-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I can't get a clear idea if this TV has HDR or not (Samsung UN40KU6290FXZA)
- Thread starter Dr_Boris_Goltz
- Start date
Aztechnology
Member
just want to reiterate I don't know what the use case scenario for 4k 10bit @ 60hz HDR 4:4:4 is. HDMI 2.0a doesn't support it. So when gaming at 4k HDR you'll be at 20ms.
Oh wait maybe I'm just implying they mean 10 bit everywhere here when in fact it's 8bit 4:4:4 and just not referenced.
If you have a PC hooked up and label it 'PC' you can use the 4:4:4 for cleaner text and detail at the sacrifice of some lag
Don't think it would be HDR though - maybe W10 will get it via a patch. 60fps Forza Horizon 3 with HDR would be sweet
What's a better 65" TV for under a G?
I bought it a couple months ago, I could have bought a smaller ks8000, but to me the trade off in HDR is totally worth it to have a drastically larger TV. I'm going to play PC, Wii U, PS3/4, XBONE/360, movies, Netflix, old TV shows... all types of stuff that isn't HDR. Having a bigger screen for all that stuff easily is worth having less accurate HDR to me.
Would I like a 65" ks8000, yeah of course - but $999 was hard enough of a sell to the wife as it was 😅
Aztechnology
Member
Sorry read my edited text. I know that, but 10 bi 4:4:4 at 4k 60hz isn't supported. So they must just inherently mean 8 bit for PC mode but haven't stated as much. Can lead to confusion.
I'm a PC gamer using it as a monitor and 4:4:4 has always influenced my purchasing decision.
Grabbed one yesterday since its fairly cheap and I read mostly positive reviews about it being a decent PC monitor. So far the monitor part is definitely a yes and I`m gonna put it thru its paces with my PS4 Pro and some HDR stuff this week.
So far Titanfall 2, Battlefield One & Overwatch have been fantastic but honestly this HDR/Faux HDR thing is annoying and might be enough for me to return it.
I`m not supporting something labeled as HDR kinda but not really
So far Titanfall 2, Battlefield One & Overwatch have been fantastic but honestly this HDR/Faux HDR thing is annoying and might be enough for me to return it.
I`m not supporting something labeled as HDR kinda but not really
Marty Chinn
Member
Let's not sugar coat this. It's technically HDR because it accepts the signal but what the true HDR experience is, this doesn't even remotely come close. It's like a 720p screen with a native res of 1360 x 768 taking a 1080p signal. It's not really 1080p despite you likely getting a better resolution than 720p. Two years from now, when we look back at what this capability is, it's going to be considered complete utter shit and not in the same league as what the content is supposed to look like. It's super half assed HDR and to keep pushing the line that it's HDR is going to be more confusing for people looking for a proper HDR implementation.
suikodan
Member
There was a thread whose title was "HDR must the most confusing technlogy" here on GAF recently.
I couldn't agree more.
I have a UN55KU6500 that I bought on impulse. I got also a Xbox One S with it along with Gears 4.
I played the Xbox version on HDR and PC on "normal". Even though the PC version is way more detailed, for some reasons I found the Xbox version more colorful. Is it HDR? Is it placebo effect? Don't know.
I tried Infamous First Light and honestly, the colors are awesome. The pink trail of the girl when she's dashing, I was really impressed.
But, is it HDR?
Thanks for having this thread for Samsung UHD owners
I couldn't agree more.
I have a UN55KU6500 that I bought on impulse. I got also a Xbox One S with it along with Gears 4.
I played the Xbox version on HDR and PC on "normal". Even though the PC version is way more detailed, for some reasons I found the Xbox version more colorful. Is it HDR? Is it placebo effect? Don't know.
I tried Infamous First Light and honestly, the colors are awesome. The pink trail of the girl when she's dashing, I was really impressed.
But, is it HDR?
Thanks for having this thread for Samsung UHD owners
Reallink
Member
Assuming this is indeed the 6300 (which I can not confirm), it's a very good display for the price. Effectively perfect SRGB/709 performance post calibration, very high native CR for an LCD, excellent input lag and 1080p scaling. I'd personally buy this AND next year's equivalent black friday model (probably with full meta-HDR10 support) before I'd buy that current $650 Sony 800d with 'real' but still pretty half assed HDR support (dat peak light output).
I agree that it pales in comparison but it would still be considered HDR the same way youtube '1080p' is still 1080p regardless of whether its blu ray quality.
n0razi
Member
Just get a B6 OLED... it has no flaws really
Yeah limme just grab 3,000 from my wallet.
Just get the Sony X800D, Hisense H8C or the Samsung KS8000 if you want to play it safe and have something right now.
Rats Off To Ya
Banned
Marty Chinn's not wrong. If you're buying a 4K TV without proper HDR you're not really making good choices with your money, IMO. For the vast majority of use cases, HDR is going to have a much more noticeable benefit than the resolution bump.
That's not entirely true. Things are more or less standardized, but TV marketing is a dirty business and manufacturers will take their claims to the very edge of false advertisement. It creates a lot of unnecessary confusion.
Waiting isn't a bad idea if you don't feel a pressing need to upgrade, but there are relatively inexpensive options out there for people who want to jump in now. We have threads on this forum about the Sony 800D and the Samsung KS8000, the two TVs that are the easiest to recommend to gamers right now.
That's not entirely true. Things are more or less standardized, but TV marketing is a dirty business and manufacturers will take their claims to the very edge of false advertisement. It creates a lot of unnecessary confusion.
Waiting isn't a bad idea if you don't feel a pressing need to upgrade, but there are relatively inexpensive options out there for people who want to jump in now. We have threads on this forum about the Sony 800D and the Samsung KS8000, the two TVs that are the easiest to recommend to gamers right now.
I've been looking at the local Australian equivalent, but I never could get past the lack of proper HDR, so I decided to wait. I told this to a local Samsung rep who frequently works at my local tech store, and a couple of weeks ago he said that he had gotten some preliminary information on the 2017 lineup. He doesn't have all the details yet, but based on what he's been told so far, it's looking very likely that one of the 2017 models will be a 40-incher with full, legit, 1000 nits + 10-bit panel HDR. I hope it turns out true.
Reallink
Member
Wut? The H8C is largely on par with the 6290/6300, it adds no specs/features over it, and if anything is a hair worse in overall performance (much worse for gaming, with over twice the input lag of the Samsung). The 800D is literally more than twice the price to add expanded gamut, every other performance metric is effectively a wash. If you're paying a premium for "Real HDR", the 800D is the last set you should buy as it's peak light output is shit (even worse than the 6XXX Samsung's in question). The 8000 the only recommendation that makes any sense, but at $1000+, it's a poor buy Vs. the sub-$1500 55" B6/C6 OLED's can be had for. The 6300/6290 is unbeatable at $300, but it's a stop-gap set, not a future proof set. To be fair though, nothing right now is future proof with HDMI 2.1, dynamic metadata, and variable refresh rates on the immediate horizon.
The Hisense H8C is better for size and price with similar performance compared to the Samsung KU6300. Game performance of the H8C is inferior compared to the other TVs, but if it's not a priority and you run on Cinema mode and whatnot anyway, you might not even care. The Sony XBR43X800D is adequate if you want better budget HDR. It doesn't have the the peak brightness of the KS8000 obviously, but it's also not competing in that price range except the XBR49X800D and maybe when the UN49KS8000 goes on sale for a similar price. But there's little reason to own the XBR49X800D when it's an IPS panel and the Samsung KS8000 exists for a few hundred more, but it has hit $650 before last December and it does have Sony image processing if that's a factor. Then there's the KS8000 if you want an even better budget HDR than the XBR43X800D essentially. Funnily, if we're talking about the 2016 LG OLED TVs, there hasn't been an authorized seller that has sold any of them for <$1000 at any point in time so far, so I don't think of them as a budget priced TV. But for a budget HDR TV, it's the minimum I would suggest over the KS8000 if we're talking about a true budget HDR TV and disregarding price. The KS8000 isn't the only choice though. Depends on your priorities, budget and whatever else really. If you can still find the Samsung KU6300 for $300, there are worst things to get like the Sony XBR43X800D for $650 if you're looking for alternatives.
n0razi
Member
Not necessarily. Yes the higher the brightness level the better for HDR. But 400 nits sustained brightness is more than enough to actually take note of the HDR. I have both a KS8000 in 65" and a 43" X800D. Both sets display HDR content superbly, obviously the KS8000 gets far brighter, but it doesn't have 1100 nits sustained like you think. It drops to 500 or so etc. A wide color gamut is the #1 thing that impacts HDR over everything else because you actually get to see expanded colors and accuracy.
Otherwise you are not really getting anything with a Samsung set without the wide color gamut. The HDR data may help improve the image somewhat, but rather than not full brightness HDR10, it isnt't even low brightness HDR. It is essentially an SDR image that attempts to mimic HDR. It will give you a better image than another 4K SDR image, but any HDR set with a wide color gamut will give you a superior picture.