or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official 2013 Sony R550A series TVs (KDL-xxR550A) --- 50", 60", and 70"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official 2013 Sony R550A series TVs (KDL-xxR550A) --- 50", 60", and 70" - Page 64

post #1891 of 3981
Anyone else have an opinion of gaming on this set?
post #1892 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swoley2k View Post

Fortunately, this doesn't mean your TV is frameskipping because the test has self-invalidated itself. The frame stutter detected messages refer to the animation itself, and not to the television, so discard any photographs where it does not say green "VALID"

Also, I see you ran the frameskipping test in FireFox beta. Can you please re-run the test in Chrome, because FireFox 24/25 has some known inaccuracies in this test (FireFox team is already aware of the problems with page flips, I've sent a bug report). This is showing that 3 frames got skipped by the browser. Chrome is doing this test perfectly as long as you're running at full framerate=Hz.

- The three black gaps are the frame skips (by browser, not TV)
- However, it also shows three double-bright squares, which means repeat refreshes (by browser, not TV)

When it's properly working (not frameskipping) the white squares show up consecutively in the photo (calendar-style continuity). Make sure when you've taken the photo, the status is green (VALID). That's when we're more certain that it is the TV that is frameskipping.

1. Go to TestUFO Frame Skipping Test at www.testufo.com/#test=frameskipping
2. Make sure it says "VALID" when you take the photo
3. Interpret it as follows:


Confirmed zero frame skipping. Congratulations!


Bad frame skipping. Must also say "VALID"
(Either by browser or by television, but probably the television's fault if you're using Google Chrome on a fast GPU.)
Edited by Mark Rejhon - 8/2/13 at 10:53pm
post #1893 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

I just got it too. I wish we could find out what they do.

Sony has this on their website:



I assume it's the most current version... It's cool that you are given the ability to download it via their website.
post #1894 of 3981
Thread Starter 

I'd suggest trying an actual testing application (the "Refresh Rate Multitool") Mark (and I later) linked to.

 

It's this one: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1423433

 

As an application, it'll of course not have browser hooey in the way and have tight control over communication with the TV.  You can then look at the panels it displays and see what's what.

post #1895 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalvatoreOH View Post

Anyone else have an opinion of gaming on this set?

So far, I think it's great. I downloaded Crysis tonight, simply because I wanted an FPS that was natively 3D. All I can say is wow. I ordinarily hate FPS games, but in 3D the experience was amazing. Completely fluid and responsive and immersive. A LOT of fun.

What's more important, though, is that even with all of the picture enchancement settings on, there was no perceptible lag. I've yet to have any lag any of us could discern with any 2D game, but with 3D it has been an issue for me with a couple of games. With this game that was not so, and so I now conclude that the issue is specific to certain titles. I'll try more games in the near future and see what I think.
post #1896 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I'd suggest trying an actual testing application (the "Refresh Rate Multitool") Mark (and I later) linked to.
The native app is definitely ideal performance-wise, but not a user-friendliness basis. The web method has pros too (it's much easier, provided you're using a browser configuration that's reliable)

Not everyone wants to install software (with the risk of viruses and trojans). Chrome is very reliable now with this test. I've now modified the instructions of the test to make sure it says "VALID". Also, Chrome is now usually very reliable (on a fast computer) in this test. Also, the web method is much easier to reconfigure, because Multitool uses command line arguments, which not everyone understands. Multitool starts up in a fairly camera-unfriendly configuration by default, forcing you to use a command line to make it display a bigger matrix of squares. So the web method is more accessible to novice computer users. Plus, the good/bad frameskip screenshots and instructions are built into the TestUFO page now, as I've just added them. Not a knock on shurCool -- he is the world's first great consumer frameskipping tool -- TestUFO just simply improved upon it and gave him credit. TestUFO does have the disadvantage of not working perfectly in some browsers, but the pros of the browser approach actually begin to outweigh the negatives (unless you have a slow computer)

BTW, I've now modified the TestUFO instructions as well as detecting FireFox. The TestUFO Frame Skipping Test (for now) automatically display "FireFox has bugs with this test" when it detects FireFox 24 / FireFox 25, at least until their page flipping accuracy is fixed. I've also edited the instructions at the top, to hyperlink to the example photos, so users of TestUFO will know how better to interpret results. (Multitool doesn't have built-in instructions) I am already in touch with the FireFox team to improve their VSYNC support, as I'm the one who got them to support 120fps VSYNC (but it's not perfect enough yet for frameskipping tests), while Chrome 18+ and Opera 15+ is far more reliable at this time of writing. TestUFO will also attempt to detect if your computer is fast enough for the frameskipping test, and warn you if performance is too poor. So you'll know to better trust the frameskipping test is valid when it is green-colored and says "VALID".

By about 2014, all five major web browsers will reliably run everything at perfect framerate=Hz on modern GPU-accelerated platforms (and be reasonably self-detectable when it does not, to permit reliable self-validation). http://www.testufo.com/browser.html
Edited by Mark Rejhon - 8/2/13 at 6:21pm
post #1897 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by setguillaume View Post

So far, I think it's great. I downloaded Crysis tonight, simply because I wanted an FPS that was natively 3D. All I can say is wow. I ordinarily hate FPS games, but in 3D the experience was amazing. Completely fluid and responsive and immersive. A LOT of fun.

What's more important, though, is that even with all of the picture enchancement settings on, there was no perceptible lag. I've yet to have any lag any of us could discern with any 2D game, but with 3D it has been an issue for me with a couple of games. With this game that was not so, and so I now conclude that the issue is specific to certain titles. I'll try more games in the near future and see what I think.

Thanks for the reply! Good to hear that this set is good at gaming. I will have to try Crysis in 3D on it. Were you playing on a PS3 or a 360?
post #1898 of 3981

Edited by Swoley2k - 8/2/13 at 9:33pm
post #1899 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swoley2k View Post

(photo of TestUFO main page)
Good, now can you take a photo of the Frame Skipping Test at http://www.testufo.com/#test=frameskipping in the same Chrome browser?
You can change motion tests via the top selector, make sure "Frame Skipping Test" is selected.

Take a photo of it at 1920x1080p @ 120Hz, then another photo of it at 1280x720p @ 120Hz.

The photos will answer whether frame skipping is occuring.
post #1900 of 3981
This is the last one I am doing.


post #1901 of 3981
You're not alone .What an amazing price, I like it.
post #1902 of 3981
Just in case anyone else was looking for a little more sound and didn't wanna go through the AV receiver typical route:

I posted awhile back about getting hum out of the external speaker analog output when I tried to feed it through a transmitter for wireless speakers. Someone had suggested I try using the optical out and a convertor from optical to analog to my transmitter. I also read and thought about adding a ground loop isolator for the analog transmitter.

Anyhow, I decided instead to just skip the transmitter and run 50 foot monoprice 3.5mm stereo cables from the tv 'analog out' to my "wireless" speakers that sit on my nightstands - thus taking away their wireless status. Problem gone and the sound is SO much clearer. Very nice. I just gotta tuck the cables under the carpet where it meets the baseboard now and I'll be done.

It's fine too that I have taken away the wireless feature as these speakers are meant (by me) to be plugged into power and sitting on the nightstands all the time. I really am just treating them as speakers that don't need a separate AV receiver to work as they have their own individual amps built in. This is a very easy and cheap solution. K.I.S.S.
post #1903 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swoley2k View Post

This is the last one I am doing.
Ok, this confirms the TV is frameskipping at 120Hz (skipping every other frame) at the resolution you are using, so you won't be able to tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz. You will get slightly less input lag however, since the 60Hz refreshes are delivered quicker. Two other users said that their 1280x720 was not frameskipping at 120Hz, so that is something to keep in mind.
post #1904 of 3981
good idea,Those things can annoy folks by providing a distracting reflection.thanks j734
post #1905 of 3981
good idea,Those things can annoy folks by providing a distracting reflection.thanks
post #1906 of 3981
good idea,Those things can annoy folks by providing a distracting reflection.thanks
post #1907 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalvatoreOH View Post

Thanks for the reply! Good to hear that this set is good at gaming. I will have to try Crysis in 3D on it. Were you playing on a PS3 or a 360?

PS3. All the Crysis games support 3D, so I figured I'd start with the first. It's also only 3 GB, so it was a fast download to boot.

I downloaded the Resistance 3 demo, and I'm actually enjoying that game more. It's pretty cheap right now, so I may have to snag a copy. It, like Crysis, is very responsive and just a blast in 3D.
post #1908 of 3981
Hello,
New to the forum and want to tank everyone for all the info. Just got my 70 today and so far loving every minute of it.

2 issues -

I'm having issues with the ps3 screen going black during gaming. I know it was talked about but can I get the link please.

Just activated my free Netflix but having issues using my receivers audio. I only get sound using the tv audio. All other components work fine with my receiver. Anyone has experienced this ?
post #1909 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by palaciosc View Post

Just activated my free Netflix but having issues using my receivers audio. I only get sound using the tv audio. All other components work fine with my receiver. Anyone has experienced this ?

You probably need to run an optical cable from the TV to your receiver. 5.1 Dolby Digital Netflix channels will then be able to be played through your receiver in 5.1 surround mode..
post #1910 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama29 View Post

You probably need to run an optical cable from the TV to your receiver. 5.1 Dolby Digital Netflix channels will then be able to be played through your receiver in 5.1 surround mode..

You can do that, unless your receiver has ARC HDMI which I have been using so I don't need the optical cable.
post #1911 of 3981
Hi tgm 1024. I have been following 3 threads this one, the Sony w802 and the w900 thread. You seem well experienced that is why require your help it seems you have owned or tested all 3 models and are satisfied with your R550a. Unfortunately the R550a is not available in my country so that leaves me with just the 802 and 900. I have tested both of them prefered the 802 more to the 900 cause didn't find a big difference in colour also found the passive 3D more usable for me. As a stand alone set i liked the black levels of the 802 but the 900 had deeper blacks again the difference wasn't much and i noticed it only on a side by side comparison. For reference i carried a pen drive with 2 movies and a tv serial that i use for reference.( The Dark Knight rises, Skyfall, and the 1st episode of House of Cards) The reason being that all 3 of them have a dark scene in the opening and during the bright scenes one gets to check almost all colours. My question is "are the black levels and uniformity on the W802 really bad?" I know the W900 gets darker. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Oh! am comparing the 47" W800 to the 46"W950 ( in my country).
post #1912 of 3981
Well I'm pretty happy with my 70 incher.

I was lazy Sunday and had the tv on all day watching several different sources. Not once do I recall seeing the clouding. I've learned to let light into the room and NOT max out the backlighting. The external sound that I have running wired to the nightstand speakers is clear. The apps on the tv itself run fine enough, if not great, but I use the PS3 99.9% of the time for that anyhow. All inputs are run through a Darbee and look great to awesome.

So glad I didn't decide to exchange this set. It would have been over the very minor clouding, but I think that has been managed now. It's been a month with this tv and now I can finally breakdown and store the box away in the garage. She's a keeper!

Ya probably won't hear much from me now on this thread unless a problem pops up. Everything seems to be dialed in pretty well and working just fine.

Time to enjoy it all......

Thanks to all on here for their contributions in learning about this tv.
post #1913 of 3981
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sehej Rana View Post

Hi tgm 1024. I have been following 3 threads this one, the Sony w802 and the w900 thread. You seem well experienced that is why require your help it seems you have owned or tested all 3 models and are satisfied with your R550a. Unfortunately the R550a is not available in my country so that leaves me with just the 802 and 900. I have tested both of them prefered the 802 more to the 900 cause didn't find a big difference in colour also found the passive 3D more usable for me. As a stand alone set i liked the black levels of the 802 but the 900 had deeper blacks again the difference wasn't much and i noticed it only on a side by side comparison. For reference i carried a pen drive with 2 movies and a tv serial that i use for reference.( The Dark Knight rises, Skyfall, and the 1st episode of House of Cards) The reason being that all 3 of them have a dark scene in the opening and during the bright scenes one gets to check almost all colours. My question is "are the black levels and uniformity on the W802 really bad?" I know the W900 gets darker. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Oh! am comparing the 47" W800 to the 46"W950 ( in my country).

 

I haven't "tested" all 3 models; I've seen them in person and decided on the 550.  However, the problem with determining the specifics of things such as black levels is that what is written on paper as a contrast ratio doesn't ever trump whatever edge bleed / flashlighting / dirty screen effect / etc. that shows up in real life.

 

For instance, someone with a "lucky" 802 might actually end up with something that "seems" like a better picture than a higher end model if that higher end model has even a couple problems.  It's not very common, but it happens.  What is common however is that people will buy a set and become focused on the few things that are wrong with it.  And even though unfortunate, this is for an understandable reason: the down-side of staring at something for hours on end (anything) is that you become aware of the details.  I'm certainly in that camp.

 

I wish there were something more definitive I could tell you.  *OFF PAPER*, I can tell you that too me overall the 802 "seems" very close if not immeasurable to the 550 in person, but the W900 "seems" a larger distance away from the 802.  This is in person.  For me, however, the active-3D removes that one from the running.  And many people may find that relationship the opposite: they might believe the 802 towers over the 550, but the W900 isn't worth it.

 

The suggestion that I give everyone is to try your best to push the fears aside and buy.  If in doubt, go with the more expensive model, and make sure you buy it from a place from where you can return it easily.  Why more expensive?  From what I can tell by talking to many people in person, and their comments here, folks seem more likely to kick themselves for an inferior screen than kick themselves for getting a higher model.

 

As a final note, keep in mind what has been said many times throughout AVS.  Forums tend to attract the negative.  Most people that buy a TV don't rush to a forum and register just to post "Hey, mine's pretty good."

post #1914 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I haven't "tested" all 3 models; I've seen them in person and decided on the 550.  However, the problem with determining the specifics of things such as black levels is that what is written on paper as a contrast ratio doesn't ever trump whatever edge bleed / flashlighting / dirty screen effect / etc. that shows up in real life.

For instance, someone with a "lucky" 802 might actually end up with something that "seems" like a better picture than a higher end model if that higher end model has even a couple problems.  It's not very common, but it happens.  What is common however is that people will buy a set and become focused on the few things that are wrong with it.  And even though unfortunate, this is for an understandable reason: the down-side of staring at something for hours on end (anything) is that you become aware of the details.  I'm certainly in that camp.

I wish there were something more definitive I could tell you.  *OFF PAPER*, I can tell you that too me overall the 802 "seems" very close if not immeasurable to the 550 in person, but the W900 "seems" a larger distance away from the 802.  This is in person.  For me, however, the active-3D removes that one from the running.  And many people may find that relationship the opposite: they might believe the 802 towers over the 550, but the W900 isn't worth it.

The suggestion that I give everyone is to try your best to push the fears aside and buy.  If in doubt, go with the more expensive model, and make sure you buy it from a place from where you can return it easily.  Why more expensive?  From what I can tell by talking to many people in person, and their comments here, folks seem more likely to kick themselves for an inferior screen than kick themselves for getting a higher model.

As a final note, keep in mind what has been said many times throughout AVS.  Forums tend to attract the negative.  Most people that buy a TV don't rush to a forum and register just to post "Hey, mine's pretty good."

Tgm...Very well put. Good advice. It is very refreshing to read truth with regard to the negative posters, they really mean well, but their volume does produce uncertainty about a product.
post #1915 of 3981
Mo.. good to hear!! Enjoy.
post #1916 of 3981
Keyboard Mouse YES - 120hz USB

Some misc info: The KDL-50R550A does support wireless keyboard/mouse for the browser. At least mine work. Im using a Logitech Performance MX mouse and a K800 keyboard both on one unified receiver!

Tested a few movies (.mkv, .mp4, .avi) to see if the USB input had less 120hz stutter and sure enough it is SILKY smooth. There are no skips/judders/etc. Not really sure why the HDMI inputs have stuttering from PC or cable box but at least we know he TV can do smooth video without stuttering. I tested this with the WORSE slowest crappiest thumb drive I have ever used....so apparently the TV can do smooth video even from a slow drive.

Still wish I had a legit Blu-Ray play and a disc to try but I do not...It is very possible that My PC and my cable box just cant put the signal out well enough for the TV to prevent stutters.
Edited by Swoley2k - 8/5/13 at 2:04pm
post #1917 of 3981
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetjocky View Post

Tgm...Very well put. Good advice. It is very refreshing to read truth with regard to the negative posters, they really mean well, but their volume does produce uncertainty about a product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I haven't "tested" all 3 models; I've seen them in person and decided on the 550.  However, the problem with determining the specifics of things such as black levels is that what is written on paper as a contrast ratio doesn't ever trump whatever edge bleed / flashlighting / dirty screen effect / etc. that shows up in real life.

For instance, someone with a "lucky" 802 might actually end up with something that "seems" like a better picture than a higher end model if that higher end model has even a couple problems.  It's not very common, but it happens.  What is common however is that people will buy a set and become focused on the few things that are wrong with it.  And even though unfortunate, this is for an understandable reason: the down-side of staring at something for hours on end (anything) is that you become aware of the details.  I'm certainly in that camp.

I wish there were something more definitive I could tell you.  *OFF PAPER*, I can tell you that too me overall the 802 "seems" very close if not immeasurable to the 550 in person, but the W900 "seems" a larger distance away from the 802.  This is in person.  For me, however, the active-3D removes that one from the running.  And many people may find that relationship the opposite: they might believe the 802 towers over the 550, but the W900 isn't worth it.

The suggestion that I give everyone is to try your best to push the fears aside and buy.  If in doubt, go with the more expensive model, and make sure you buy it from a place from where you can return it easily.  Why more expensive?  From what I can tell by talking to many people in person, and their comments here, folks seem more likely to kick themselves for an inferior screen than kick themselves for getting a higher model.

As a final note, keep in mind what has been said many times throughout AVS.  Forums tend to attract the negative.  Most people that buy a TV don't rush to a forum and register just to post "Hey, mine's pretty good."

Thanks a ton tgm1024 your reply has been very helpful. I wanted to buy the 802 but became hesitant after reading mixed review it got from actual users on the thread here. Alas I cannot comment on the R550 cause its not released her as yet that just leaves me with W802 and the W950 to choose I plan to pull the trigger on one of them soon and when I do will post my opinion on the respective threads if I made the right choice. My primary reason for preferring the W802 is that it has passive.
post #1918 of 3981
Thread Starter 

Probably the best I could ever read are when something I said helped someone.  Thanks for that all.
 

post #1919 of 3981
Hey....not sure if it has been mentioned in this thread but did a quick scan and couldn't see anything, or I'm just blind LOL

I have noticed at times while watching TV that some people with black hair.....the black actually appears as blue (almost like a Smurf blue at times). I have not noticed this on past Sony sets I've owned. Does anyone here know what may cause that? Is it a setting that is needing adjustment. Any help would be awesome! smile.gif
post #1920 of 3981
That brings up an interesting question. How do you make your final choice of what to buy? For me I like to see the TV in a store setting for general eyeball evaluation. Then I read all I can here at AVS Forum. Then I read any professional reviews (none for the 550 series yet). Then I go back to the store and play with the remote (if they let me) and try some of the suggestions for set up that I get from these threads at AVS. Assuming that nobody I know owns this set then I've pretty much done all I can. I actually do not take a blu-ray with me because I assume anything should do a good job with blu-ray. I will check out a regular DVD or two and If I'm in lucky a live sporting event to check for motion blur and color saturation. Then I say. I'll take the Sony please.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official 2013 Sony R550A series TVs (KDL-xxR550A) --- 50", 60", and 70"