TCL HDR 5000 . . 5000nit with 5184 FALD zones

I don't think it's going to be that expensive relatively speaking. Not like Micro LED unobtainium expensive I mean. Just look at the Hisense UX: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/hisens...uled-4k-uhd-google-tv/6543835.p?skuId=6543835

85 inches. Over 5000 dimming zones and 2500 nits(and Hisense is known to underrate their brightness numbers) all for under $5k. So somewhat affordable. I would imagine TCL to be similar in pricing.
 
MistaSparkul said:
I don't think it's going to be that expensive relatively speaking. Not like Micro LED unobtainium expensive I mean. Just look at the Hisense UX: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/hisens...uled-4k-uhd-google-tv/6543835.p?skuId=6543835

85 inches. Over 5000 dimming zones and 2500 nits(and Hisense is known to underrate their brightness numbers) all for under $5k. So somewhat affordable. I would imagine TCL to be similar in pricing.
Click to expand...

7xdd5l.jpg


Digital Viper-X- said:
85" minimum... heart break
Click to expand...

Yeah it's probably a lot easier to fit more zones in giant screens. 85" is like a quad of 42" screen size so it would be 1296 zones per 42" screen size (but at 5000 nit peak capability on all of the zones supposedly, prob not all at the same time but within APL breakdown). All of the microLED screens I've heard about online being demoed have been huge too.
 
The 1300 nits, 500 something dimming zone, 144hz VRR/Freesync version, dolby-HDR10 will probably more reasonable:

https://www.tcl.com/global/en/tvs/c755

Goes from 50 to 98 inch

TV that enter the at that price may as well have some integrated speaker:
  • · 4.2.2 Channel up to 160W
For the very few for who it would be relevant (or just in back-up in case of a quick move of the tv for watching something outside, during a speaker transition, etc...) because what a couple of hundreds more at that point... will be quite expensive.
 
elvn said:
View attachment 594729
Click to expand...

I literally said Hisense underrates their brightness figures lol. The U8K is rated for 1500 nits yet delivers 2000 in real world use which is 33% higher. If the UX is rated for 2500 nits but is 33% brighter in real usage then you are looking at almost 4000 nits. And how do you know that TCL isn't trying to pull a fast one on you like 5000 nits....at 10k color temp but 4000 nits at D65 whitepoint.
 
Last edited:
IMHO, more impressive if it wasn't on a jumbo tron sized screen. Just saying.

"How'd they pack in so many LEDs? Oh.... I see...."
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Could make a damn good theater display though. I had a 92 inch projector screen. Most people go 100 inches and up. 85 mini LED? Holy shit that would be a great big screen.
Click to expand...
Sure, but it kind of takes away from the whole 5000+ zones since it is spread out that much more.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Sure, but it kind of takes away from the whole 5000+ zones since it is spread out that much more.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. 5184 zones across 3,087.24in² for the 85" model is one zone every 0.5955in². Compare that to the PG32UQXR with 576 zones across 437.56in² at one zone per 0.7596in², or the PG32UQX with 1152 zones across the same area at 0.3798in² per zone. The 85" sits right in between those monitors, while the 95" matches the former at 0.7439in² per zone.
 
Armenius said:
No, it doesn't. 5184 zones across 3,087.24in² for the 85" model is one zone every 0.5955in². Compare that to the PG32UQXR with 576 zones across 437.56in² at one zone per 0.7596in², or the PG32UQX with 1152 zones across the same area at 0.3798in² per zone. The 85" sits right in between those monitors, while the 95" matches the former at 0.7439in² per zone.
Click to expand...
I'm spoiled with OLED and 8 million zones on my 55 and 65" :p

On a serious note. Does that really differ much from is currently available? Like the QN95C with 1344 zones(on the 65").

Edit: OK it is about half the size per zone compared to what you get on a top end 65" these days. Unfortunately I have no interest in an 85", it will be too large for my room. They need to up the counts on the 65s :)
 
Last edited:
Digital Viper-X- said:
I'm spoiled with OLED and 8 million zones on my 55 and 65" :p

On a serious note. Does that really differ much from is currently available? Like the QN95C with 1344 zones(on the 65")
Click to expand...
1.3433in² per zone.

The math, if you want to plug it into Excel or something:

Code: 
  a² + (16a / 9)² = 65²
  a² + 256a² / 81 = 65²
       337a² / 81 = 65²
        √337a / 9 = 65
            √337a = 585
                a = 31.867
31.867 * (16 / 9) = 56.652
  31.867 * 56.652 = 1,805.341
 1,805.341 / 1344 = 1.3433
 
Armenius said:
1.3433in² per zone.

The math, if you want to plug it into Excel or something:

Code: 
  a² + (16a / 9)² = 65²
  a² + 256a² / 81 = 65²
       337a² / 81 = 65²
        √337a / 9 = 65
            √337a = 585
                a = 31.867
31.867 * (16 / 9) = 56.652
  31.867 * 56.652 = 1,805.341
 1,805.341 / 1344 = 1.3433
Click to expand...
Yeah it is about double / half depending which way you look at it. I did update my post.
 
I'd be interested to see where the line of diminishing returns sits. If I look at my M2 Macbook Pro 16", which has about 10K LEDs for apparently about 2500 zones, there's still a lot of visible blooming in "starfield" scenarios but it looks pretty great for literally anything else.
 
Essentially, TCL has made a panel the the vast majority of us will never see. So, maybe it's "great".... but maybe "who cares?"

Of course, maybe I'm not in the middle class anymore....
 
cjcox said:
Essentially, TCL has made a panel the the vast majority of us will never see. So, maybe it's "great".... but maybe "who cares?"

Of course, maybe I'm not in the middle class anymore....
Click to expand...

Can probably consider some stuff as future tech, depending. It's one case where a kind of trickle down actually can happen. You don't need to beta test new hardware advances as soon as they come out, they usually come down years later. Don't really need to be on that cutting edge of early adoption. I like to see higher nit screens and how tech advances in general even if I don't break the bank on something, but occasionally I do. A lot of people skipped 4k for quite awhile even for living rooms for a long time for example, but 4k tech eventually came down in price. People skipped on real HDR capable screens too, some still do. However in recent years, even if the flagship models were still ~ $1500 - $2500 for a larger 65", you could eventually get a 48" oled with appreciable HDR performance for around $750 (or less), and 55" cx, c# have been $1k. For reference, the C9 55" in 2019 was $3500, and the dollar value is lessened years down the line besides. i.e. $3500 in 2019 is $4,186.76 now according to an inflation calculator I just checked. 55" C2 can be had for $1k on sale currently.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Can probably consider some stuff as future tech, depending. It's one case where a kind of trickle down actually can happen. You don't need to beta test new hardware advances as soon as they come out, they usually come down years later. Don't really need to be on that cutting edge of early adoption. I like to see higher nit screens and how tech advances in general even if I don't break the bank on something, but occasionally I do. A lot of people skipped 4k for quite awhile even for living rooms for a long time for example, but 4k tech eventually came down in price. People skipped on real HDR capable screens too, some still do. However in recent years, even if the flagship models were still ~ $1500 - $2500 for a larger 65", you could eventually get a 48" oled with appreciable HDR performance for around $750 (or less), and 55" cx, c# have been $1k. For reference, the C9 55" in 2019 was $3500, and the dollar value is lessened years down the line besides. i.e. $3500 in 2019 is $4,186.76 now according to an inflation calculator I just checked. 55" C2 can be had for $1k on sale currently.
Click to expand...
While I kind of agree, lately, when things "like this" come to market "like this", it's not "future tech" so much as something "obtainable." Just my own personal observation.

I think I'm closer to the reality of density with regards to the technology. But due to that limitation, it places itself on the high high end of obtainable, which for me, at least, means unobtainable :)
 
MistaSparkul said:
Compared to the unobtanium that's MicroLED, at least this TCL would probably be somewhat affordable.
Click to expand...
You make an interesting point calling it unobtanium. Remember how SED and FED were touted and even shown off at various consumer electronics expos, and how they're right around the corner... Only to never show up.
 
kasakka said:
I'd be interested to see where the line of diminishing returns sits. If I look at my M2 Macbook Pro 16", which has about 10K LEDs for apparently about 2500 zones, there's still a lot of visible blooming in "starfield" scenarios but it looks pretty great for literally anything else.
Click to expand...
I personally think Hisense's version of using the two-layer LCD TV is very interesting. Basically 2 million zones of dimming (1920x1080 black and white LCD under a 4K color panel). Obviously it has its own set of drawbacks. Notably pixel transition times are very slow. But still - for 24hz movies I would think that that would be an excellent display.
 
cjcox said:
While I kind of agree, lately, when things "like this" come to market "like this", it's not "future tech" so much as something "obtainable." Just my own personal observation.

I think I'm closer to the reality of density with regards to the technology. But due to that limitation, it places itself on the high high end of obtainable, which for me, at least, means unobtainable :)
Click to expand...

Yeah I was just saying depends where you are coming from and can also depend on priorities, etc. Still alot of tech tends to trickle down over years, and relative power/performance across the board.
 
According to this site they released their euro pricing the 1st of september:

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1693987451


So the 85" x955 would be around $5,332 USD and the 98" x955 would be around $8,529 usd, at least at release but prices tend to drop a little late in a year as new models are due out. The prices in other countries don't always map exactly either (I'm in the usa).

TCL TVs – dimming zones & Euro pricing​

ZonesNits peak boostEuro (most EU)
50" C8053361300999
55" C80538413001099
65" C80551213001299
75" C80564013001799
85" C80588013002299
98" C805134415004999
85" C955230424003999
98" C955216020005999
85" X955518450004999
98" X955518450007999
98" P745Global-2499
 
Last edited:
From vincent's impressions HDTVtest vid on the 5000nit TCL :

"I was bored enough to measure the peak nits of several real world objects in my garden. It was an overcast day typical of manchester where I typically stay really - and even the reflections of a bicycle belt measure 3300 nits, and a flower, just a mere flower, measured over 500 nits. "
Click to expand...

"While a 5000nit tv still won't come close to replicating what we see in real life when it comes to luminance, with what the sun at noon being rated at 1.6 billion nits - fortunately almost all HDR videos are graded at 4000 nits or below. Most consumer TVs with lower peak brightness will have to perform tone mapping when displaying 4000nit elements."
Click to expand...

. . . . .

There is at least one movie mastered at hdr 10,000 though. From what I've read blade runner is. I'd also suspect that just like you can tone map down, or like you can apply auto HDR to games, you could probably tone map up similarly if mfgs/devs provided tech for that.

. . . . . . .

cjcox said:
I saw the new TV, now I can't see anything but spots....
Click to expand...


Do you ever go outside without sunglasses on? :cool: :D





gandalf.cracking.rock_the.hobbit_1.gif


gandalf.cracking.rock_the.hobbit-trolls_2.gif



. . . . .


monitor.user.cartoon.closing.daylight.blinds.vs.HDR.joke_1.png

 
Last edited:
elvn said:
According to this site they released their euro pricing the 1st of september:

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1693987451


So the 85" x955 would be around $5,332 USD and the 98" x955 would be around $8,529 usd, at least at release but prices tend to drop a little late in a year as new models are due out. The prices in other countries don't always map exactly either (I'm in the usa).

TCL TVs – dimming zones & Euro pricing​

ZonesNits peak boostEuro (most EU)
50" C8053361300999
55" C80538413001099
65" C80551213001299
75" C80564013001799
85" C80588013002299
98" C805134415004999
85" C955230424003999
98" C955216020005999
85" X955518450004999
98" X955518450007999
98" P745Global-2499
Click to expand...
You have to take out the 21% VAT from European prices, since it's included. That would put the 85" X955 at €3,949. Import duties and shipping to the US is also cheaper compared to Europe. I would put the US price at USD $3,999 based on all of that. I'd put the 98" at $6,499. Sales tax in my state is 6.5%, making my estimated final sale price at $4,258 and $6,921, respectively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
Eventually I'm sure high zone count + high brightness panels will come down to the smaller sized TVs. Once I can get a 65" set with 5000+ dimming zones and 4000+ nits of brightness I'll get one for all my HDR gaming. MiniLED TVs seem to be improving at a much faster rate than monitors so I'm sure in just a few short years we'll get all the best implementations only found in 85" sizes down to the 65" size.
 
When I think of gaming on a 65" monitor, I can only imagine my many many many deaths.

But, as long as people aren't shooting "at you", probably fine.
 
cjcox said:
When I think of gaming on a 65" monitor, I can only imagine my many many many deaths.

But, as long as people aren't shooting "at you", probably fine.
Click to expand...

I don't intend to play anything multiplayer on it. Only single player games that have great HDR implementation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjcox
like this
Square in. per zone is just a strange metric when comparing a monitor to a 85” tv IMO - pixels per zone or per degree to equalize view distance would show how much superior the 5000 zones would be all else being equal (and if anything I bet the FALD algorithm will be way better on the TV for video content ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top