As for processing, my pick would be to pay attention to dithering, which causes artifacts, diagonal lines, and dithering-related flickering that strains the eyes, similar to what happens on new LG OLED panels.
Sorry, but I’m not impressed with how the new ratings have been implemented. The scores have changed but much of the old verbage, which in some cases conflicts with the new scores, haven’t been updated. Example: the Samsung S90D now rates lower than the Sony bravia 8 based on scoring but in the narrative comparing the S90D with the Sony the S90D is said to be better. In my opinion, readers would have been better served by using the new scoring for newly tested TVs and leaving the existing tests alone.
I appreciate your feedback, but there’s no conflict here. I can’t stress this enough: you can’t compare the scores between TVs on 1.11 and ones on 2.0, they’re simply not even remotely comparable. The text, on the other hand, is still valid. Regardless of what’s changed in our scoring and tests, if we say that TV X is better than TV Y, then that is still the case after this update.
Sorry, but I’m not impressed with how the new ratings have been implemented. The scores have changed but much of the old verbage, which in some cases conflicts with the new scores, haven’t been updated. Example: the Samsung S90D now rates lower than the Sony bravia 8 based on scoring but in the narrative comparing the S90D with the Sony the S90D is said to be better. In my opinion, readers would have been better served by using the new scoring for newly tested TVs and leaving the existing tests alone.
This looks to be because the Bravia 8 is still shown as tested to method v1.11 I hope that they are able to go as far back as 2022 TVs to be updated to v2.0. A similar thing is happening between TVs such as the LG B3 v B4, C3 v C4, and G3 v G4. It’s the nature of changing test methods
Thanks for the suggestion. It won’t look like that but we are looking into expanding our EOTF tests in our next update, 2.1. The exact scope is still TBD, though.
With your next test bench setup you seriously need to include your vrr-induced gamma flicker test. Gsync and freesync is extremely important to gamers and to know if the tv is going to flash uncontrollably is pretty darn important. You already test it for pc monitors. For example the s90d is recommended as a gamer tv but with pcs the gamma flicker is way worse than every other oled I’ve tried, making it a poor choice for any pc gamer despite the high scores and nice panel.
The changes look great. I am a bit disappointed that you are moving away from reviews as a PC monitor. I don’t know if it’s a regional thing, but here in the UK lots of people are moving away from traditional methods of watching tv, and instead simply connecting it to their laptop. I almost exclusively have my tv connected to my laptop using the wireless screen mirroring (extend) function, and sometimes use it to watch content, or sometimes for general computer/work stuff. It would be great if this was reconsidered, especially the wireless screen mirroring functionality!
Love this. I do find it a bit odd that it’s a subject of discussion as opposed to a pinning to the SOTA TV in each category, e.g., “for 2025 we are using the Bravia 9 as a reference on brightness” and, “for 2025 we are using the G5 as a reference on contrast” and rescaling against new SOTA for revisions.
As for processing, my pick would be to pay attention to dithering, which causes artifacts, diagonal lines, and dithering-related flickering that strains the eyes, similar to what happens on new LG OLED panels.
I appreciate your feedback, but there’s no conflict here. I can’t stress this enough: you can’t compare the scores between TVs on 1.11 and ones on 2.0, they’re simply not even remotely comparable. The text, on the other hand, is still valid. Regardless of what’s changed in our scoring and tests, if we say that TV X is better than TV Y, then that is still the case after this update.
This looks to be because the Bravia 8 is still shown as tested to method v1.11 I hope that they are able to go as far back as 2022 TVs to be updated to v2.0. A similar thing is happening between TVs such as the LG B3 v B4, C3 v C4, and G3 v G4. It’s the nature of changing test methods
I use my Hisense U8G as a PC monitor. It’s a really nice thing to have since I’ll continue to use future TVs like this.
Thanks for the suggestion. It won’t look like that but we are looking into expanding our EOTF tests in our next update, 2.1. The exact scope is still TBD, though.
With your next test bench setup you seriously need to include your vrr-induced gamma flicker test. Gsync and freesync is extremely important to gamers and to know if the tv is going to flash uncontrollably is pretty darn important. You already test it for pc monitors. For example the s90d is recommended as a gamer tv but with pcs the gamma flicker is way worse than every other oled I’ve tried, making it a poor choice for any pc gamer despite the high scores and nice panel.
The changes look great. I am a bit disappointed that you are moving away from reviews as a PC monitor. I don’t know if it’s a regional thing, but here in the UK lots of people are moving away from traditional methods of watching tv, and instead simply connecting it to their laptop. I almost exclusively have my tv connected to my laptop using the wireless screen mirroring (extend) function, and sometimes use it to watch content, or sometimes for general computer/work stuff. It would be great if this was reconsidered, especially the wireless screen mirroring functionality!
Love this. I do find it a bit odd that it’s a subject of discussion as opposed to a pinning to the SOTA TV in each category, e.g., “for 2025 we are using the Bravia 9 as a reference on brightness” and, “for 2025 we are using the G5 as a reference on contrast” and rescaling against new SOTA for revisions.