While not as expensive as their OLED counterparts, QLED TVs from most premium brands such as Samsung command a hefty premium over their LED offerings. But as technology has become more commoditized, the market has become flooded with more affordable alternatives from brands like TCL, Mi, and many others, offering the QLED experience almost at the cost of regular LED televisions. This raises a natural question: can these budget-friendly QLEDs truly compete with the premium offerings from industry giants like Samsung and LG?

Once you start using these more affordable QLEDs, that can start for as low as $300 (Rs 25,000) it becomes apparent that not all QLEDs are created equal. Brands such as TCL and Mi, though boasting QLED technology, often fall short of delivering on the promises associated with the acronym. Color reproduction issues, subpar black levels, and uniformity problems like bleeding become a part of the viewing experience. You will find the colors to be often washed and not as popping as you’d see on a more expensive QLED. These TVs often have poor contrast ratios as well, where true blacks are rarely achieved due to diminished dynamic range.

Uniformity, or the consistency of color and brightness across the entire display, is another area where budget QLEDs tend to falter. Bleeding issues, where light spills into adjacent areas of the screen, can be a common problem. This not only distracts from the viewing experience but also diminishes the perceived quality of the display.

But why is there such a huge difference between cheaper and more expensive QLEDs when the difference isn’t that great in OLEDs? There is no one answer. Usually, cheaper QLEDs come with edge-lit dimming compared to full array lighting on the more expensive models. Edge-lit QLEDs even from premium brands like Samsung (case in point, the Frame) are known to have uniformity issues, leading to light bleeding and a reduction in contrast levels. Also, the recent premium QLED  come with technologies like mini-LED, which ensures several hundred local dimming zones, thus, better contrast. The panel quality is also better on more premiemly priced televisions which results in better viewing angles.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that all QLEDs that aren’t Sony, Samsung, or LG are bad. A quick look at Rtings.com for QLEDs from TCL, HiSense, and other more affordable brands show that some of the more high-end offerings from these brands do score well. Conversely, not everything that Samsung or LG touches is gold either. I’ve had my Samsung Frame and the dirty screen effect on the TV makes me want to throw it in the trash bin.

What to do as a buyer?

For those considering a QLED TV, it is advisable to approach the decision with caution. Raising the budget to invest in a reputable brand like Samsung, LG, or even exploring more premium options such as OnePlus can significantly enhance the overall viewing experience. We don’t mean to say brands like TCL cannot offer compelling TVs. But we don’t think a lot of people would be willing to invest Rs 80,000 on a TCL. While cost may be a determining factor, the long-term satisfaction derived from a higher-quality QLED is likely to outweigh the initial savings offered by cheaper alternatives.

Conclusion

In the quest for the perfect television, it is crucial to recognize the distinctions within QLED technology. Cheaper QLEDs may fall short of delivering the promised visual prowess, leading to disappointment for unsuspecting consumers. While the allure of affordability may be tempting, investing in a trusted brand ensures a superior viewing experience that truly captures the essence of QLED technology. As the market continues to evolve, discerning consumers must be vigilant in distinguishing between the genuine QLED experience and the diluted imitations that threaten to diminish the technology’s reputation

The post Are affordable QLED TVs a match for LG and Samsung? appeared first on Gizmopolitan.

The whole point of this post is to share how I find OLED to be way superior even if that means settling for a TV with a smaller size. We will dissect the fundamental aspects that elevate OLED to the throne as the superior choice. We’ll scrutinize its remarkable black levels, exceptional HDR content performance, and unparalleled contrast abilities. While QLED does have its merits, we will uncover why OLED remains the gold standard for those who demand the finest viewing experiences.

True Blacks and Contrast Performance

To truly grasp the supremacy of OLED in the OLED vs. QLED showdown, it’s imperative to understand the inner workings of these technologies. At the heart of OLED’s brilliance lies its unique ability to achieve true black levels. This is accomplished by having each pixel emit its light, allowing for the complete extinguishing of individual pixels when necessary. On the flip side, QLED relies on LED backlighting, which lacks the granularity required to turn off specific pixels.

The significance of OLED’s capacity becomes evident when immersing yourself in low-light or dark scenes. OLED TVs excel in rendering shadows with precision, offering a depth and richness that QLED TVs struggle to replicate. In such scenarios, OLED’s pixel-level control stands out as its defining advantage and is able to deliver an immersive and lifelike viewing experience. This advantage is further magnified when consuming high-contrast scenes, where OLED’s ability to deactivate pixels on a per-pixel basis results in an unparalleled feast for the eyes.

HDR Content

High Dynamic Range (HDR) content promises a broader spectrum of colors and heightened brightness.  There are different standards like the HDR10 and the Dolby Vision. While QLED TVs do an admirable job of presenting vibrant and colorful HDR content, OLED takes it a step further. Thanks to its pixel-level control, OLED achieves brighter highlights and deeper shadows simultaneously, contributing to a more authentic and engrossing HDR experience. Imagine a scene like a moon in a black starry sky. The QLED will suffer with blooming, but the OLED will produce it nearly perfectly.

When basking in the glory of HDR content on an OLED TV such as the LG CX, one can’t help but notice the nuanced details in both the brightest and darkest corners of the screen. This enhances the authenticity of the content and underscores why OLED is the go-to choice if you are finicky about the picture quality.

QLED Lighting Technologies

Leading manufacturers like Samsung have invested substantially in improving the performance of QLED TVs through innovative lighting technologies. These advancements include edge lighting, full array lighting with local dimming, and the more recent Neo QLED technology. While these strides have undoubtedly enhanced the performance of QLED TVs, especially in well-lit rooms, they grapple with inherent challenges when it comes to delivering profound blacks and impeccable contrast.

For instance, edge-lit QLED TVs have been known to contend with uniformity issues, leading to light bleeding and a reduction in contrast levels. While full array lighting with local dimming mitigates some of these issues, it still falls short of OLED’s precision in controlling individual pixels.

Cost and Burn-In Considerations

An imperative factor in the OLED vs. QLED deliberation is cost. OLED TVs, particularly those in larger sizes, tend to carry a heftier price tag than their QLED counterparts. This cost differential often prompts consumers to scrutinize whether OLED’s enhanced picture quality justifies the steeper investment.

Additionally, it’s worth acknowledging that OLED TVs are susceptible to a phenomenon known as burn-in. This occurs when static images or logos are displayed for extended periods, potentially resulting in a lasting imprint on the screen and affecting long-term image quality. However, it’s crucial to note that recent OLED models have implemented preventive measures to minimize this risk, making it less of a concern for most users.

Size Matters: OLED for Smaller Screens

While OLED’s superiority in picture quality is undeniable, screen size plays a pivotal role in the decision-making process. OLED TVs tend to become considerably more expensive as screen sizes exceed the 65-inch mark. This pricing discrepancy underscores the significance of size when choosing between OLED and QLED. If you’re seeking a television under 65 inches, OLED remains an attractive choice, even if it entails a slight premium. However, for those in pursuit of massive screens, QLED might offer a more cost-effective solution.

Conclusion

In the ongoing contest between OLED and QLED technologies, OLED stands as the unequivocal champion for those who demand the zenith of picture quality. While QLED TVs possess their strengths, they simply cannot measure up to OLED’s depth, richness, and contrast performance. Whether you’re reveling in movies in a dimly lit room or immersing yourself in vibrant HDR content, OLED stands as the undisputed choice for a truly exceptional viewing experience. If you find yourself in the market for a new TV and prioritize picture quality above all else, the investment in an OLED TV is one that you won’t regret.

Having tried multiple QLED TVs, be it with full array lighting or edge lighting, the quality has always fallen short for me when compared to my rather old OLED. I even tried the newer Neo QLED at retail shops and felt that they were held back for the same reasons despite being comparable in price to OLED screens. In my experience, the difference in quality becomes even more noticeable in dark settings where the blacks on QLED don’t appear as dark as they do in the day. I’d say, if you usually watch TV during the day, or in a bright room, a QLED might be a more cost-effective proposition for you.

OLED’s capacity to generate true blacks, deliver outstanding HDR performance, and provide unrivaled contrast renders it the ultimate choice for home entertainment enthusiasts. While cost and the potential for burn-in are factors to weigh, OLED’s merits shine through, especially for screens under 65 inches in size. Ultimately, your choice between OLED and QLED should be informed by your unique requirements, viewing environment, and budget. OLED’s exceptional picture quality transforms it into an investment that elevates your entire television-watching experience, underscoring the fact that in the realm of television technology, not all screens are created equal.

The post After trying multiple QLED TVs, I can’t recommend them over OLEDs appeared first on Gizmopolitan.

I saw it on my relative’s wall and thought it was a great deal compared to my LG CX that I got a couple of years ago. I have to say, I watched it during the day and it looked awesome. The colors were good, and the blacks were really black. Plus, the way it was perfectly flush with the wall got me excited. But my excitement turned into disappointment when I got the same TV at home and tried to watch a movie at night with the lights off.

So, what happened? Let the pictures below explain.

Looking at these photos, you’ll see the screen shouldn’t look like that. It’s not because the screen is dirty or because I live in a dusty place. And in case you haven’t seen a TV before, trust me, this is not how a good TV should look when it’s showing something dark.

If you compare the same scene on another type of TV called OLED in a similar situation, the problem doesn’t exist. Even my old cheap LED TV, which is 5 years old, doesn’t have this issue like my new Frame TV.

It took me a while to figure out what was going on. It’s called the “Dirty Screen Effect” or what Samsung calls the Mura effect. It’s because of how the light shines through the screen. Sometimes, parts of the screen are a little brighter or darker than they should be, even when they’re supposed to show the same color. This is most noticeable when the camera moves across a smooth background like a field or the sky. These uneven patches can be distracting and make the picture less smooth. Surprisingly, the issue is only visible during the night when the ambient light is minimal. In the daytime, it’s barely noticeable and the TV looks as good as an OLED.

This Dirty Screen Effect happens to different kinds of LED panels, whether it’s a regular LED, a QLED, or even a Neo QLED. That’s because they all use similar technology. The main reason for this effect is how the panels are made and the limits of the technology. Some pixels shine brighter than others, causing this problem, even on expensive TVs.

The bad thing is that not all TVs have this problem to the same degree. You might be lucky and get a TV with less of this issue. Or you might get a TV where this effect is really bad. And the worst part is, the warranty usually doesn’t cover it. So, if you can’t easily return the TV, you’re stuck with a TV that doesn’t look great even though you paid a lot for it.

But that’s not all the bad news. This Dirty Screen Effect can’t usually be fixed. Changing some settings or using software won’t make it go away completely. You might be able to make it a little less noticeable by adjusting the brightness, but it won’t completely disappear.

I’m frustrated with Samsung because the Frame TV, in particular, seems to have this problem. I found this out from reading posts on Reddit’s r/SamsungFrameTV community where many others are complaining about the same thing. I’ve tried to get Samsung to fix the TV, but they say it’s not a problem.

Luckily, it’s not very obvious during the day, so that’s a bit of a relief. But if I had the choice, I’d pick a different TV without a second thought.

Not reading about this issue beforehand led me to a bunch of Frame TV reviews. That’s when I realized that this TV isn’t great for picture quality even aside from this problem. Let’s talk about QLEDs and how to choose a good one if you’re considering it (especially because big OLED TVs are really expensive). Here are some tips:

How to pick a QLED TV

Know the different Kinds of Backlighting: Edge Lighting vs. Array Lighting

When LED TVs light up, they do it in two main ways: edge lighting and array lighting. These methods decide how the light behind the screen works, which affects how bright and colorful the picture looks.

Edge Lighting:

Imagine the TV screen is like a big canvas, and the light behind it is like a light bulb. With edge lighting, the lights are around the edges of the TV. They shine towards the middle. This makes TVs thin and light. But sometimes, the light doesn’t spread evenly, so parts of the screen can be brighter or darker.

Array Lighting (Full Array or Direct Backlighting):

Think of the screen like a grid with lots of little sections, each with its own light. Array lighting puts these lights in a grid behind the screen. They can be controlled separately, so they can be brighter or dimmer depending on what’s on the screen. This helps the TV show better colors and darker blacks. When there’s a mix of bright and dark parts in a scene, array lighting makes sure they look good.
In short, edge lighting has lights around the edges, and array lighting has lots of lights behind the whole screen in a grid. Array lighting is better for making the picture look great, especially with contrast and colors. But remember, array lighting might make the TV a bit thicker than edge lighting.

Local Dimming Zones: Making Things Darker

Imagine your TV has 100 zones behind it that can change the brightness and colors. If a scene has dark edges and a bright center (like the moon in a dark sky), using just 30 out of these 100 zones for the moon can make the dark parts even darker and create a better picture.

Local dimming is usually in TVs with array lighting. More zones usually mean better dark parts and better contrasts. There are some downsides, like the bright parts sometimes leaking into dark parts. But usually, local dimming is a good thing.

Now, there are new mini LED TVs with even more zones, like thousands of them. These are better than regular QLEDs and fix some of the problems. LG’s QNED is an example of this.

Which QLED to Choose: The Simple Version

If all of this is too much, here’s an easy way to think about it: if you can afford it, go for an OLED TV. They have the best picture quality. The blacks are true blacks and better than anything that a QLED or even Neo QLED or QNED produces. The downside is that OLEDs are the most expensive of the lot.

If OLED is too expensive (especially for bigger size TVs), then go for a mini LED QLED or a full array QLED with lots of zones. Only pick an edge-lit QLED if looks are the most important thing and you want a really thin TV, even if the picture quality isn’t perfect.

I hope this helps you choose a good TV next time you’re looking for one.

The post Getting a Samsung Frame taught me how to not buy a QLED TV. Dirty Screen Effect and more appeared first on Gizmopolitan.

I know it is not healthy. After all, these are just gadgets, and they breakdown or age with time. However, as well as I understand this, my OCD trill tries to make sure that even after months, they are as close to the day I unboxed them. In my defense, I get to enjoy them longer and the whole experience of using a thing that’s as good as new is much more fulfilling. While they don’t give off the fragrance of new books, I still find it enjoyable.

In my quest to acquire the best technology, I recently got an OLED TV from LG. This was 2020’s premium model, the LG CX, and I have nothing but praises for the television. The deep contrasts, sharp colors, and terrific picture quality are well worth the price if you ask me. My Netflix experience has gone up by leaps and bounds and I can’t wait to play games on PlayStation 5 on this TV if I ever get my hands on one (that’s for another rant).

But, as great as OLED TVs are, they have an inherent technology flaw. While OLED panels can create perfect blacks and excel in displaying HDR images, they are also susceptible to screen burn in. For those coming across this term for the first time, OLED burn in is an issue where a part of the screen gets a permanent mark or imprint(usually a ghosting effect) left on it due to a static image being displayed in that area for a long time.

There’s a noticeable patch or pattern in that area marked by different brightness and color compared to the rest of the screen. This pattern gets permanently imprinted on the screen and can be a result of either a logo, or an icon, or a user interface design that gets displayed in the same area over and over again, impacting the pixels in that region. It is not noticeable always, but once you do notice it, it’s kind of hard to ignore.

The latest OLED panels come with a bunch of features to mitigate burn in effect, although, there’s no sure shot cure to burn in right now. LG OLED TVs, for example, come with Pixel Refresher which enables all the pixels to wear out evenly. Sony’s OLEDs have a similar feature too. That said, these solutions can mitigate the risks to some extent but can’t solve them completely or make them a nonissue.

I knew all of this well in advance before I purchased my television.  Since I don’t watch a lot of cable TV or use my TV as a monitor so I wasn’t too worried about it. Although, I did consider Samsung’s QLED as an alternative but wanted a better picture quality and decided to go with an OLED panel.

But having used this television for six months now, the whole OLED burn in fear prevents me from being at complete ease of mind or using my TV without a worry. Yes, I know that in all likelihood, my television isn’t going to get a burn in just because I use Netflix a lot or want to use Disney+ which has an annoying white star logo at the bottom right corner of the screen (c’mon Disney). But it becomes difficult to explain this to my OCD brain and I just avoid keeping the screen turned on when I don’t have to. I’m also terrified of the screensaver that looks like wall paintings due to the same reason and choose to keep the TV turned off instead.

What makes it worse for me is that I have seen burn in first hand on my Samsung S8 OLED dislay where the keyboard and the notification drawer have permanently left an imprint on the screen in under three years of use. Technology might have improved in this time, but I definitely plan to keep my television for over three years and would like to have the display be as pristine as possible.

This unhealthy obsession with saving my display from issues that may not even crop up has led me to conclude that I probably would have been better off with a QLED display instead. Yes, the picture quality isn’t as great, but it’s almost there. It also comes with the peace of not having to worry about leaving the TV turned on for a while or being on a static page for too long. I definitely would have been able to have more fun with my TV and the lack of true blacks would have been more than overcompensated for in the mental peace.

That said, I’m not saying you should not go for OLED screens (in fact, some of the best premium TVs you will find will be OLED TVs) or that they are doomed to suffer sooner or later. On the contrary, these are the best screens out in the market right now. But if you have this weird obsession like me and can relate to my dilemma, I highly encourage you to go with a QLED panel instead. In most cases, you wouldn’t even notice the difference and you can abuse that screen as much as you like.

The post An OLED TV isn’t that great if you’re a person who’s always worried about your gadgets (read, has OCD) appeared first on Gizmopolitan.

But times have changed rather swiftly. The technology keeps on improving while the price of televisions (even large screens) has become much more competitive. These recent advances have resulted in televisions closing in on the gap with projectors with their popping colors, HDR capabilities, and minimal response time.

Although, it is not like projectors have not improved at the same time. We’re seeing affordable 4K projectors under $2,000 with HDR10 support, improved brightness, and improved optics overall.

With advancements on both sides, it really becomes difficult for a prospective buyer to pick a side. Consumers rarely have a favorite (except, when they do) and tend to pick whatever is more accessible or convenient.  We know it isn’t easy. To simplify things though, we’ve looked at the best televisions and projectors under $3,000 or INR 3 lakhs, for those of you in India, and compared the best models across both camps to settle this feud once and for all.

SCREEN SIZE

This one is easy. While you can find high-end televisions as large as 65 inches under $3,000, a projector can beam on a wall that is 100 inches across diagonally, or even 150 inches if you’ve got that kind of space. Granted the projector needs to have adequate brightness and contrast to deliver content on such a huge screen, but with the kind of budget we’re talking about, it is fairly in the realm of possible. That difference is really day and night and if the size is a deal-breaker for you, we can recommend you stop reading this post here and get yourself a 4K projector.

Winner: Projector

INITIAL SETUP

Televisions are easy. Put them in front of a wall, plug the right cables, and that’s it. Just sit back and enjoy whatever you are planning to consume on your big screen.

Projectors, on the other hand, are a different beast. Got a great projector? Awesome. Did you also get a good quality screen to reflect the light? Did you position it at the right angle to the screen to ensure the image doesn’t look distorted? You also need to ensure that there’s no natural light in the room and the entire setup is in as dark a setting as possible for the best experience.

Winner: Televisions by a big margin

RESOLUTION

Both projectors and OLED televisions in this range offer up to 4K resolution. However, there’s a catch.

While OLED TVs can display in true 4K (3840x2160p) at 60Hz, when it comes to projectors, they use a technique called “pixel shifting.” The projector beams each pixel 4 times with each projection being slightly shifted open to the right from the previous one by half of the pixel, creating overlaps. Using algorithms and clever use of technology, the projector is able to beam 4K pixels in the same time as a native 4K projector would, thus creating 4K Image on the screen.

Also called faux-4K, it is slightly different from native 4K. While the drop in quality is minuscule (or negligible as some claim), the price savings are substantial. Native 4K projectors usually start from $5,000 while a faux-4K one can be had for as low as $1,500.

Winner: Largely a draw. Maybe televisions by a small margin

BRIGHTNESS AND CONTRAST

It is difficult to compare the brightness across televisions and projectors directly since they are measured in different units (nits vs. lumens). Still,  we can safely say that televisions do a far better job at producing bright images on the screen. Part of the reason is that projectors, even when bright need to reflect the light off of a surface which, naturally, not being 100% reflective creates some brightness loss.

And when viewing on a projector in a room that’s not completely dark, the image seems to be a little washed out.

Moving on to contrast, both projectors and OLED TVs can reproduce HDR10 content, which is as good as the current technology gets. However, contrast also depends on the peak brightness, which is something projectors struggle with, especially in lit environments. Televisions emerge as the clear winners here.

Winner: Televisions

COLORS

This is a really close one. Generally speaking, projectors in this budget have a wide color range and can accurately reproduce colors across Rec.2020 color space and the DCI-P3 color space. TVs come close but still fall short marginally.

However, a key factor to consider here is the brightness and ambient settings. Projectors tend to do better only if you use them in a dark room and use a good quality reflective screen.

Winner: Projectors, but televisions are quite close

Gaming: INPUT LAG and refresh rate

These are metrics that might not impact casual viewers, but for gamers, it can mean the difference between life and death (in-game, of course).

Input lag measures the time it takes for an input made by the user to reflect on the screen. Anything below 40ms is acceptable and below 20ms the law of diminishing returns kicks in.  Best projectors in this budget can offer input lag of anywhere between 20-30ms, which is great, honestly. The best TVs, however, can take it further down to 10ms.

As far as the refresh rate goes, projectors under $3k top out at 60Hz at 4K, while OLED TVs can push it up to 120Hz at the same resolution.

Although, most TVs don’t support variable refresh rate, while we aren’t aware of any projector that supports it either.

Winner: Televisions for the refresh rate, tie for the input lag

AUDIO

We don’t expect you would be using the inbuilt speakers on the television or the projector if you’re willing to spend the kind of budget on a home theater setup. But in case you do, televisions win this round easily for their much better audio features.

Projectors have seen improvement in this area in recent years but compare poorly against televisions. Then, there is the whole issue around fan noise which gets more pronounced at higher resolutions due to increased workload.

Winner: Televisions, easily

MAINTENANCE

Televisions have a long lifespan and can last you more than half a decade without any serious trouble. We’ve rarely heard panel issues cropping up on the equipment in their early years.

Projectors tend to use lamps instead which eventually burn out after a few years of moderate use and can cost anywhere between $150-300 to replace.

Winner: Televisions

VERDICT

To be honest, the final decision is easy to make. If you must have a large screen (70″ plus), there’s no option available within the OLED TV range and you can pick a projector instead. If you still need a television instead, your other choice would be restricted to a QLED television from the likes of Samsung which can go as big as 85 inches in this budget. QLED is not as great as OLED, but really comes close.

If the size is not a concern, OLED televisions are ahead on most parameters and it just makes sense to go with television instead of a projector. Modern televisions have made great strides in terms of features and picture quality while being competitively priced.

It’s not just the viewing experience but also the ease of installation and maintenance-free experience that makes OLED TVs the preferred choice. Having said that, projectors can also offer stunning cinematic viewing experience and also offer some additional features such as 3D which TVs cannot. But all said and done, we would prefer to just get a TV instead.

The post Home theater under $3,000 (INR 3 lakhs). OLED TV or a 4K projector? appeared first on Gizmopolitan.

WHAT IS THE HYPE AROUND 8K ANYWAY?

Technology is always improving and while sometimes the results are more evolutionary instead of revolutionary, they make a tiny difference, nonetheless. 8K, or 7680 × 4320 pixels, offers four times the pixels in the same area compared to the current mainstream 4K standard. It’s all about pixel density on the screen and 8K hits the ball out of the park. You shouldn’t start comparing pixel density on your television to what you’ve seen on your smartphone displays though. Unlike a phone, television is viewed from a distance of at least a few feet, making things like Retina density (300 ppi) absurd. It is still good to have more pixels crammed in your display of course, even though you might not be able to call out the difference without considerable effort.

Further, independent studies also show HDR introduces the potential for images to contain small, intense light peaks which higher-resolution 8K displays do a much better job at.

However, it is all good in theory, but does it really make a difference in real life? Warner Bros did a study (the depths of which can be read here) to compare how 8K improved viewing experience over 4K. The final results of the study were somewhere on the lines of 8K being only marginally better than 4K in terms of perceived detail—and only with good visual acuity at a relatively close distance from the screen.

8K TV? WHERE IS ALL THE 8K CONTENT THOUGH?

Unfortunately, there’s no mainstream streaming service that pushes its content in 8K in the market currently, and by the looks of it, it doesn’t appear anything of that kind is even being planned for the near future. Even Hollywood, at best, is working with 6K cameras at the moment. Given the investment it would take on part of content creators as well as the bandwidth requirement to make this content reach your living room, it seems like we might have to do with upscaled 4K content.

That said, it is not like nobody has hopped on the 8K bandwagon. Last we heard, some Japanese broadcasters were experimenting with 8K content broadcasting. The experiments probably went well, because NHK, which is a Japanese broadcaster, is now offering an 8K native channel NHK BS8K. In fact, they were planning to broadcast some content from the Olympics 2020 live in 8K before the world discovered we have a deadly virus amongst us and the whole sporting event was postponed for a year.

However, even if you’re not in the region, it’s safe to assume that in the next two-three years, we should start seeing more 8K content out in the market along with enhanced audio (Dolby 7.1 isn’t the pinnacle of sound technology. Last we heard, it goes all the way up to Dolby 22.2) . It might not become as widespread as the current 4K standard, but we expect two major factors to make 8K content go mainstream and increase public acceptance.

NETFLIX AND 8K?

Netflix has played a big role in pushing content creators to shoot native 4K and that has helped in getting the industry up to speed in big ways. But then there’s Amazon Prime, HBO, Apple TV, and whatnot. We expect some of these companies to fight it out amongst each other by offering true 8K as a differentiator. From a business standpoint, this will allow them to target high-end customers and push for new premium-tier plans.

Realistically, it might not happen anytime soon, but as soon as even one of them starts offering 8K content, we’re sure others would follow suit rather quickly.

WHAT ABOUT 8K GAMING ON THE NEXT-GEN CONSOLES?

The upcoming next-gen consoles from Microsoft and Sony are both packed with power to the brim. Both the Xbox Series X and the Sony PlayStation 5 are capable of streaming in 8K. And that’s not just media content, we are talking games here too. That should push up the adoption among a substantial number of people. 

Although, gamers hoping to play 8K AAA titles on the next-generation consoles can forget that in the near term, if not for the entire lifecycle of the next-gen consoles. We’re pretty sure, that, while the Xbox Series X and the PlayStation 5 will eventually have games supporting 8K, you can pretty much kiss 60FPS goodbye at those resolutions. Yes, they’re powerful, but 8K 60FPS is another beast altogether. We’re not saying it definitely won’t happen, but it might not happen in the initial few years. Usually, developers take a couple of years before they can extract the maximum potential from consoles.

OKAY, IS THERE MORE DEPRESSING NEWS? YES

We’ve already spoken about content but that’s not the only limitation holding back 8K adoption. The biggest challenge to 8K adoption is not technology-related but something that sits within us all. The human eye can only distinguish so many pixels from each other on certain screen size. 4K was already being called an overkill when it was introduced (well, that usually happens though) but we overcame that challenge by pushing bigger televisions out in the market. However, TVs can only get so much bigger before they can’t fit in your drawing rooms or bedrooms anymore, which makes the whole point of going 8K a little irrelevant. Unless you’re an eagle or you are planning to get an 80 inch or larger TV, you might not see a meaningful difference from the current 4K content. Add the price difference to the equation and it just doesn’t look that appealing anymore.

AND MORE SAD NEWS WITH A RAY OF HOPE

Streaming more pixels also requires more internet juice. With the current technology, you might require at least 100Mbps bitrate to stream 8K content, which is nowhere near the current speeds in a large part of the world. You could argue 5G might help, but the volume of content would be so huge that you would run out of your designated bandwidth on your cellular plan in no time. Imagine the load on the internet infrastructure without significant investments to overhaul the entire system, which again won’t happen overnight.

But all isn’t lost on this front. Only very recently, a new video compression standard was announced which is twice as efficient as the current H.265 codec. That means you can stream the same content while needing half the bandwidth.

As per the official announcement:

“This new standard offers improved compression, which reduces data requirements by around 50% of the bit rate relative to the previous standard H.265/High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) without compromising visual quality. In other words, H.266/VVC offers faster video transmission for equal perceptual quality. Overall, H.266/VVC provides efficient transmission and storage of all video resolutions from SD to HD up to 4K and 8K, while supporting high dynamic range video and omnidirectional 360° video.”

The catch is that the new standard might require more powerful hardware to perform that data crunching. This means the current-gen televisions are incapable of supporting the new media format (unless you use a streaming device like the Firestick or next-gen consoles). Also, such hardware might not be available until the next 12-18 months.

SO SHOULD YOU TAKE THE PLUNGE?

In all honesty, it doesn’t seem like investing in an 8K TV right now will do you much good in the near term. Sure, if you have spare money lying around, we’d say go for it. But it would be much more prudent to invest in a high-end OLED 4K TV that can offer exceptional picture quality. Or, just wait for another year if your current television is up to the job. You might get an 8K set that would probably also support the new H.266 standard by then.

That said, we expect 8K will pick up steam over time and we might see some great content in the coming years. But with the current state of affairs globally (did someone say Coronavirus?), it might have been pushed further into the future than what we were earlier expecting.

It ultimately comes down to your budget and the size of the screen you are looking for. If you need a 55-65 inch display, we’d strongly suggest getting a high-end 4K instead. For anything above 70 inches, it wouldn’t hurt to futureproof your purchase a little. You will find some early options from the likes of Samsung and Sony that should set you up for years.

The post Is it worth investing in an 8K television now that the next-gen consoles support the resolution? appeared first on Gizmopolitan.