Support NeoGAF

[watership]

Is it technically even possible to reduce the input lag to tolerable levels with the old chipset?

It can, unless the chipset is already maxed out of it's capabilities. I know Panasonic and LG have patched in features for years. Some devices had HDR10 patched in, but given they support DV already, it's not that hard.

LG has promised to patch their OLEDS to improve 4K HDR game mode imput lag, and that was only after there was a dedicate campaign to get it fixed. I have a feeling that Sony either doesn't want to invest engineering time to improve it, or they can't. Either way, trying to suppress the truth and being silent in PR was not the way to deal with it, especially if this blows up and it leaves the gaming community.

If it doesn't Sony will probably sell well this holiday anyway, I know many people who think "Sony Bravia, PS4 Pro, that can't go wrong, right?"

 

[FutbolBat]

Is there top tier competition in console gaming? I would think the controller is a bit of a limiting factor. Most competitive gaming is done on PC with a mouse/keyboard I think.

Yes, there is.

 

[Gitaroo]

****. It was delivered several months ago to our contractor. It's an expensive ass TV, got it specifically for 4K gaming, PS4 Pro and a Titan X Pascal rig. Is it technically even possible to reduce the input lag to tolerable levels with the old chipset?

no body knows until Android M date get released. ETA Dec 10, can change anything since its ETA.

 

[Gitaroo]

It can, unless the chipset is already maxed out of it's capabilities. I know Panasonic and LG have patched in features for years. Some devices had HDR10 patched in, but given they support DV already, it's not that hard.

LG has promised to patch their OLEDS to improve 4K HDR game mode imput lag, and that was only after there was a dedicate campaign to get it fixed. I have a feeling that Sony either doesn't want to invest engineering time to improve it, or they can't. Either way, trying to suppress the truth and being silent in PR was not the way to deal with it, especially if this blows up and it leaves the gaming community.

If it doesn't Sony will probably sell well this holiday anyway, I know many people who think "Sony Bravia, PS4 Pro, that can't go wrong, right?"

yeah, what worse is they are still shamelessly say they design their tvs for 4K and HDR gaming. Like this

http://presscentre.sony.co.uk/press...ony-4k-hdr-tv-and-playstation-r-4-pro-1642908

I believe they have also include an ad or something for X930D in EU or UK PS4pro pacakaging base on DF PS4pro unboxing video. This company is absolutely shameless, even if this does get fixed at the end I am sure most of the tv owners will never buy their tv again with this kind of post purcahse support.

 

[fudgey_lumpkins]

Can you link that instructional?

I believe this is the link but Sony has removed it. https://us.en.kb.sony.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/75736/c/66/kw/75736

Basically the instructions stated that once you are displaying 4K HDR through HDMI go into the action menu and disable motionflow. You only need to do it once per HDMI input.

 

[Freshmaker]

Huh? Many (most?) monitors have less than 10ms input lag, and you can easily use a large monitor as a TV. Pretty sure you can find LCD TV's that are that low too, although it's admittedly difficult.

No. That's the GTG response. Actual input response time is 9-10ms at best.

Look at displaylag.com some time.

 

[Goodacre0081]

I believe this is the link but Sony has removed it. https://us.en.kb.sony.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/75736/c/66/kw/75736

Basically the instructions stated that once you are displaying 4K HDR through HDMI go into the action menu and disable motionflow. You only need to do it once per HDMI input.

not sure why they ever mentioned motionflow. it was set off by default on both HDMI2(PS4pro) and HDMI3(XB1s) on my set when i initially played HDR games.

 

[Theognosis]

I'm surprised that TV ratings are looking almost exclusively at game mode and completely ignoring the INTERPOLATION feature ("MotionFlow" in Sony TVs and "Motion Plus" in Samsung's), which is very important in console gaming considering that many AAA titles run at 30 fps. Through interpolation, 30 fps games on consoles will look like they're running in glorious 60 fps. I have enjoyed 30 fps games like Uncharted 4, Ratchet & Clank, Paper Mario and #FE on my 800D and the lag with interpolation turned on is negligible.

Now, let's compare the lag when interpolation is turned on:

You can play Uncharted 4 running at "60 fps" on the Sony 800D with 49.1 ms lag which is acceptable.

Sony X800D
1080p @ 60Hz Show Help : 33.3 ms
1080p With Interpolation Show Help : 49.1 ms
1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode Show Help : 49.0 ms
1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 33.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz Show Help : 35.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 35.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz + HDR Show Help : 33.2 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR Show Help : 33.2 ms

On the other hand, Uncharted 4 at "60 fps" with 118.9ms lag is unplayable on the Samsung KS8000.

Samsung KS8000
1080p @ 60Hz Show Help : 20.9 ms
1080p With Interpolation Show Help : 118.9 ms
1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode Show Help : 113.5 ms]
1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 37.8 ms
4k @ 60Hz Show Help : 22.7 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 37.4 ms
4k @ 60Hz + HDR Show Help : 21.1 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR Show Help : 37.6 ms

Samsung's interpolation implementation is just HORRIBLE.

 

[ss_lemonade]

Sony used to make great TVs when it comes to input lag. What happened?

I'm surprised that TV ratings are looking almost exclusively at game mode and completely ignoring the INTERPOLATION feature ("MotionFlow" in Sony TVs and "Motion Plus" in Samsung's), which is very important in console gaming considering that many AAA titles run at 30 fps. Through interpolation, 30 fps games on consoles will look like they're running in glorious 60 fps. I have enjoyed 30 fps games like Uncharted 4, Ratchet & Clank, Paper Mario and #FE on my 800D and the lag with interpolation turned on is negligible.

Now, let's compare the lag when interpolation is turned on:

You can play Uncharted 4 running at "60 fps" in the Sony 800D with 49.1 ms lag which is acceptable.

Sony X800D
1080p @ 60Hz Show Help : 33.3 ms
1080p With Interpolation Show Help : 49.1 ms
1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode Show Help : 49.0 ms
1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 33.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz Show Help : 35.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 35.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz + HDR Show Help : 33.2 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR Show Help : 33.2 ms

On the other hand, Uncharted 4 at "60 fps" with 118.9ms lag is unplayable in the Samsung KS8000.

Samsung KS8000
1080p @ 60Hz Show Help : 20.9 ms
1080p With Interpolation Show Help : 118.9 ms
1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode Show Help : 113.5 ms]
1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 37.8 ms
4k @ 60Hz Show Help : 22.7 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 37.4 ms
4k @ 60Hz + HDR Show Help : 21.1 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR Show Help : 37.6 ms

Must be TV dependent but the Smooth mode on my w900a looks pretty bad with artifacts and uneven frame rates. Even if it had low input lag, I don't know if I could see myself using that mode outside of testing.

 

[Theognosis]

Sony used to make great TVs when it comes to input lag. What happened?

Must be TV dependent but the Smooth mode on my w900a looks pretty bad with artifacts and uneven frame rates. Even if it had low input lag, I don't know if I could see myself using that mode outside of testing.

Not sure about the older models, but the MotionFlow in 800D is clean and consistent in the games I've played so far. I wouldn't want to play any 30 fps game without MotionFlow. There's no turning back.

 

[soldierblue]

Based on rtings testing post-update, game mode input lag is totally workable IMO.

 

[kikonawa]

What a blown up thread this is.. you are looking with a magnifiying glass on something which wont be even. Noticable for 99;99%

 

[Gitaroo]

Sony used to make great TVs when it comes to input lag. What happened?

change in market approach most likely. When Sony tvs had the lowest input lag, Samsung was the best seller with insane amount of image boosting and processing and highly rated by no reviewer criticized them for high input lag. Sony probably thought that was the right approach and started going crazy with all the image processing and forgot what they were good for. As time passes more and more people are aware of input lag, Samsung realize people actually start looking at their input lag numbers so they corrected the issue where sony is still blindly chasing after image boosting and they all ended up like this. This is why Samsung is still the king and Sony is still a step behind. Thats my guess anyway

 

[mrklaw]

What a blown up thread this is.. you are looking with a magnifiying glass on something which wont be even. Noticable for 99;99%

This is like the whole of avsforums.

I do wish manufacturers would consider performance around input lag more -games must be at least a partial driver for sales of new TVs? You'd think at least one of the manufacturers would try to appeal more to that group.

Take an approach like VR where signal latency is critical. Heck, go the whole hog and start scanning out over HDMI line by line like the old raster displays and update the TV immediately to have CRT-like input lag

 

[Disagree Guy]

Unless I'm mistaken there are 1000 milliseconds in a second....

I got a Sony Bravia KD49XD8077 on order last night to arrive tomorrow...
It's got 33m/s with gaming mode on according to reports.

You are telling me I'll notice the latency on 33/1000 milliseconds?

Other users I play with on BF1 have the same TV and say they haven't noticed a difference at all - and they regularly top the game

Using a reaction timer I just got an average of 291m/s..... I also get near the top of the leaderboard on BF1 with my current setup. I don't think I'll notice a difference.

 

[Durante]

You are telling me I'll notice the latency on 33/1000 milliseconds?

No. But you might easily notice a latency increase of 33/1000 seconds.

That's 2 frames at 60 FPS. Personally, I easily notice that in fast-paced games with good, direct controls.

 

[Disagree Guy]

No. But you might easily notice a latency increase of 33/1000 seconds.

That's 2 frames at 60 FPS. Personally, I easily notice that in fast-paced games with good, direct controls.

At the moment I've got a 32" Sony Bravia HD tv from around 7 years ago.
No idea if that has any sort of latency but... will it increase?

Also I only bought my new TV because for 4K HDR it has one of the lowest latency without going into the 'thousands of £' territory

 

[Freshmaker]

What a blown up thread this is.. you are looking with a magnifiying glass on something which wont be even. Noticable for 99;99%

Especially from people quoting GTG numbers as if they mean something useful.

 

[pswii60]

Incredible lag? Highest value there is just over 1/10th of a second.

Anything less than that is not noticeable for 99% of people.

100ms is 3 frames at 30fps and 6 frames at 60fps.

So with a 60fps game, you're not going to see something until an entire 6 frames after the fact.

I am fine up to around 50ms of display lag. Beyond that and I struggle - aiming becomes a chore and games just don't feel as responsive and fun.

That's the main reason I got rid of my EF950 and now have a C6.

 

[Disagree Guy]

100ms is 3 frames at 30fps and 6 frames at 60fps.

So with a 60fps game, you're not going to see something until an entire 6 frames after the fact.

I am fine up to around 50ms of display lag. Beyond that and I struggle - aiming becomes a chore and games just don't feel as responsive and fun.

That's the main reason I got rid of my EF950 and now have a C6.

So in your opinion a 33m/s latency would be in the 'acceptable but not ideal' range?
That's what i'm looking at

 

[takriel]

What a blown up thread this is.. you are looking with a magnifiying glass on something which wont be even. Noticable for 99;99%

1 second lag is noticable all right.

 

[TAJ]

You are telling me I'll notice the latency on 33/1000 milliseconds?

33ms is more than fine unless you're trying to beat Mike Tyson on NES or something. I could live with 45ms, personally, but I'm also glad that I don't have to.

 

[Disagree Guy]

33ms is more than fine unless you're trying to beat Mike Tyson on NES or something. I could live with 45ms, personally, but I'm also glad that I don't have to.

And that is what I like to hear!

 

[Backlogger]

I love my XBR-55X810C. Wish it was HDR capable though, but other than that never noticed any significant input lag. Though seems this thread is specifically about Sony TVs that support HDR

 

[EASTC0AST_GH05T]

And still 9/10 users won't notice anything.

Well isn't this one of the reasons to appreciate GAF. Gamers alike bringing awareness to other fellow gamers.

 

[Fliesen]

my Samsung had ~100ms outside of gaming mode. that was super noticeable.

27.4ms in gaming mode were pretty much imperceptible.

just checked and in 4k gaming mode it'll be 44ms. - that's 1 extra frame of lag. Bummer, but i suppose i can deal with that.

 

[Mokubba]

Sony used to make great TVs when it comes to input lag. What happened?

We've moved on from 1080p panels to 4K + HDR.

Makes sense that processing will be more but over time they will get the input lag down

4K TV's across the board were notoriously bad for input lag when they first came out IIRC.

 

[Pankratous]

Unless I'm mistaken there are 1000 milliseconds in a second....

I got a Sony Bravia KD49XD8077 on order last night to arrive tomorrow...
It's got 33m/s with gaming mode on according to reports.

You are telling me I'll notice the latency on 33/1000 milliseconds?

Other users I play with on BF1 have the same TV and say they haven't noticed a difference at all - and they regularly top the game

Using a reaction timer I just got an average of 291m/s..... I also get near the top of the leaderboard on BF1 with my current setup. I don't think I'll notice a difference.

Jesus man do you fight with cheetah's for a living?

 

[Disagree Guy]

Jesus man do you fight with cheetah's for a living?

Is that quick? haha The record on this website was 113m/s

Mine would have been nearer 180m/s but I didn't click properly on the last one so it went to like 500m/s and averaged out at 291m/s

I'd be quite impressed if I had a good reaction time

Just did it again and got 221m/s

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime

 

[Pankratous]

Is that quick? haha The record on this website was 113m/s

Mine would have been nearer 180m/s but I didn't click properly on the last one so it went to like 500m/s and averaged out at 291m/s

I'd be quite impressed if I had a good reaction time

Just did it again and got 221m/s

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime

Lowest I can get after multiple attempts is 314ms

 

[Disagree Guy]

Lowest I can get after multiple attempts is 314ms

The general point I was trying to make is that 33m/s of latency with my new TV is nearly a 7th of my quickest reaction time after multiple attempts.

Putting that into perspective that appears on paper to be such an insignificant and un-noticeable amount....

 

[Calabi]

Unless I'm mistaken there are 1000 milliseconds in a second....

I got a Sony Bravia KD49XD8077 on order last night to arrive tomorrow...
It's got 33m/s with gaming mode on according to reports.

You are telling me I'll notice the latency on 33/1000 milliseconds?

Other users I play with on BF1 have the same TV and say they haven't noticed a difference at all - and they regularly top the game

Using a reaction timer I just got an average of 291m/s..... I also get near the top of the leaderboard on BF1 with my current setup. I don't think I'll notice a difference.

Its not about reaction times. Its about the dissonance between your senses and the feedback from the game.

No matter what your reaction times are you'll notice(should notice) in comparison tests input lag, where you have to wait several frames before your character responds. The games will feel sluggish, its like the built in input lag in Tomb Raider and Witcher 3. Its not pleasant to play, not very immersive. If your reaction times are that slow its not going to make things better its going to make things even worse. Responding to events in fast paced games are going to be even worse.

You can get used to games with large input lags, I can get used to games like this, but they are frustrating and harder to play.

 

[Disagree Guy]

Its not about reaction times. Its about the dissonance between your senses and the feedback from the game.

No matter what your reaction times are you'll notice(should notice) in comparison tests input lag, where you have to wait several frames before your character responds. The games will feel sluggish, its like the built in input lag in Tomb Raider and Witcher 3. Its not pleasant to play, not very immersive. If your reaction times are that slow its not going to make things better its going to make things even worse. Responding to events in fast paced games are going to be even worse.

You can get used to games with large input lags, I can get used to games like this, but they are frustrating and harder to play.

Well as I say I'm confident that the reported 33m/s input lag is one of the lowest available (without going into the 20m/s sort of range at £2000+ sets) and from reports from people who play the same games I intend to, I'm happy enough.

I'll report here should I notice anything different. Really am quite anxious after reading all this but quietly confident.

 

[jimboton]

Only possible if you game exclusively on a CRT.

PC monitors, even gaming ones are around 10 ms input lag, you are only going significantly lower with a CRT. For the 1-5 ms advertisement, that is response time not input lag.

Like others are saying, plenty of sub 10 ms lag gaming monitors around. The Benq I use is in fact sub 5 in most tests, as well it should be being 144 hz. Yes, I know the difference between response time and input lag.

And, yes, I could tell the difference with a Sony TV tested at 20-something ms playing Spelunky on both. TV felt like platforms were 'sticky' when jumping off them. It was subtle but it was there.

It's everyone's choice, eye candy, gaming responsiveness or a compromise between the two. Unfortunately you can't max both at the same time today.

 

[Freshmaker]

Like others are saying, plenty of sub 10 ms lag gaming monitors around.

Nope. Only if you're quoting the GTG response time.

http://www.displaylag.com/benq-rl2755hm-gaming-monitor-review/

10ms isn't lower than 10 last I checked.

 

[jimboton]

Nope. Only if you're quoting the GTG response time.

http://www.displaylag.com/benq-rl2755hm-gaming-monitor-review/

10ms isn't lower than 10 last I checked.

The guys at DisplayLag use the LeoBodnar device to measure lag, which is only compatible with HDMI and thus limited to 60 Hz. That's why they only ever measure 10 ms as a minimum when they place the sensor in the middle of the screen (it measures around 2 ms at the top and around 17 ms at the bottom, which makes sense in a 60 Hz refresh rate). Input lag @144Hz is lower.

Also, Benq makes more than one model of monitor, with different characteristics, including input lag. Mindblowing, I know.

 

[Madness]

Bollocks. Most will feel 60ms for a game that isn't a slow/turn based game.

You might want to look at input lag for televisions especially LCD/LED over the past few years. Rtings has discontinued models still up. See just how many televisions routinely hit 40-60ms. I bet the majority of people here if they have been gaming on lcd the past decade were definitely playing with higher input lag than they woild think.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

And still 9/10 users won't notice anything.

I don't know...100ms is a lot of lag. I thought my Panasonic plasma was bad but 100ms is just absurd

 

[Freshmaker]

You might want to look at input lag for televisions especially LCD/LED over the past few years. Rtings has discontinued models still up. See just how many televisions routinely hit 40-60ms. I bet the majority of people here if they have been gaming on lcd the past decade were definitely playing with higher input lag than they woild think.

Or Plasmas.

 

[Theognosis]

change in market approach most likely. When Sony tvs had the lowest input lag, Samsung was the best seller with insane amount of image boosting and processing and highly rated by no reviewer criticized them for high input lag. Sony probably thought that was the right approach and started going crazy with all the image processing and forgot what they were good for. As time passes more and more people are aware of input lag, Samsung realize people actually start looking at their input lag numbers so they corrected the issue where sony is still blindly chasing after image boosting and they all ended up like this. This is why Samsung is still the king and Sony is still a step behind. Thats my guess anyway

I don't think that's a fair assessment on what Sony has done. To begin with, "Game Mode" was invented in the past to accommodate gaming since other modes had terrible input lag due to image processing. Consumers should be aware that "Game Mode" is just a way to make TV's playable at the expense of gimping almost every feature that made the TV great in the first place.

The industry should move in a direction where this so-called "Game Mode" is altogether eliminated and shit like "Outside of Game Mode" is thrown outside the window by TV rating sites. This is only possible if manufacturers are able to speed up image processing and reduce input lag such that consumers can play video games in ANY mode.

It's just unfair to proclaim that Samsung is the best TV for videogames when its TV's are terrible with >100 ms input lag outside of game mode. On the other hand, Sony is moving forward by making TV's that can play games in any mode you choose. That's a step in the right direction.

 

[SebastianM]

This situation reminds me a lot about lcd tvs back in 2006-ish. Even high-end models were crap and not very suitable for gaming.

 

[copelandmaster]

I pretty much stopped playing anything on my TV 2 years ago after I discovered that my Sony XBR4 from 2007 was really laggy for smash (and I think its a TN). I have 3 consoles and my computer all hooked up to my monitor now.

People say they don't notice lag, but I just shake my head every time. 30ms, 40ms, 50ms, 60ms -- these are acceptable?

Meanwhile

That's 1440p, 165hz, IPS

4k60, IPS


Red is input lag, green is avg panel response time (divided by 2 for testing purposes).

Both Acer 270HU models have the same panel.



AUO came out with a 27 inch 4k 144hz IPS panel 6 months ago. It probably won't support HDR (dat lag tho), but it'll be in a bunch of ASUS, Acer, Viewsonic, and Benq/Zowie monitors through 2017.

If you care about lag, can stand gaming on a desk at 27 inches, and don't care about HDR, I would suggest looking into that for PS4 Pro. While I'm going to fall back on a 1440p model if reviews find that the lag at 4k is too much higher than a 1440p model, it'll be lower than a TV and the rest of you might be a bit more forgiving (should such a worse case scenario occur). Hopefully the monitors that come out will have a HDMI connection in addition to displayport. The PG278q and XB270HU didn't, but the PG279q, XG270HU, XB271HU (270HU update based on feedback), and xb271hk do have one.

EDIT: Fixed images

 

[Neff]

Not only that Sony forum mods are actively deleting any discussion threads mentioning it on the boards

Truly for the players

 

[MilesTeg]

How exactly do you update firmware on sony tvs? I just got a 700d and wondering how to do this.

 

[DangerMouse]

How exactly do you update firmware on sony tvs? I just got a 700d and wondering how to do this.

It's automatic as long as you are connected online, but if you want to run the check manually to do it sooner it's under Help after you go to the Home screen. Atleast on the 2015 Android TVs.

 

[Freshmaker]

Truly for the players

Deleting bad info is bad for the community.

 

[spwolf]

Unless I'm mistaken there are 1000 milliseconds in a second....

I got a Sony Bravia KD49XD8077 on order last night to arrive tomorrow...
It's got 33m/s with gaming mode on according to reports.

You are telling me I'll notice the latency on 33/1000 milliseconds?

Other users I play with on BF1 have the same TV and say they haven't noticed a difference at all - and they regularly top the game

Using a reaction timer I just got an average of 291m/s..... I also get near the top of the leaderboard on BF1 with my current setup. I don't think I'll notice a difference.

your tv has one of the lowest 4k + HDR tested latency out of all 4KDR tvs, so you are fine... as to OP, posting old pre-patch info knowing it is outdated is simply spreading misinformation on purpose due to being mad at sony.

We have been posting here bout bad latency on most Sony 2016 models forever now since every review ever made mentions that. News is that they have drastically reduced it post patch. This is why people here have been only recommending XD80 from Sonys lineup, since it was only tv prepatch to work well.

As to ZD9, it has lowest 4K+HDR latency that i have saw so far at 27ms. So people are again spreading false information.
https://hdtvpolska.com/sony-zd9-kd-65zd9-test-flagowy-telewizor-ultra-hd-z-direct-led-i-hdr/

Problem right now is that only few mags have ability to test 4K + HDR lag, everyone is basically testing 1080p and passing it as 4k result. But again, we have known about this at neogaf tv threads for a while now.

 

[Nostremitus]

OP needs an update, those are pre patch numbers.

For reference, these are the current Rtings numbers or the 850C.

1080p @ 60Hz Show Help : 35.3 ms
1080p With Interpolation Show Help : 65.0 ms
1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode Show Help : 71.3 ms
1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 35.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz Show Help : 58.2 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 Show Help : 58.2 ms
4k @ 60Hz + HDR Show Help : 58.1 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR Show Help : 58.1 ms

The 4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4 + HDR was over 90ms pre patch...

None of the info in the OP is accurate.

 

[Memorabilia]

Just another tire thrown on the fire for the current state of HDR standards/lag. I'm generally an early adopter but I won't be upgrading any of my household TVs to 4K for at least another year, maybe 2-3. I just don't see the point yet. The frustration of being stuck with a more expensive, less capable model a year or two from now would far outweigh the short term rush I'd get from the paltry amount of 4K content currently available.

 

[Nostremitus]

Just another tire thrown on the fire for the current state of HDR standards/lag. I'm generally an early adopter but I won't be upgrading any of my household TVs to 4K for at least another year, maybe 2-3. I just don't see the point yet. The frustration of being stuck with a more expensive, less capable model a year or two from now would far outweigh the short term rush I'd get from the paltry amount of 4K content currently available.

TVs will always advance. There's no way to avoid that. Any TV you buy at any given time will be outclassed in some way in a couple of years. But, everyone has their threshold of entry. I feel sorry for people who bought 4K TVs before HDMI 2.0 or HDR existed.

That said, ignore the numbers in the OP. They aren't accurate. Check Rtings yourself.