Deal: Highly Recommended Philips 4K OLED TV Drops Below £1,000

I’m just happy that the PS5 will mean my 4K TV will actually use the 4K capabilities. It’s only an entry level Samsung that I got in the sales last year for £300 from £800 but it’s a nice enough set.

30ms? That's woeful. My 6-year-old Bravia has just over 15ms.

I'm waiting until mid-2020 before I consider a 4K TV. It'll basically only be the PS5 which will be utilising it.

Not fussed about all the Ambilight and other nonsense they put on TVs these days. Just give me an evenly-lit screen, some decent speakers, and plenty (4 minimum) of HDMI sockets.

I might even look at a large gaming monitor instead, as I've no real need for tuners.

Argos have 40 inch 4k T.V. for ....................£200 just under
https://www.argos.co.uk/product/3038244

If anyone want a great oled tv, I recommend lg 4k hdr oled tv c9 which have hdmi 2.1 and variable refresh rate (vrr), ps5 and xbox scarlet will have hdmi 2.1 and vrr so I don't think it's wise to buy a new expensive tv without those 2 features.

Does not look like this has hdmi 2.1 ports

@MadAussieBloke yeah, I wouldn't touch Philips electronics, had really bad experience with them in the past, sony or Samsung only for me.

With the PS5 (and next Xbox) having HDMI 2.1, I wouldn't buy ANY 4K TV without it. HDMI2.1 is going to be very important for gamers - VRR, low latency mode etc as well as 4k at up to 120fps.

With a game like Fifa that offers 4k/60 on a PS4 Pro, there is no reason that some AAA games could offer more than 60fps and with VRR, it won't matter if the frame rate is 87fps, 103fps etc as the screen will refresh with each new frame eliminating judder and screen tear.

30ms Lag is 'high' for most big brand TV's these days too - still a decent performance but 20ms and under is achievable with LG and Samsung TV's.

If you want a 4k OLED for movies and reasonable gaming performance, its OK but you are better off looking at the LG C9 and that has HDMI 2.1. Ambilight is completely unnecessary with OLEDs as the Blacks are perfect and doesn't require bias lighting at all - its more of a gimmick than a functional feature. If you like that, that's a different matter but with LCD Displays, it serves a purpose of making the blacks look darker. Philips weren't the best for its blacks on LCD TV's and so ambilight helped...

@BAMozzy Would it not be wise to just save for an 8K TV? I know they are very expensive and hardly anything supporting 8K right now but it would be future-proof and I can see a mid-gen upgrade happening like we saw with the Pro and X but this time actually outputting native 8K.

I’m still happy with my Samsung KS8000 but it has got light bleeding in a couple of places at the very bottom of the screen, so I would be tempted to buy another top spec 4K TV with HDMI 2.1 and VRR at a decent price in time for Scarlett.

The older Philips 46PFL8606T is 1ms, just a shame it's 1080, I'll need to change it for PS5 to get the visual benefit.

This was when the used Sharp Panels, I think they now use LG.

Unshore about phillips as over my life 3 phillips tv's have broke for no reason and even my phillips kettle packed up. I like Sony , Panasonic & Lg best.

That's a pretty good chunk of money to spend on a TV.

I think I'll just wait and grab a 4K set dirt cheap in a few years (right now, with PS4, Switch, etc. there's no sense in upgrading).

@MaccaMUFC I will be alright with supersampled 8k content on a 4k TV for a good few years - at least until 8k content becomes readily available. With gaming, I can see you being given a choice - 8k at 60fps (or less) - not necessarily native 8k btw - or 4k at 120fps and I know which I would favour.

The next gen of consoles may well do 8k but I doubt any AAA 3D realistic artstyle games coming close to native 8k and certainly the TV sources I use (Sky, Netflix) won't be offering 8k in the near future. Youtube could I guess so for me, 8k isn't necessarily worth the investment at this time.

I tend to upgrade my TV every 4-5yrs (unless I have to upgrade sooner and I do have at least 5yrs Warranty), with the main TV (currently my KS8000) moving to the bedroom so I keep a TV for 8-10yrs. Half of its life is as a main TV. As such, I can do without 8k for another 4-5yrs rather than jump in now and get little/no content. I know with 8k Screens now and AI upscaling, you can get a 'better than' 4k image from 4k content but to me, its not worth the massive premium. I can wait until 8k TV's are the price of a great 4k TV today.

If you want to look further into the future than I do, then maybe 8k is worth considering for the most 'future-proof' option but with advancements in technology, MicroLED technology for example, future-proof is always going to be a gamble. When 4k came out, HDR let alone the different formats was not considered and a few years later, made the early 4k TV's dated - certainly not 'future' proof.

Of course 8k could suddenly take off big time in the next couple of years but we do know that the next gen consoles will have HDMI 2.1 output and are expected in a year. VRR is available now with the Xbox One X so buying a TV without HDMI 2.1 is going to limit your gaming experience with the next gen hardware. For a start, you are limited to a max of 4k/60 and certainly won't benefit from Variable Refresh rates with certain TV's like the Philips here. Buying this TV in preparation for the next gen - just because its a 4k TV - is a mistake in my opinion and will find yourself missing out on some of the next gen console features.

@wiiware yes the oled lg 9c is very nice, but you have the risk of burn ins. i was gonna buy it but decided to wait for the new tvs of 2020 instead. by then 13ms(and less), hdmi 2.1, 4k 120hz, g-sync etc will be common and hopefully burn ins will not be a problem anymore.

if you absolutely must buy a tv now the samsung qled q90 with 14ms hdmi 2.0b is the one to pick and you will not have the burn in problem. but i recommend to wait for 2020 instead, that is the year of hdmi 2.1.

@BAMozzy its only one problem with the oled lg 9c and that is burn ins, specially if you are gonna use it for gaming. so better wait for the new tvs of 2020.

@LemonHaze what 1ms gaming monitor you use for ps4, do you have the product number so i can look it up?

@TheBuzz Burn in is incredibly unlikely - uneven wear on the other hand is a risk as the individual sub-pixels will get used at different rates. If you look at the RTING's tests, the reason the CNN test was so destructive on the OLEDs is because the Red Sub-pixel - used for displaying the Red CNN logo has worn out quicker than the rest - its not Burn in.

Burn in is a result of having the same static image, box, health bar on screen for a prolonged time without a break causing that to 'burn in' to the screen. It also affects EVERYTHING so every slide etc will show that 'image' burned into it. That doesn't tend to happen with OLEDs unless you really do try...

Burn in and image retention risk can be eliminated by watching other content or switching off the TV but regardless of what's being displayed (or not if the TV is off), its still possible to wear out some sub-pixels much faster than others. The CNN test shows that the Red sub-pixels are worn out - much darker and only affect the slides where Red is used. Its not affecting the Blue slide for example and you can't see the image because its not burned in.

If you spend a lot of time browsing Netflix on an OLED, that Red Logo will eventually cause the Red Sub-pixels there to wear out because they are being used a LOT more and a lot brighter than the red sub-pixels on the rest of the screen and thus will fade causing the Netflix logo to appear 'burned in' on certain slides (like the Red for example) but the Blue and Green slides will still be perfect - no indication of burn-in at all.

Essentially, each sub pixel has a life span and will fade over time with use and if you are using some sub-pixels much more because of a static logo, then they will wear out quicker...

@BAMozzy Yeah I certainly wouldn’t buy an 8K TV until a few years at least and when it’s reasonably priced with more 8K content. I’d really like an oled but burn ins put me off, it would be used as the main tv in the living room so kids channels with the Nickelodeon sign for example would be in the top corner constantly while the channel is on would cause it to burn in, same with sky sport channels.

I think I’ll try and get a good deal on a 65” 4K LED tv that has hdmi 2.1.

@TheBuzz I have lg oled b6, 3 generation below c9 and I don't have burn-in. I use my tv just for games though, already played nier automata more than 100 hours (not at the same time of course lol), and playing cod black op 3 8 hour in same day (4 hour in morning and another 4 hour in afternoon).

Oled rarely burn-in unless you're using the tv for shop display or playing only one game for 1 or 2 years, also I don't feels the lag although I'm not using the tv "game mode" (I don't like it because it's too dark).

Never earlier adopt something In the hope that it will work with an unreleased product. That the way to get burnt when standards change.

@BAMozzy lets hope for an improvement in 2020. at the moment its only lg that offer hdmi2.1. so im interested in seeing what samsung can do next year. this year you only have samsung q90 and lg 9c that is best for gaming, the rest of the tvs on offer is a joke(like this on here in the news article with 30ms). but with that said, i dont feel samsung q90 or lg 9c is quiet there yet. so its better to sit on the fence and save the money at the moment.

@LemonHaze thanks

@MaccaMUFC it's way too early and expensive to invest into a 8k TV right now, 4k tvs are just starting to play catch up with prices and features.

@TheBuzz The rest of the Q series from Samsung and all the LG OLEDs are great for gaming and all have around the same Input lag as the Q90 and C9. The OLEDs, from the entry B9 up, offer HDMI 2.1 and all the Q series offer low latency gaming with VRR too.

Granted each has its Pro's and Con's - mostly relating to the technology of the Screen and both LG and Samsung can improve too - something they will do no doubt in their 2020 range BUT it will be 6-12months before the prices drop on those to be comparable to the prices you can find on this years TV's now. If you are in need of a 4k TV and can't wait until next black Friday to get something comparable to a C9 or Q90, then you have to make do with the choices available now.

I guarantee that you could have the same conversation in a years time too as neither will make the perfect TV that cannot be improved or bettered in any category. There will always be something that can be improved or that a different TV does better in some areas - whether that's black quality or HDR, No risk of Burn In, Image Retention etc or Picture Quality.

You can wait until someone does release the best of both Techs, the 'perfect' TV or TV that has the 'best' stats in every category. You can be constantly be waiting for the end of year sales or waiting to hear what the new TV's will offer but that is up to you. Every November, there is this conversation it seems, buy the current best TV's in the sales or wait to see what the new year and what improvements have been made...

Do yourselves a favour and get the LG OLED 65C9

It's a beast.

Great pun in the headline as usual

Damn that's a good deal! Finally upgraded to a 4K TV for the lounge myself the other day - got an LG B9 55"er from Very at £1099, as can pay monthly interest free over 12mths. Was very close to getting the Samsung Q80, as Samsung's my usual tech brand, but the DolbyVision and 2.1 compatibility on LG OLED sets swung it for me...probably would've gone for the C9 had it been sold on there! People worry about burn in with OLED sets, but from what I've read then it's only really a problem if you're leaving the tv paused for long periods of time or are planning on having the same tv for longer than a decade or so.