The year is 2037. We watch movies and shows with 48k optical implants. The AI owner/operator of Value Electronics assures the AI testers at RTINGS that the QM8K should be delivered soon.
So is this another Deja Vu experience like with the Samsung S95B with initial FW from a few years back? It tracks perfectly at 10% then if you were to test it at 11% or 9% it raises considerably. Basically gaming the system at preset window targets like 5%, 10%, 20%?
For reference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhto9MmiExE
timestamp 1:12 to 3:04
I’m sympathetic to an extent as virtually all buyers won’t care, and not committing creates more flexibility for them in their supply chains. I’m still personally quite sick of the information gaps on this stuff and a vendor communicating promptly, clearly, and effectively could really ingratiate them with the enthusiast community. TCL seems to be doing a lot of direct representative outreach to reviewers so maybe it will be them.
Unfortunately, the RTings review of the U8Q won’t mean anything since they are testing a VA version.
I don’t think we can fully assume the panel types per size until there’s manual confirmation. The spec sheets have been all over the place. B the installer took delivery of a 100U8QG over a week ago and has been asked about the panel type but hasn’t replied or reviewed.
Sadly Best Buy here had them in stock for about 3 days this week and I didn’t pull the trigger due to not knowing how the U8qg 100” would compare and it was never reviewed really by any one.
The 98UX has been in stock for online delivery for at least a month as I’ve been tracking it to a similar or same end: I want a ~100, I want it great, I want it ASAP, and I don’t want to totally throw away money. Ergo 100U8K (N never recently available) vs 98UX vs 100U8QG vs (possibly) QM8K.
The 98UX seemed to be ADS and perform vastly better than the 75U8N (the only ADS in the U8N lineup) according to what reviews exist. That’s part of the reason that I’m willing to entertain that ADS isn’t autodoomed, the other part is that Hisense appears (this is still sus spec sheet stuff) to be expanding its adoption in a near-flagship product line. I doubt they would do that if it’s just relatively terribad outside of viewing angles.
It’s odd how underreviewed the 2024 98UX was/is given that it’s still available. I asked that exact Q in the FOMO U8Q live and he said w/o review that he’s default to the U8Q because of Hisense’s year-over-year software improvements.
Update for anyone interested:
Tech steve has recently posted his initial review and shared the specifications for each size:
Values for 85 and 100 seem odd though.
FOMO had a live YT vid comparing the U8Q and B9 yesterday. It leads off with specs that — of course — differ.
Well, I don’t know how the following information didn’t appear to me before, But directly from the Hisense Iberian website you can find the technical specifications for this year’s different models
This also reports 0 nits, 0 contrast, 0 dimming zones, etc. for the 100" 🙃 Not unspecified, 0.
I do wish we could get a straight answer on the panel types by size. The possibility of the 100" being IPS / ADS Pro rather than VA makes me very nervous.
I’m planning on buying a 98" or 100" TV this year. I’m interested in how the Hisense U8GQ 100" version compared to the TCL 98" 2025 models.
With the 2024 U8N ahead of the 2025 QM7K it will seem to come down to this against TCL’s still-unannounced QM851G successor. https://x.com/High_Def_News/status/1894424368148570542 is an alleged leak of TCL’s roadmap.
“Unfortunately, the QM8’s HDR brightness accuracy is quite poor, while the QM7K’s is great, so it follows the content creator’s intent much more closely.”
This actually scores as 9.4 to 7.4 with a huge advantage QM8.
QM7 review “The Hisense U7N and TCL QM7/QM751G QLED are closely matched, with the TCL having the edge. While the Hisense has far better reflection handling and is the most accurate of the two TVs in SDR and HDR, the TCL is the punchier option due to its deeper black levels, better color volume, and slightly higher peak brightness.”
This page: “The TCL QM7/QM751G QLED is a good alternative to the Hisense U7N. However, the Hisense is slightly better overall, as it has better contrast and accuracy.”
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.
The delta between what YouTubers are saying in side-by-side comparisons and what was captured here is pretty jarring. Everyone seems to fawn all over the G4’s color, but I’m not seeing it in the submetrics.
That’s a very good question, thanks for mentioning it! When we’re reviewing individual products, we’re looking at the overall raw performance of the product. All products are rated the exact same way, regardless of price or market content. So when we say in a review that one is better than the other, we’re talking about the raw performance. In our recommendations, though, we’re providing a curated list, taking price and availability into account as well. So when we rate the S90C as the best product in our recommendations, we’re taking the significant price difference between the S90C and the A95L into account as well. Hope this helps!
That was my inference. Thanks for making it clear. If I may, my suggestion would be to sprinkle in some adjectives like “overall” or “pound for pound” or “for the price” in the best-of lists. Reading the text alone, it wouldn’t even necessarily be clear to me that the A95L is the price-agnostic best from descriptions like, “If you’re looking for the absolute best TV for a home theater setup” because of the nuance that might be deployed on what “home theater” means (e.g., one might take it to exclude general TV watching in favor of dark room Blu-Rays). Really appreciate the site and your prompt response!
It either doesn’t have discrete input codes for the remote, or Harmony isn’t aware of them. Either way, if you’re trying to use a Harmony for activity-based switching it is doing so by pressing INPUT…INPUT…INPUT… a set number of times. And it trips over itself a lot, even with custom timings.
rtings may no longer have the TV to update older test benchmarks with.
I’m not suggesting a retest. I am suggesting that if, say, previous versions are “overrated” by 15% that the numbers should be shifted down 15% to normalize them for cross-comparison.
The C2 is definitely the better overall TV as highlighted by the text in the comparison tool. As for the scores not necessarily supporting that, this is likely related to some of the changes in our most recent test bench updates where some of our scoring fluctuated and may not paint the full picture. The C2 is definitely better though!
I came with the same question. I appreciate this response but don’t find it very satisfying. Should the older tests not be adjusted so that numbers can be compared with numbers?
Jury’s in: Last year’s Tcl 6 series wins hands down for my particular use, and I dare say, a majority approaching the nineties percentile..Movie/HDR Movie viewing and light/moderate..heck, even heavy console gaming!
Looks that way from the numbers too. Why does the review say, “It provides very good overall performance and is an upgrade from its predecessor, the TCL 6 Series/R625 2019” and, “The TCL 6 Series/R635 2020 is a nice improvement over its predecessor, the TCL 6 Series/R625 2019” ?
The year is 2037. We watch movies and shows with 48k optical implants. The AI owner/operator of Value Electronics assures the AI testers at RTINGS that the QM8K should be delivered soon.
Has it at least shipped yet 🥲
Gross.
Can you get them to CONFIRM panel types by size?
Whoa!
Insiders have early data access prior to reviews. Once a review is published, everyone has access. The review for the U8QG has not yet been published.
I’m sympathetic to an extent as virtually all buyers won’t care, and not committing creates more flexibility for them in their supply chains. I’m still personally quite sick of the information gaps on this stuff and a vendor communicating promptly, clearly, and effectively could really ingratiate them with the enthusiast community. TCL seems to be doing a lot of direct representative outreach to reviewers so maybe it will be them.
Example quote from AVS Forum:
“I contacted Hisense USA by email regarding the type of panel of the Hisense 100U8QG.
Hisense customer support replied :
« Based on the reported query please be advised that the 100U8QG has a VA Panel »”
I don’t think we can fully assume the panel types per size until there’s manual confirmation. The spec sheets have been all over the place. B the installer took delivery of a 100U8QG over a week ago and has been asked about the panel type but hasn’t replied or reviewed.
The 98UX has been in stock for online delivery for at least a month as I’ve been tracking it to a similar or same end: I want a ~100, I want it great, I want it ASAP, and I don’t want to totally throw away money. Ergo 100U8K (N never recently available) vs 98UX vs 100U8QG vs (possibly) QM8K.
The 98UX seemed to be ADS and perform vastly better than the 75U8N (the only ADS in the U8N lineup) according to what reviews exist. That’s part of the reason that I’m willing to entertain that ADS isn’t autodoomed, the other part is that Hisense appears (this is still sus spec sheet stuff) to be expanding its adoption in a near-flagship product line. I doubt they would do that if it’s just relatively terribad outside of viewing angles.
It’s odd how underreviewed the 2024 98UX was/is given that it’s still available. I asked that exact Q in the FOMO U8Q live and he said w/o review that he’s default to the U8Q because of Hisense’s year-over-year software improvements.
FOMO had a live YT vid comparing the U8Q and B9 yesterday. It leads off with specs that — of course — differ.
This also reports 0 nits, 0 contrast, 0 dimming zones, etc. for the 100" 🙃 Not unspecified, 0.
I do wish we could get a straight answer on the panel types by size. The possibility of the 100" being IPS / ADS Pro rather than VA makes me very nervous.
With the 2024 U8N ahead of the 2025 QM7K it will seem to come down to this against TCL’s still-unannounced QM851G successor. https://x.com/High_Def_News/status/1894424368148570542 is an alleged leak of TCL’s roadmap.
I want something around 100", the U8N is sold out, so I’m looking to see if this can be justified over the still-available U8K.
“Unfortunately, the QM8’s HDR brightness accuracy is quite poor, while the QM7K’s is great, so it follows the content creator’s intent much more closely.”
This actually scores as 9.4 to 7.4 with a huge advantage QM8.
QM7 review “The Hisense U7N and TCL QM7/QM751G QLED are closely matched, with the TCL having the edge. While the Hisense has far better reflection handling and is the most accurate of the two TVs in SDR and HDR, the TCL is the punchier option due to its deeper black levels, better color volume, and slightly higher peak brightness.”
This page: “The TCL QM7/QM751G QLED is a good alternative to the Hisense U7N. However, the Hisense is slightly better overall, as it has better contrast and accuracy.”
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.
Sample message. User has no access to this comment.No access.
This discussion is for insiders only.
Become an InsiderVery interested. It’s probably 85 Bravia 9 vs 83 G4 vs 98 QM851 for me.
Insider only comment.Sample message. User has no access to this comment.User does not have permissions.
No access.
This discussion is for insiders only.
Become an InsiderIs the even-brighter G4 replacing the G3 as a notable mention?
The delta between what YouTubers are saying in side-by-side comparisons and what was captured here is pretty jarring. Everyone seems to fawn all over the G4’s color, but I’m not seeing it in the submetrics.
That was my inference. Thanks for making it clear. If I may, my suggestion would be to sprinkle in some adjectives like “overall” or “pound for pound” or “for the price” in the best-of lists. Reading the text alone, it wouldn’t even necessarily be clear to me that the A95L is the price-agnostic best from descriptions like, “If you’re looking for the absolute best TV for a home theater setup” because of the nuance that might be deployed on what “home theater” means (e.g., one might take it to exclude general TV watching in favor of dark room Blu-Rays). Really appreciate the site and your prompt response!
Best TVs (Apr 2024): “The best television we’ve tested is the Samsung S90C OLED.”
Review of the S90C itself: “The Sony A95L OLED is a bit better than the Samsung S90C OLED.”
Table tool (Apr 2024): A95L leads Mixed Usage, TV Shows, Sports, and HDR Movies.
And both the S90C and A95L are using the same test methodology, v1.11. How do I reconcile this?
It either doesn’t have discrete input codes for the remote, or Harmony isn’t aware of them. Either way, if you’re trying to use a Harmony for activity-based switching it is doing so by pressing INPUT…INPUT…INPUT… a set number of times. And it trips over itself a lot, even with custom timings.
I’m not suggesting a retest. I am suggesting that if, say, previous versions are “overrated” by 15% that the numbers should be shifted down 15% to normalize them for cross-comparison.
Thanks for the detail!
I came with the same question. I appreciate this response but don’t find it very satisfying. Should the older tests not be adjusted so that numbers can be compared with numbers?
Looks that way from the numbers too. Why does the review say, “It provides very good overall performance and is an upgrade from its predecessor, the TCL 6 Series/R625 2019” and, “The TCL 6 Series/R635 2020 is a nice improvement over its predecessor, the TCL 6 Series/R625 2019” ?