The Q70T was also released in 2020 and is the next cheaper QLED from Samsung. However, when comparing these two devices directly, it quickly becomes obvious that the Q80T plays in a different league. The picture quality of the Q80T is much better because it has Full Array Local Dimming and the Q70T only has edge lit. In addition, the Q70T’s viewing angle is quite small, as it does not have the Ultra-Viewing-Angle layer like the Q80T. These two circumstances alone make the Q80T a much better product, and the extra cost is really worth it. The Q70T’s reflection handling is also not comparable to the Q80T, which makes the Q80T look much better in bright rooms.
Both have an HDMI 2.1 port, which makes them interesting for console gamers, but overall the Q80T does better under all circumstances than its sister model.
The Q85T can be used somewhat well in bright rooms, but its picture quality still decreases noticeably. The X950H can be perfectly used here, as it has a high maximum brightness of ~1000 Nits and excellent reflection handling. Both TVs use a layer to extend the viewing angle, but the X950H’s one is not really convincing. At a slightly oblique viewing angle, the colours become blurred and the picture no longer looks nearly as good, making the Q85T clearly superior. In addition, this layer has a negative effect on the contrast ratio which is especially noticeable on the Sony device. Its contrast ratio is only 3200:1.
The X950H is not really suitable for gamers. Playing games is fun with it, but it misses many useful features that are already integrated in cheaper devices. For example, the possibility of a variable refresh rate is missing and the input lag of 19ms isn’t quite as good.
Moreover, an HDMI 2.1 interface is missing.
LG’s CX performs better in comparison with the Q80T. This is mainly due to the OLED’s much better picture quality. This is the case because it has brilliant contrast on the one hand and perfect black on the other. The supposed disadvantage that OLED TVs perform worse in bright rooms is also only partly evident in this comparison. The Q80T does get a bit brighter, but the maximum brightness is still sufficiently high and the reflection handling is equally excellent, which allows both the CX and the Q80T to be used in brighter rooms. A small disadvantage for the picture quality is the Automatic Brightness Limiter, which reduces the CX’s maximum brightness in large bright scenes to avoid burn-in. The motion handling looks similar. The Q80T’s highlight was the Motion Handling, but it can’t quite keep up with the CX. Both devices have excellent characteristics here, but the response time of the CX is much lower at 0.2ms, which results in no visible blur trails. Because of the low response time slow pans can result in The input lag is very low on both TVs, but the Q80T is ahead here, which can be important for gamers. Both have an HDMI 2.1 port, which makes them suitable for next-gen consoles.
Thus, a direct comparison shows that the CX scores better in almost all categories. Both devices have a quite similar gaming performance, but the CX is more convincing in general with a considerably better picture quality.