you need a high zone count FALD, like Sony's ZD9. Can samsung match up? Yes, if it stops fooling around with its HDR eotf, and increase its dimming zones on its led TVs, coupled with its non-reflective technology + newly achieved wider viewing angles, perhaps. But until then, Sony to me, is still king when it comes to led/lcd TVs.

You can google to find PSA panel. It is Samsung indeed.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/panel_technologies.htm
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/1294904-samsung-panel-version-thread-34.html#/topics/1294904?page=207

Is know that maker may not use panel that manufacture in their own factory especially on low end TV, these are mainly for cost reason. But usually these are from their supplier they have invested.

You should search back history Samsung-Sony relation in developing LCD panel. Just like LG-Philips case.
 
Last edited:
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Top