Notice: Your browser is not supported or outdated so some features of the site might not be available.
Products
Samsung S90D OLED
Samsung S85D OLED
Tested using Methodology v2.0.1
Updated Aug 26, 2025 12:48 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon.comTested using Methodology v2.0.1
Updated Aug 26, 2025 12:52 PM
SEE PRICE
Amazon.com
Resolution4k
Native Refresh Rate144Hz
TypeOLED
Sub-TypeQD-OLED
Dolby VisionNo
Screen FinishGlossy
Resolution4k
Native Refresh Rate120Hz
TypeOLED
Sub-TypeWOLED
Dolby VisionNo
Screen FinishGlossy
Our Verdict
Samsung S90D OLED
Samsung S85D OLED
The QD-OLED version of the Samsung S90D OLED is better than the Samsung S85D OLED. The S90D is a lot brighter in HDR, and it maintains its brightness much better while using Game Mode. The S90D also supports up to 4k @ 144Hz for PC gamers with high-end graphics cards. The biggest advantage of the S90D is its ability to display more vibrant and lifelike colors with almost no banding due to its QD-OLED panel. The S90D is also the more accurate TV in SDR and HDR without calibration.
Variants
- QN42S90DAEXZA (42" (WOLED))
- QN48S90DAEXZA (48" (WOLED))
- QN55S90DAFXZA (55" (QD-OLED))
- QN65S90DAFXZA (65" (QD-OLED))
- QN77S90DAFXZA (77" (QD-OLED))
- QN83S90DAEXZA (83" (WOLED))
- QN55S85DAEXZA (55")
- QN65S85DAEXZA (65")
- QN77S85DAEXZA (77")
- QN83S85DAEXZA (83")
Check Price
42" (WOLED)
QN42S90DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store42" (WOLED)
48" (WOLED)
QN48S90DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store48" (WOLED)
55"
55"
QN55S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store55" (QD-OLED)
QN55S90DAFXZA
Searching
Finding store55" (QD-OLED)
65"
65"
QN65S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store65" (QD-OLED)
QN65S90DAFXZA
Searching
Finding store65" (QD-OLED)
77"
77"
QN77S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store77" (QD-OLED)
QN77S90DAFXZA
Searching
Finding store77" (QD-OLED)
83"
83"
QN83S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store83" (WOLED)
QN83S90DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store83" (WOLED)
Main Differences forMixed Usage
Mixed Usage
Threshold
Mixed Usage
8.5
7.8
HDR Brightness
8.3
6.3
Full Comparison
Brightness
HDR Brightness
8.3
6.3
HDR Hallway Photo
HDR Cityscape Photo
HDR Landscape Photo
Hallway Lights (~1950 cd/m²)
1,045 cd/m²
620 cd/m²
Yellow Skyscraper (~700 cd/m²)
755 cd/m²
359 cd/m²
Landscape Pool (~300 cd/m²)
319 cd/m²
226 cd/m²
Peak 2% Window
1,199 cd/m²
643 cd/m²
Peak 10% Window
1,193 cd/m²
643 cd/m²
Peak 25% Window
640 cd/m²
472 cd/m²
Peak 50% Window
334 cd/m²
257 cd/m²
Peak 100% Window
214 cd/m²
144 cd/m²
Sustained 2% Window
1,192 cd/m²
631 cd/m²
Sustained 10% Window
948 cd/m²
627 cd/m²
Sustained 25% Window
614 cd/m²
467 cd/m²
Sustained 50% Window
329 cd/m²
256 cd/m²
Sustained 100% Window
211 cd/m²
142 cd/m²
Automatic Brightness Limiting (ABL)
0.101
0.095
HDR Brightness In Game Mode
8.2
5.7
HDR Hallway Photo
HDR Cityscape Photo
HDR Landscape Photo
Hallway Lights (~1950 cd/m²)
973 cd/m²
463 cd/m²
Yellow Skyscraper (~700 cd/m²)
822 cd/m²
392 cd/m²
Landscape Pool (~300 cd/m²)
392 cd/m²
162 cd/m²
Peak 2% Window
1,193 cd/m²
581 cd/m²
Peak 10% Window
1,190 cd/m²
595 cd/m²
Peak 25% Window
641 cd/m²
442 cd/m²
Peak 50% Window
335 cd/m²
263 cd/m²
Peak 100% Window
216 cd/m²
139 cd/m²
Sustained 2% Window
1,187 cd/m²
569 cd/m²
Sustained 10% Window
795 cd/m²
582 cd/m²
Sustained 25% Window
584 cd/m²
437 cd/m²
Sustained 50% Window
330 cd/m²
262 cd/m²
Sustained 100% Window
213 cd/m²
138 cd/m²
Automatic Brightness Limiting (ABL)
0.097
0.091
SDR Brightness
6.5
6.4
Real Scene Peak Brightness
381 cd/m²
402 cd/m²
Peak 2% Window
496 cd/m²
425 cd/m²
Peak 10% Window
493 cd/m²
434 cd/m²
Peak 25% Window
497 cd/m²
431 cd/m²
Peak 50% Window
316 cd/m²
338 cd/m²
Peak 100% Window
209 cd/m²
180 cd/m²
Sustained 2% Window
487 cd/m²
422 cd/m²
Sustained 10% Window
486 cd/m²
428 cd/m²
Sustained 25% Window
487 cd/m²
426 cd/m²
Sustained 50% Window
313 cd/m²
336 cd/m²
Sustained 100% Window
206 cd/m²
179 cd/m²
Automatic Brightness Limiting (ABL)
0.057
0.056
Black Level
Contrast
10
10
Contrast Picture
Contrast
Inf : 1
Inf : 1
Native Contrast
Inf : 1
Inf : 1
Lighting Zone Precision
10
10
Lighting Zone Precision Picture
Lighting Zone Transitions
10
10
Preferred LD Video, Moving Object
Local Dimming
No
No
Backlight
No Backlight
No Backlight
Dimming Zone Count Of The Tested TV
8,294,400
8,294,400
Contrast And Dark Details In Game Mode
9.5
9.5
Lighting Zone Precision Photo In Game Mode
Preferred LD Video, Moving Object In Game Mode
Game Transitions With VRR And Preferred LD
Black Uniformity
10
10
Black Uniformity Picture With Preferred Local Dimming
Std. Dev.
N/A
N/A
Native Black Uniformity Picture
Native Std. Dev.
0.155%
0.163%
Color
SDR Color Volume
9.3
8.1
DCI-P3 Gamut Rings
CIELAB DCI-P3 Coverage
99.90%
95.22%
BT.2020 Gamut Rings
CIELAB BT.2020 Coverage
83.40%
64.14%
HDR Color Volume
9.0
7.3
P3 Color Volume ITP Picture
1,000 cd/m² DCI P3 Coverage ITP
99.4%
73.9%
2020 Color Volume ITP Picture
10,000 cd/m² BT.2020 Coverage ITP
55.2%
33.2%
White Luminance
1,197 cd/m²
678 cd/m²
Red Luminance
281 cd/m²
100 cd/m²
Green Luminance
856 cd/m²
349 cd/m²
Blue Luminance
62 cd/m²
36 cd/m²
Cyan Luminance
919 cd/m²
377 cd/m²
Magenta Luminance
342 cd/m²
138 cd/m²
Yellow Luminance
1,133 cd/m²
440 cd/m²
SDR Pre-Calibration Color Accuracy
8.2
6.7
Pre White Balance Picture
Pre Gamma Curve Picture
Pre Color Picture
White Balance dE 2000
2.17
4.97
Color dE 2000
1.44
2.24
Gamma
2.12
2.12
Color Temperature
6,892 K
6,817 K
Picture Mode
Movie
Movie
Color Temp Setting
Warm 2
Warm 2
Gamma Setting
2.2
2.2
SDR Post-Calibration Color Accuracy
9.6
9.4
Post White Balance Picture
Post Gamma Curve Picture
Post Color Picture
White Balance dE 2000
0.20
0.23
Color dE 2000
0.88
1.37
Gamma
2.19
2.21
Color Temperature
6,532 K
6,590 K
White Balance Calibration
20 point
20 point
Color Calibration
Yes
Yes
HDR Pre-Calibration Color Accuracy
8.3
6.8
HDR Pre White Balance Picture
HDR Pre Color Picture
White Balance dE ITP
4.88
9.93
Color dE ITP
6.5
9.6
Color Temperature
6,857 K
7,197 K
Picture Mode
Filmmaker
FILMMAKER MODE
HDR Post-Calibration Color Accuracy
9.4
8.4
HDR Post White Balance Picture
HDR Post Color Picture
White Balance dE ITP
3.20
4.61
Color dE ITP
3.90
9.70
Color Temperature
6,572 K
6,617 K
Processing
PQ EOTF Tracking
7.8
8.7
PQ EOTF Graph
600 Nit Tracking Delta
0.0057
0.0037
1000 Nit Tracking Delta
0.0058
0.0034
4000 Nit Tracking Delta
0.0049
0.0033
Low-Quality Content Smoothing
7.3
7.3
Low-Quality Content Smoothing Picture
Smoothing
7.0
7.0
Detail Preservation
8.0
8.0
Upscaling: Sharpness Processing
8.0
8.0
Sharpness Picture - 480p
HDR Native Gradient
9.8
8.0
HDR Gradient Picture
100% Black To 50% Gray
10
8.0
50% Gray To 100% White
10
10
100% Black To 50% Red
10
8.0
50% Red To 100% Red
10
10
100% Black To 50% Green
8.0
6.0
50% Green To 100% Green
10
8.0
100% Black To 50% Blue
10
6.0
50% Blue To 100% Blue
10
8.0
Game Mode Responsiveness
Input Lag
9.0
8.9
1080p @ 60Hz
10.1 ms
10.2 ms
1080p @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode
83.8 ms
98.3 ms
1080p @ 120Hz
5.4 ms
5.3 ms
1080p @ Max Refresh Rate
4.7 ms
5.3 ms
4k @ 60Hz
10.1 ms
10.2 ms
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4
10.1 ms
10.2 ms
4k @ 60Hz Outside Game Mode
67.4 ms
71.7 ms
4k @ 60Hz With Interpolation
19.7 ms
31.3 ms
4k @ 120Hz
5.4 ms
5.3 ms
4k @ Max Refresh Rate
4.8 ms
5.3 ms
8k @ 60Hz
N/A
N/A
Supported Resolutions
9.4
9.1
Resolution
4k
4k
480p @ 59.94Hz (Widescreen)
Yes
Yes
720p @ 59.94Hz
Yes
Yes
1080p @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4
Yes
Yes
1080p @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
1080p Maximum Refresh Rate
144 Hz
120 Hz
4k @ 60Hz
Yes
Yes
4k @ 60Hz @ 4:4:4
Yes
Yes
4k @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
4k @ 120Hz @ 4:4:4
Yes
Yes
4k Maximum Refresh Rate
144 Hz
120 Hz
8k @ 30Hz Or 24Hz
No
No
8k @ 60Hz
No
No
Variable Refresh Rate
8.5
7.5
Native Refresh Rate
144Hz
120Hz
Variable Refresh Rate
Yes
Yes
HDMI Forum VRR
Yes
Yes
FreeSync
Yes
Yes
G-SYNC Compatible
Yes
Yes
4k VRR Maximum
144 Hz
120 Hz
4k VRR Minimum
< 20 Hz
< 20 Hz
1080p VRR Maximum
144 Hz
120 Hz
1080p VRR Minimum
< 20 Hz
< 20 Hz
VRR + Local Dimming
No Local Dimming
No Local Dimming
CAD In Game Mode @ Max Refresh Rate
9.7
9.7
Pursuit Photo Max Refresh
CAD Heatmap Max Refresh
Transition At Max Refresh
0 to 31
0 to 31
Avg. CAD
24
30
Best 10% CAD
14
15
Worst 10% CAD
52
64
CAD In Game Mode @ 120Hz
9.7
9.7
Pursuit Photo 120Hz
CAD Heatmap 120Hz
Transition At 120Hz
0 to 31
0 to 31
Avg. CAD
24
30
Best 10% CAD
14
15
Worst 10% CAD
50
64
CAD In Game Mode @ 60Hz
9.7
9.6
Pursuit Photo 60Hz
CAD Heatmap 60Hz
Transition 60Hz
0 to 31
0 to 31
Avg. CAD
25
35
Best 10% CAD
14
16
Worst 10% CAD
54
88
PS5 Compatibility
PS5 Screenshot
Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM)
Yes
Yes
4k @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
1440p @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
1080p @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
HDR
Yes
Yes
VRR
Yes
Yes
Xbox Series X|S Compatibility
Xbox Series X Screenshot
Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM)
Yes
Yes
4k @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
1440p @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
1080p @ 120Hz
Yes
Yes
HDR
Yes
Yes
VRR
Yes
Yes
Motion Handling
Stutter
4.3
4.4
Frame Hold Time @ 24 fps
40.9 ms
40.7 ms
Frame Hold Time @ 60 fps
15.9 ms
15.7 ms
24p Judder
10
10
Judder-Free 24p
Yes
Yes
Judder-Free 24p via 60p
Yes
Yes
Judder-Free 24p via 60i
Yes
Yes
Judder-Free 24p via Native Apps
Yes
Yes
Response Time
9.7
9.4
Pursuit Photo 60Hz
Response Time Heatmap 60Hz
Transition At 60Hz
0 to 31
0 to 31
First Response Time
0.8 ms
1.0 ms
Total Response Time
1.2 ms
1.9 ms
Worst 10% Response Time
5.3 ms
8.5 ms
Flicker
Backlight chart
Flicker-Free
No
No
PWM Dimming Frequency
0 Hz
0 Hz
Black Frame Insertion (BFI)
BFI Picture
BFI Frequency Picture
Optional BFI
Yes
Yes
Min Flicker For 60 fps
60 Hz
60 Hz
60Hz For 60 fps
Yes
Yes
120Hz For 120 fps
No
No
Min Flicker For 60 fps In Game Mode
60 Hz
60 Hz
Motion Interpolation
Motion Interpolation (30 fps) Picture
Motion Interpolation (30 fps)
Yes
Yes
Motion Interpolation (60 fps) Picture
Motion Interpolation (60 fps)
Yes
Yes
Reflections
Direct Reflections
8.2
6.4
Ring Light Picture
Direct Reflections Graph
Peak Direct Reflection Intensity
21.3%
44.9%
Screen Finish
Glossy
Glossy
Ambient Black Level Raise
5.7
9.3
Black Level Raise Picture
Bright Room Black Level Raise Graph
Black Luminance @ 0 lx
0.00 cd/m²
0.00 cd/m²
Black Luminance @ 1000 lx
2.14 cd/m²
0.24 cd/m²
Total Reflected Light
9.1
8.4
Bright Room Off Picture
Ring Picture Total Reflection
Total Reflected Light Intensity
4,259% ⋅ pixel
12,646% ⋅ pixel
Diffraction Artifacts
No
No
Ambient Color Saturation
8.1
8.1
Bright Room Color Volume Graph
Low-Luminance Colors @ 1000 lx
62.65%
66.56%
Mid-Luminance Colors @ 1000 lx
78.81%
70.16%
High-Luminance Colors @ 1000 lx
77.95%
66.03%
Panel
Viewing Angle
9.9
9.4
Viewing Angle Video
Chroma Graph
Color Washout
70°
68°
Hue Graph
Color Shift
70°
37°
Lightness Graph
Brightness Loss
70°
70°
Black Level Raise
70°
70°
Gamma Shift
70°
70°
Gray Uniformity
8.0
7.5
50% Uniformity Picture
50% Std. Dev.
1.468%
1.665%
50% DSE
0.103%
0.134%
5% Uniformity Picture
5% Std. Dev.
0.417%
0.500%
5% DSE
0.098%
0.114%
Panel Technology
Spectral Power Distribution
Pixels Picture
Type
OLED
OLED
Sub-Type
QD-OLED
WOLED
Subpixel Layout
Triangular RGB
RWBG
Inputs
Input Specifications
Side Inputs Picture
Rear Inputs Picture
HDMI
4 (4x HDMI 2.1)
4 (4x HDMI 2.1)
HDMI 2.1 Rated Speed
48 Gbps
48 Gbps
ATSC Tuner
1.0
1.0
USB Ports
2
2
USB 3.0
No
No
Audio Out 3.5mm
1
1
Wi-Fi
Yes (2.4 GHz, 5 GHz)
Yes (2.4 GHz, 5 GHz)
Ethernet Speed
100 Mbps
100 Mbps
Composite In
0
0
Digital Optical Audio Out
1
1
Audio Passthrough
ARC/eARC Port
eARC
eARC
eARC: Dolby Atmos Over Dolby Digital Plus
Yes
Yes
eARC: Dolby Digital Plus 7.1
Yes
Yes
eARC: LPCM 7.1 Over Dolby MAT
Yes
Yes
eARC: Dolby TrueHD 7.1
Yes
Yes
eARC: DTS:X Over DTS-HD MA
No
No
eARC: DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1
No
No
eARC: LPCM Channels (Bitstream)
7.1
7.1
ARC: Dolby Digital 5.1
Yes
Yes
ARC: DTS 5.1
No
No
Optical: Dolby Digital 5.1
Yes
Yes
Optical: DTS 5.1
No
No
HDR Format Support
HDR10
Yes
Yes
HDR10+
Yes
Yes
Dolby Vision
No
No
HLG
Yes
Yes
Design
Style
Design Picture
Curved
No
No
Stand
Stand Picture
Back
Back Picture
Wall Mount
VESA 300x200
VESA 300x200
Borders
Borders Picture
Borders
0.28" (0.7 cm)
0.35" (0.9 cm)
Thickness
Thickness Picture
Max Thickness
1.61" (4.1 cm)
1.26" (3.2 cm)
Build Quality
7.5
7.5
Build quality picture
Smart Features
Interface
Smart TV Picture
Smart OS
Tizen
Tizen
Version
2024
2024
Ad-Free
0.0
0.0
Ads Picture
Ads
Yes
Yes
Opt-out
No
No
Suggested Content in Home
Yes
Yes
Opt-out of Suggested Content
No
No
Remote
Remote Picture
Voice Control
Yes
Yes
TV Controls
Controls Picture
Mute Switch
Yes
Yes
In The Box
In The Box Picture
Misc
Power Consumption
102 W
104 W
Power Consumption (Max)
231 W
176 W
Firmware
1059
1106
Sound Quality
Frequency Response
7.4
7.1
Frequency Response
Low-Frequency Extension
71.27 Hz
89.80 Hz
Std. Dev. @ 70
2.82 dB
2.56 dB
Std. Dev. @ 80
2.93 dB
2.37 dB
Std. Dev. @ Max
4.86 dB
4.62 dB
Max
88.1 dB SPL
86.5 dB SPL
Dynamic Range Compression
4.08 dB
3.29 dB
Digital Room Correction
Yes
Yes
Check Price
42" (WOLED)
QN42S90DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store42" (WOLED)
48" (WOLED)
QN48S90DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store48" (WOLED)
55"
55"
QN55S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store55" (QD-OLED)
QN55S90DAFXZA
Searching
Finding store55" (QD-OLED)
65"
65"
QN65S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store65" (QD-OLED)
QN65S90DAFXZA
Searching
Finding store65" (QD-OLED)
77"
77"
QN77S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store77" (QD-OLED)
QN77S90DAFXZA
Searching
Finding store77" (QD-OLED)
83"
83"
QN83S85DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store83" (WOLED)
QN83S90DAEXZA
Searching
Finding store83" (WOLED)
Samsung S90D OLED
Samsung S85D OLED
Comments
Samsung S90D OLED vs Samsung S85D OLED: Main Discussion
What do you think of these products? Let us know below.
Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Insiders have direct access to buying advice on our insider forum.
We’ve purchased the product and are waiting for it to arrive in our lab.
Actually, You are wrong. Whooting 80HE has a 0.125ms response time when using the 8k pulling option while the ATK RS7 Pro only has 0.3ms. Check your facts before making a fool of yourself.
is there any news? its been almost 6 mothes since purchased…
Hey TH3STRICH,
Thanks for reaching out!
Unfortunately, we’re still waiting for our unit to arrive in the lab. Wooting is shipping these keyboards in batches—the first batch shipped in late September, but ours is part of the second batch (EU-Brug) with an estimated arrival by the end of November.
We’ve very eager to test this keyboard and know the community is excited to see how it performs! Rest assured, it’s a high-priority product for us, and we’ll be working to get the review out as soon as possible once it arrives.
Thanks for your continued patience!
Thanks for Replying looking forward to the end of november :)
I heard from some Chinese that theres quite a few Chinese HE keyboards beating Wooting in their test… idk details tho
The product has arrived in our lab, and our testers will start evaluating it soon.
yessssss!!!! finallyyyyy ive been checking twice a day for monthessssssss
😁😁😁😁
Oh man.
Having high hopes for this one being potentially the next best recommended gaming/enthusiast keyboard from you guys.
Based on the YouTube reviews I’ve watched it’s just the 60HE but in a 80% format but I am eagerly awaiting your input before I pull the trigger.
Our testers have started testing this product; is there anything specific you’re looking to see? Let us know in this thread.
Excellent data fellas, lower key press latency but higher release latency than the NuPhy Field75 HE. Glad to see Wooting delivers as usual and good competition is rising as well.
So would you guys say that the 80HE is on par with the 60HE (meaning same features and performance but in bigger format)? Is the 80HE the new best gaming keyboard / best gaming keyboard for enthusiasts?
80HE is on not just on par with the 60HE, but actually faster since it can run at an 8KHZ polling rate. If you’re looking for the lowest latency this keyboard and the NuPhy Field75 HE are the fastest currently according to Rting’s Raw performance scores.
The full review has been posted here. Let us know what you think!
Hey SetupHeaven,
To echo what ashii just mentioned, the 80HE does offer some performance uplift. The 8k polling makes a difference, especially in regards to consistency, but it’s minor. It’s not something you’re going to notice in-game, but it’s worth considering if you’re laser focused on getting the lowest latency possible.
The Wooting 60HE is still an outstanding option that performs nearly as well and is a great choice if you prefer the more compact 60% layout.
Ahh. You’re paying 220 euros for a keyboard that has a plastic case and OEM switches in the basic version. Can it get any worse?
You’re paying for the R&D and tech that goes in the PCBA. If you just want a keyboard with good type and sound, there’s plenty cheaper options but none will reach similar low latency performance.
And the OEM Lekker V2 switches are not bad good stock, or you can just order without switches for cheaper.
R&D is the reason your monitor can do above 60hz, R&D is the reason Hall effect keyboards are on the market. Products don’t just appear out of nowhere they need to be developed and that development needs money which means the best products with the latest tech are the most expensive. You don’t need to know or understand ‘deeper technology’ but if you don’t care about ‘deeper technology’, then you don’t care about performance.
If you want the best in quality, performance and reliability you need pay for it and to those with the money, it is well worth it. My 60HE easily has more value than all my previous keyboards combined.
Can you name them? And I mean ones with similar latency and performance. Closest I can find is the NuPhy Field75 and that’s similarly priced. There are other Hall Effect keyboards in the market but there’s evidence they aren’t close in latency to the 80HE or Field75.
While I understand why this keyboard is currently listed as an 80% TKL board (likely partially based on Wooting’s odd naming convention), I think it would be more accurate and helpful for users making comparisons to mark it as a Compact 75% size. Notably, I can’t think of any other 80%/TKL keyboard that (a) has the arrow keys slid partially under the right shift key, (b) correspondingly has the right CTRL key moved into a non-standard location, or © is missing one or more of the document movement control keys (in this case, Home and End). Certainly, none of the TKL keyboards Rtings has tested to date have any of those qualities. However, all of those features are relatively common on 75% boards, and are one of the key reasons that a lot of TKL users wouldn’t consider 75% and TKL keyboards to be directly comparable.
I know that Wooting is claiming this is akin to an 80% because it’s not quite as compact as a 75% keyboard, but I would argue that, from a functionality standpoint, it operates much more similarly to a 75% board. Part of the appeal of a TKL keyboard for traditional touch typers is that it still makes available all of the traditional keys except the numpad without requiring multi-stroke modifiers, and it has all of the keys in essentially their “normal” locations, setting it apart from any of the more compact form factors in those ways.
Update: We’ve made a small change in the Hardware Customizability section, changing our result for the North-Facing Cherry MX Interference test to YES. This is only to indicate that there is a small possibility of interference with some aftermarket Cherry MX profile keycaps. We’ve also added new text to this section for more context.
Hey Alamei,
You raise some outstanding points. Just from my personal perspective, I completely agree that spiritually and functionally, this keyboard is closer to a Compact 75%!
We still made the decision to label it an 80% for fairly boring reasons, not least of which is that virtually all other media— not to mention Wooting themselves— have pretty unambiguously chosen to identify it as an 80%, and we’ve seen the rest of the community largely follow suit.
We’ve tried to address the issue in writing within our review, calling out pretty plainly that the format sits really awkwardly between two fairly well-established standards. I agree that we’re unintentionally sacrificing some comparability but we expect that we’d be leaving some comparability on the table, and likely considerable discoverability, if we decided to take a hard stance and call it a Compact 75% instead.
But your question has sparked some renewed thinking on our part as to how we might better classify non-standard layouts in the future. We’ll be working on changes to our methodology this year, and we’ll keep this idea in mind. We really appreciate you taking the time to send us your thoughts.
Best wishes!
Update: We’ve added a link to the newly reviewed Corsair K70 PRO TKL to the Extra Features section.
Really dropped the ball not having a knob or roller or anything on this model when most of the actual competition at this form factor does
Would be practically perfect if it did imo
What’s the difference between Chord Split and Multi-Key Latency? I’m confused—based on the descriptions, aren’t they both about multiple keys? Why do their latencies differ?
Multi-Key Latency: latency of a single key while other keys are being pressed. Focuses on one key but the rest of the keyboard is also active.
Chord Split: latency between different keys when multiple keys are pressed at the same time. i.e. the time gap in sending multiple keys when they’re pressed at the same time.
Please do a review of the ATK EDGE 60HE ULTIMATE Esports Edition.
Thanks.
Update: We’ve updated this review with our new Test Bench 1.4 methodology. It adds a new Output Type classification in the Switches box, indicating whether the keyboard’s output is non-adjustable, adjustable, or analog. It also introduces a new Adjustable Input Granularity test, which improves comparability between keyboards with adjustable input.
monsgeek fun60 ultra tmr has the same latency and 1/3 the price (:
Yes, and this is just one keyboard of several available similar/better than wooting, but there are people like the guy below who try to justify their paranoia of overpaying for everything. Most expensive = best - ridiculous
Update: Added a reference to the ASUS ROG Azoth Extreme in the Typing Quality box as an alternative with better typing quality.