I like Vincent, but I wouldn't use his settings. He likes a lighter (less inky blacks) picture because of "source tools."
The chip they share is the XR chip. It's mainly for movies and adds extra processing which isn't good for gaming.
You may not remember, but you told me once that smooth gradation and other processing in the picture menus add lag on Sony sets. They actually don’t, with the exception of bfi on oled sets. Tested by myself of course.
Even then if they had an OLED with 2.1, they wouldn't have VRR ready just like the LEDs that are still waiting. Along with the PS5.
They do add input lag.
My man, I have tested settings myself with a leo bodnar 4k lag tester. On both Bravia 4k LCD and Sony oleds.
You need the eARC port to connect to the receiver. If you don't have a receiver, you can obviously use it for other purposes.
He's not waiting for a price cut. He's been waiting 3 years for this and has more money then he knows what to do with it thanks to covid not allowing him to spend on the things he enjoys.
I can’t understand how that works when VRR isn’t on the PS5 and both devices need VRR to work. That is new. Do you have anything that pointed to that I can check out?
pro.sony
I have the X900H and the PS5 and I can confirm that at least some kind of "ALLM" is implemented with this pair.
So still no VRR until end of the year for xh90 or xj90, this time it is Sonys own video that say "by Winter 2021"
These settings apply to both my sets : I just leave reality creation on the default setting of 10 out of 100 on the ps4 pro. Smooth gradation on low, turn off extended dynamic range. Local dimming on high for my x900e lcd. Under motion settings, under clearness I use a value of 2, which is the most effective 120hz bfi, as 3 gives you 60hz bfi with noticeable flicker. There's talk of image duplication when the bfi doesn't match the output fps, but in truth due to the sample and hold nature of the display and the low fps blur that occurs anyway, any duplication just blends in to whatever blur is already present. At least, on my sets. Some sony sets display bfi a bit differently.
Yeah, I'm limited in space so it'll be perfect for me. It's a little expensive for the size, but hopefully it can see a price drop within 45 days (my Best Buy return window) and can get refunded the difference. I'm just ready to get a new tv dang it
Yeah, I'm limited in space so it'll be perfect for me. It's a little expensive for the size, but hopefully it can see a price drop within 45 days (my Best Buy return window) and can get refunded the difference. I'm just ready to get a new tv dang it
Yeah if I had a choice of x900f vs. 900h I would probably buy the former lol. Input lag would still be good for 4K sources.
www.rtings.com
I'm almost always talking about the "Real Scene" values, the top figure in the rtings brightness section. Rtings only recorded a value of 725 nits for the 25% window on the X900H, the 10% figure is 450 and Real Scene is 500. Generally when you see the leaked brightness readings from chinese, etc websites they will be quoting the 10% figure.
The 25% window is important too for large bright areas like an interior shot of a big bright window, but 2/10% and Real Scene is better for knowing how good general HDR impact will be.
2/10% is for the brightness of small highlights, like the sun or headlights, since those things will generally not take up a large area of the screen, nowhere near 25% certainly, even a 10% window will be bigger that them most of the time so 2% is best for measuring that.
Real Scene is a way to see how bright 2, 5 and 10% windows will be in actual mixed content and not just a white box over a black screen. This is the video Rtings use (Its the SDR version, but its the same video) for the Real Scene test:
If you have a look at the shot, (this is rough percentages ofc, but you get the idea) the striplights at the top act as the 2% window, the smaller white square on the left is the 5% window and the white square on the right is the 10% window. They made this test so you can see how bright those sized highlights will really be, as opposed to just what you read from a test pattern.
Here is the comparison for X900F vs. X900H I checked.
Sony X900F vs Sony X900H Side-by-Side TV Comparison
Compare the Sony X900F and Sony X900H TVs
I usually look at the Real Scene + 2% + 10% + 25% values and then compare and contrast them. The Real Scene and 10% should be similar unless they are fucking around with the test patterns* and hopefully the 2% should be the same or just a bit under those first two values, though sometimes its much less if the TV has large dimming zones. The 25% and 50% figures are good for seeing how much brighter very bright scenes would be on an LCD vs. OLED, like the Matrix scene in the white construct area, with Morpheus. Maybe also for really bright games, like the Mount Volbono level in Mario Odyssey.
*Occasionally the 10% figure is much more than the Real Scene figure but thats usually due to a power limit, ie when the rest of the screen is pure black it has the power available to maximise the light output of the 10% window, but when the rest of the screen has content on it, it doesn't have the power leftover to keep a 10% of the screen at the same brightness. It only really applies to super high end LCD sets though.
Sorry for the lecture if you already knew that but while explaining why you shouldn't say X900H is 700 nits, I thought I'd also write out a guide for helping people understand the rtings brightness measurements a bit more.
Very detailed from an experienced TV man! Much appreciated.
Hahaha, I like his informative videos just not his picture settings, since what works on an OLED source material doesn't always translate well on backlit LED. It may in microLED in the future.
