Hey! If you buy through our links, you support our project. It won't cost you a cent more! Many thanks in advance! β₯οΈ
The Samsung QN90A can handle direct light better due to its higher brightness and the anti-reflective coating. However, you can also see that the biggest drawback of OLED TVs is not as noticeable as many think.
Even though the Samsung QN90A has a wide viewing angle layer, the LG OLED evo G1 is still better – in terms of viewing angle. Despite the missing layer, the OLED has an even wider viewing angle where the picture does not lose quality. However, it has to be said that the QN90A is also sufficient for any use here and such a slanted angle would be nonsensical.
In a direct comparison, LG G1 vs Samsung QN90A, both TVs perform extremely well. The theoretically infinitely high contrast and the resulting perfect black level of the LG G1 ensure an excellent SDRStandard Dynamic Range – image/video with a conventional gamma curve (opposite: HDR) – “normal” videos picture quality. Samsung’s QN90A, however, also performs extremely well here due to its Full Array Local Dimming as well as the wide color space.
HDRHigh Dynamic Range – image/video with more dynamic range (contrast range) content looks simply stunning on both high-end TVs, but once again the LG G1 has the edge here. The QN90A has all sorts of gimmicks that improve the picture quality, especially in terms of HDR, thanks to the mini-LED backlight and full array local dimming, but the G1 is just that little bit better here. The perfect black level as well as the lack of any blooming effects let the G1 present the better picture quality, especially in a dark environment.
When watching movies and series on a regular basis, both TVs should be able to convince just about everyone. Both TVs offer amazing picture quality, whether with SDRStandard Dynamic Range – image/video with a conventional gamma curve (opposite: HDR) – “normal” videos or HDRHigh Dynamic Range – image/video with more dynamic range (contrast range) content. Thus, both are very suitable for everyday use, and the G1’s improved evo panel means you have to worry even less about the notorious burn-in risk.
The rating already shows it: both TVs are ideally suited as gaming TVs. Thanks to the HDMI 2.1 interfaces, the 120 HzHertz is the derived SI-unit of frequency with 1Hz=1/s – When talking about TVs this means how many different pictures a TV can display in one second. panel, VRRVariable Refresh Rate – synchronizes the display’s refresh rate with the output refresh rate of the graphics card, Free- and G-SyncVariable Refresh Rate for Nvidia graphics cards and an extremely low response time, even the latest gaming consoles, i.e. Xbox Series X and Playstation 5, can be used to their full potential.
Thanks to the good viewing angle of both flagship models, every sports event can be enjoyed even in a large group. The 120 HzHertz is the derived SI-unit of frequency with 1Hz=1/s – When talking about TVs this means how many different pictures a TV can display in one second. panel and the fast response time provide perfect motion handling in fast scenes. The LG G1 also features the Automatic Brightness Limiter, which reduces the picture brightness when a scene becomes brighter over a large area. Such scenes are rare, but occur more often especially in the sports segment, such as winter sports.
The equipment of both rivals is largely the same. The main difference here is the operating system, which offers the latest version of the company’s internal software in each case. Both TVs have 4 HDMI2.1 interfaces and an Hdmi-eARC connection is also available on both TVs.
For most, the LG OLED G1 should be the better choice. It generally performs better, except when there is a lot of reflection on the TV – but this can be fixed with a curtain in virtually all cases. The G1 is the slightly better option both as a dedicated home theater and for gaming or sports. However, Samsung’s Neo QLED QN90A is better here when it comes to a crisp and color-intensive picture. However, this is highly subjective and simply a matter of taste.