R&D Snapshot

TV 2.0 Preview

TV 2.0 - Main Changes

TV 2.0 represents a significant change in our TV testing. We've changed nearly every aspect of our TV reviews in some way, from test coverage to the individual objective scoring splines. This is just a sample of the changes coming; stay tuned for a full changelog when we publish TV 2.0 in a few weeks. What you see here is also a work in progress, so some things could change between now and publication. It's also just a preview of some of the changes. We've changed much more than what's mentioned here, but these are the main changes.

Structure

One of the first things you'll notice when you open a review on TV 2.0 is that we've completely changed the structure. Some of our old sections, like Picture Quality, were getting very, very long and were filled with tests that not everyone cared about. To remedy this, we've restructured the reviews to show the most important tests first. Instead of 6 main test categories on TV 1.11, TV 2.0 is now broken down into 12 separate sections. These sections more or less match the usages at the top of the review.

• Brightness
• Black Level
• Color
• Processing
• Game Mode Responsiveness
• Motion Handling
• Reflections
• Panel
• Inputs
• Design
• Smart Features
• Sound Quality

This structure is far from final and will likely change between now and the publication of the final test bench update. Let us know what you think and if you have any suggestions!

SDR Color Volume

Gamut rings are a new way of looking at color volume in SDR by splitting it into rings of increasing lightness, from 0 to 100. This makes it easier to see differences between panel types that weren't very obvious in our previous tests. As you can see above, colors on the LG C4 are noticeably desaturated at high lightness levels. The benefits of the S95D, which doesn't rely on a white subpixel to boost brightness, are immediately apparent.

HDR Calibration

We can't talk about HDR without talking about creative intent, but until now, we've only been able to talk about the range of brightness and colors that a TV could display. Besides our PQ EOTF test, we couldn't really talk about how well a TV tracks creative intent. TV 2.0 takes one small step closer to answering those questions, as we now measure the white balance dE, color dE, and the overall color temperature in HDR10. We do this twice, once with the TV in its most accurate pre-calibration settings and again after calibrating it.

Reflections

Last year's Samsung S95D OLED, with its matte coating and QD-OLED panel, exposed some limitations in our reflections handling. There are pros and cons to any TV coating, but other than measuring the pure intensity of reflections, we didn't really have any way to quantify how light impacts a TV's picture quality. One of our goals with this test bench was to expand our reflection handling tests to better capture the nuances between these different coatings so you can make an informed decision. We've redone our total and direct reflections tests to make the test easier to run and more representative, but we've also added two new tests.

The Ambient Black Level Raise test measures how much a TV's black levels rise when you're in a bright room. This became more of an issue in recent years with the release of QD-OLED panels. Since these TVs lack a polarizer, they have a noticeable purple tint when used in a bright room, and blacks aren't as deep. This new test lets you quickly see how the panel technology impacts contrast when watching TV in a bright room.

The Ambient Color Saturation test is very similar to the black level raise test mentioned above. Instead of looking at black levels, though, it looks at a TV's perceived color volume as a function of ambient lighting. This shows you how bright and vibrant colors will be in a bright room. Unlike the black level raise test, which shows the change in black levels relative to a dark room, the color saturation test shows the absolute values in both dark and bright rooms.

Samsung S95D
LG C4

Taking the above examples of the LG C4 and the Samsung S95D, you can immediately see the benefits of each model. The C4 retains its black levels better in a bright room, so it maintains more of those deep, inky blacks OLEDs are known for. On the other hand, the S95D maintains bright colors better, so if you prefer bright, saturated colors and usually watch TV in a bright room, you can immediately see why the S95D is a better choice.

Panel Tech

Although we've been collecting this data for years as part of the process needed to calibrate our equipment before each test, by popular demand, we're now including the spectral power distribution charts for all TVs under the Panel Technology section. Although most people shouldn't pay any attention to this, a TV's SPD tells us a lot about how it produces light. More precise peaks on each primary leads to better color separation and (usually) a wider color gamut. We can also see which TVs are using certain technologies like KSF phosphors or quantum dots.

Response Time/CAD

Our response time testing has remained relatively unchanged for the last 7 years. It was fine when people mainly used TVs for watching shows/movies or playing casual games on older consoles, but with the rise of high refresh rate TVs, it simply isn't good enough anymore. With more and more people looking to use their TVs as they would a high-end gaming monitor, we needed a better test. The solution to this was fairly easy, and by popular request, we ported a portion of the response time and cumulative absolute deviation tests we developed for Monitor 2.0.

With this update, we've updated our response time test to use the new pursuit photo. This updated photo makes it easier to spot things like overshoot as specific color response times compared to our old photo. Like our previous test, we still run the response time test in the most accurate settings, and it's intended to show how motion is handled when watching movies, shows, or sports.

We've also added three new tests. Instead of measuring the response time itself, these tests measure the cumulative absolute deviation, or in other words, the total area shaded in yellow on the charts above. This new way of measuring transitions takes into account how severe overshoot is, so if you have two TVs that take the same amount of time to transition between two shades, but one overshoots the target before falling back, it'll score worse in this test. Unlike the response time test, the CAD tests are done in Game Mode, at 60Hz, 120Hz, and the max refresh rate of the TV.

Input Lag & Supported Resolutions

On TV 2.0, we decided to simplify the input lag test to remove formats that don't matter as much anymore, like 1440p. TVs were never designed for 1440p inputs, and with the rise of HDMI 2.1, PC gamers looking to render their games at 1440p to achieve a higher framerate can simply have their graphics card upscale the image to 4k anyway, so it doesn't matter. This change isn't just on input lag, as we've also removed tests for 1440p in the VRR and Supported Resolutions sections of the review.

Beyond the test coverage itself, we've also made significant changes to our input lag scoring. Our scoring curve hasn't changed much in the last few years, but TVs have gotten a lot better. If input lag is important to you, it's difficult to make a buying decision when the best and worst TVs all score almost the same.

We also adjusted the 144Hz input lag measurements to instead measure the input at the maximum refresh rate a TV supports for both 1080p and 4k. With more and more TVs supporting 165Hz and even higher refresh rates, this ensures we're showing you the best input lag a given TV can provide.

Scoring Changes

Our usage scores have also been completely revamped. We've removed a few outdated usages and simplified others. We've also added new Performance Usages to TV reviews. These usage scores look at specific aspects of a TV's performance, so if you care about Brightness, for example, you just have to look at the Brightness score to understand how well the TV performs in that aspect. We're also much harsher on some of our scoring, ensuring that the scores accurately represent how a TV really performs and making it easier to choose one TV over another.

The mixed usage score, for example, has shifted significantly, with an average decrease of 0.7. Low-end TVs that nobody should buy are now scoring deep in the red, making it clear to anyone, whether you're a hobbyist or not, that you should avoid them.

Release Plan

Over the next few weeks, we'll wrap up the initial phase of our TV 2.0 launch plan, which includes retesting and rewriting 22 TV reviews from the last year or so. We're aiming to publish those reviews and the new methodology in a few weeks, on or around March 26th. We'll have another batch of 10 TVs updated shortly after launch, and we've already started testing the first 2025 models on 2.0, including the Amazon Fire TV Omni Mini-LED Series and the TCL QM6K. Going forward, we'll test all new TV reviews directly on the 2.0 test bench.

In addition to the updated reviews, we've been hard at work updating dozens of test articles, so full details of how we execute most of the new and updated tests will be available at launch.

Conclusion

TV 2.0 is the culmination of thousands of hours of research and development, and it wouldn't have been possible without the thousands of comments we've received. So, what do you think of the changes we've announced so far? This is just the start, as we have other changes planned over the course of the year and into next year. If you think we've missed something, let us know in the forums!