Preview: Samsung QN65S95B QD-OLED TV First look- At the end of last year there were rumors about the launch of a Samsung QD OLED TV. But CES came and went, and Samsung hadn’t announced a QD-OLED TV. Important detail, Samsung did receive a CES Innovation Award 2022 for its ‘QD-Display TV’, so it was there! But now the wait is over for us too, we have seen the S95B in person!
Here it is: the S95B ‘Samsung OLED’ Samsung QN65S95B QD-OLED TV
We really had to wait for it. We got a briefing of the 2022 line-up sometime at the end of December. However, there was no question of a QD-OLED. And also at CES, Samsung gave the scoop to Sony, because they announced a QD-OLED, the A95K But look, now the time has finally come. We traveled to Frankfurt for a look at the lineup, and yes, it also included an all-new model, the S95B.
Specifically, these are the specifications of Samsung QN65S95B QD-OLED TV
- Samsung OLED 4K
- Quantum HDR 1500 (1500 nits)
- Neural Quantum Processor 4K
- Laser Slim Design
- eDolby Atmos
- Object Tracking Sound
- HDMI 2.1 (4 ports, ALLM, VRR, 4K120)
- Sizes: 55 (QN55S95B) and 65 inch (QN65S95B)
That fits in perfectly with what we already know about the Sony A95K. It is a 4K TV with QD-OLED technology, and an expected peak brightness of 1,500 nits. The latter number is probably measured in the native color temperature of the panel, and we think that the peak brightness in D65 (film mode) will be around 1,000 nits. But who knows, maybe Samsung surprises us.
Availability and prices of Samsung QN65S95B QD-OLED TV
When can you get it? The date Samsung gave us: May 2022. We expect a test sample around mid-May. The TV will be available in 55 and 65 inch screen format.
And what should that cost? Well, interestingly, Samsung wants to place the S95B in its line-up below the QN95B. That choice was almost certainly made to highlight the peak brightness of the QN95B. We don’t have official prices yet, but that place in the line-up is of course a good indication. We expect a price between the QN95B and QN90B, although it will almost certainly be closer to the QN95B.
- 65QN95B: 3,599,-
- 65QN90B: 2,899,-
- 55QN95B: 2.699,-
- 55QN90B: 2.199,-
We’re aiming for 3,399 for the 65S95B and 2,499 for the 55S95B.
Why does Samsung call this an OLED?
Samsung places the S95B (QN65S95B) in the ‘OLED’ category. At Sony we also see that the A95K is called an OLED TV. We don’t think that’s ideal, since we really do label QD-OLED as a new image technology. On the other hand, we have to admit that there is no ideal solution.
For the average consumer, QD-OLED may be too confusing. Does he now use quantum dots or OLED? Well, he uses them both. The quantum dots provide a wider color range, the OLED backlight provides pixel-level dimming. The most important innovation is the use of quantum dot color converters instead of the usual color filters. But you can’t just deduce that aspect from the name QD-OLED.
Not the best possible shot due to reflections but you can see the amazing viewing angle performance. #samsung #qdoled #s95b pic.twitter.com/i3nf6UiG37
— Eric Beeckmans (@ericbeeckmans) March 24, 2022
They have probably decided that the perfect black and dimming at pixel level is one of the most important properties, and that is why they have gone for the name OLED. After all, the fact that quantum dots are responsible for the colors is also swept under the rug on many LCD TVs. Only Samsung explicitly uses the term QLED, but at Philips, for example, we do not see an explicit mention of the term quantum dots.
There may be another reason. There have been rumors for some time that Samsung also wants to use LG OLED panels. So the same panels that are already used by LG, Sony, Philips and Panasonic in their OLED TVs. This was very recently confirmed in the korean press So maybe Samsung wants to expand its ‘OLED line-up’ with traditional WOLED TVs. If we do speculate, that could be the S85B and S75B, for example. For example, Samsung has both a QLED line-up and an OLED line-up.
Pixel structure and first comments
We were also able to take detailed photos of the sub-pixel structure in Frankfurt. They confirmed previous reports that we have already seen about the Sony A95K and the Dell Alienware monitor that also use QD-OLED. The sub-pixel structure is rather unusual. With an ordinary OLED panel or with an LCD panel, the red, green and blue (and white for WOLED) sub-pixels are on the same line, and they are also the same height. On this QD-OLED panel, the green sub-pixel is above the red and blue sub-pixel. We’ve marked one pixel with a white border in the photo.
This has already led to a lot of discussion online. After all, with white objects on a dark background you will see a faint green line at the top and a magenta (red+blue) line at the bottom. We could also see that effect on the S95B (and A95K), as this photo shows.
We can understand that this can be disturbing for the Alienware monitor, after all, you are very close to it, and average computer images simply contain a lot of text, which is also white on a black background if you use dark mode a lot. on websites. But taking into account the average viewing distance of three meters in a typical living room, we don’t think this will be a real deal breaker for TV. In any case, we could not notice any disturbing effects on footage that we saw earlier this week on the Sony A95K.
But it should be clear, we will test this extensively as soon as we get our samples.
Samsung’s answer about the pixel structure
Meanwhile, Samsung has also replied to a number of questions from the Flat panelsHD associated with this sub-pixel structure.
It is not a typical RGB stripe pixel – but our proprietary structure optimized to enhance the core user experience of color and HDR. We selected this new pixel structure in order to optimize optical characteristics of QD-Display like brightness, color gamut and durability. Each pixel of QD-Display has an individual Red, Green and Blue – 3 primary sub pixels.
The artifact pointed out also can be seen on conventional LCD and OLED displays using RGB stripe. Similar phenomenon is observed on the sides (Left and Right) side when displaying bright high contrast edge on conventional display products.
Displays with better contrast modulation performance and wider color gamut and greater contrast ratio will accentuate this artifact. Because QD-Display has the widest color gamut, superior contrast ratio and new sub pixel structure, this artifact could be visible.
Having said that we believe that for the vast majority of use cases this is not an issue. For life-like color and HDR performance (Cinema and gaming) this display will provide the most elevated experience.
In short, Samsung claims that the proprietary structure has been chosen to optimize the color and HDR properties of the panel. According to Samsung, the same problem can also occur with other panels (but then to the left and right of the text instead of the top and bottom). And it’s just easier to see on the high contrast screens. Anyway, Samsung doesn’t think this will be a problem for the vast majority of cases, especially Film and Gamin.
Burn in
OLEDs and burn-in, it remains something we attention should have for. Since the QD-OLED technology uses an OLED backlight, the question naturally arises whether this technology will also suffer from burn-in. After all, Samsung has long raised that as an important counter-argument to OLED.
Samsung was unable to answer the specific question about the risk of burn-in. But when we looked at the TV, we saw that the image was not perfectly in the corner of the image matrix. And unless we are mistaken, we have also seen the picture shift. So it seems very likely that this technology also uses continuous pixel shifting as (one of the) measure(s) to prevent burn-in. In doing so, the entire image is shifted back and forth, and up and down, all the time so that the effect of static picture elements is reduced.
Energy label Samsung QN65S95B
The specifications sheet that was next to the S95B (QN65S95B) also stated an energy label: G. That was a disappointment. Because QD-OLED does not use color filters but color converters, we had hoped that the technology would be more energy efficient. The screen also felt relatively cool, even though it had been on for several hours. However, there is still a small hope. That label may be temporary (hence the star at the G) and the final label may be slightly better.
But for now it seems that we have to put our dream of an energy-efficient top TV set aside for a while.
