Originally Posted by Menarini
It is you who's missing the point. We are not claiming the sony "tech" is better. We know all oled tv panels come from the same supplier (lg display) and use the same tech (white oled), whether you buy a sony, lg, panasonic, philips or whichever oled tv. We are rather claiming that sony's processing is better (not "tech"). Since oled panels are the same, we already know before going into the shootouts, that the differences in picture quality at the shootout will mostly boil down to whose processing is superior. And that's what we evaluate at shootouts. And while lge has surely made improvements with the alpha 9 gen. 2 over their last year's model, but it's still not on the same level as the X1 ultimate.
I agree Sony's tech in terms of just picture processing (including scaling and motion) is better. To most, it is not $900 better when you see how close the results are. That's the point I think some are trying to make.
Originally Posted by JD23
A few problems with your argument:
1) On the Sony side, PS4 Pro doesn't even render in native 4k, it uses a checkerboard rendering technique and even then, can only render most new games at 4k/30 fps. Native 4k at 60 fps will be a significant jump. PS3 could not consistently render 720p at 60 fps, the original PS4 could not render 1080p at 60 fps, yet you expect PS5 to render 4k at far more than 60 fps?
2) There is far more to graphic quality than simply resolution and frame rate, and game developers often use GPU cycles for more detailed graphical effects at the expense of resolution and/or frame rate. I expect that most developers will prefer 4k/60 as a target because the difference in 120 fps vs. 60 fps will be less noticeable than the decrease in graphical quality required to render 120 fps instead of 60 fps.
Regarding MS, I don't see why you are taking E3 promises so literally. Technically, their new console probably will be able to render 8k/30 fps, except that will only be feasible for remastered previous generation games, not for new games, as the sacrifice in overall detail will be too great.
I use Xbox One X and they have NATIVE 4K games at 30-60FPS. I really think you're trying to justify your non 2.1 Sony...I mean we're are trying to speak in facts here. My point is if you are spending almost $4K on a 65" OLED in 2019, the value proposition LG offers INCLUDING HDMI 2.1 puts you a great position to utilize the next-gen consoles in 2020 and beyond.
I'm sure Sony's A9H or whatever 2020 brings will have 2.1 but ignoring that it will be useful to have for GAMERS built into your TV for the next 2-5 years (or whenever the average consumer would buy a new tv) is important to the decision making process.
I would have bought a Sony OLED this year if they had 2.1 because I value the need for future gaming features over the image processing debate.