Being flagship televisions available today, 8K Ultra-HD TVs not only feature a resolution of 7680×4320 pixels, but also pack all the latest technologies that manufacturers have to offer these days and therefore can provide ultimate experience even with 4K or 2K content. Samsung’s Q900 family of 8K TVs do exactly that, but because of its premium positioning, the company offered them in large sizes, which means price tags excessive for most. Up until this week.

At IFA, Samsung introduced its smallest 8K UHDTV to date: the Q900R 55-inch model QN55Q900RBFXZA, which costs significantly less than the rest of the SKUs in the lineup.

The television uses Samsung’s IPS-class 7680×4320 panel backed by a quantum dot-enhanced LED backlight that promises FALD-like operation, which Samsung dubs Direct Full Array 16X technology (in case of the 55-inch model). The TV features a peak brightness of 4000 nits, which is the maximum luminance at which HDR content is mastered these days. Speaking of HDR, the Q900-series officially supports HDR10, HDR10+, and HLG formats, but not Dolby Vision (at least for now). As far as color gamut is concerned, the Q900-series can reproduce 100% of the DCI-P3 space.

Just like its bigger brothers, the Samsung Q900R 55-inch uses the company’s Quantum Processor 8K as its brain. The SoC is responsible for all decoding, upscaling, and other operations. Among the capabilities of the chip that Samsung is particularly proud of is its proprietary 8K AI Upscaling technology, which is designed to enhance the quality of digital content to panel’s native resolution (does not work with PCs, games, analogue content, etc.). Furthermore, the SoC is also able to interpolate content to 240 FPS and supports AMD’s FreeSync/HDMI Variable Refresh Rate technologies.

Last but not least, the UHDTV comes with a 60-W 4.2-channel audio subsystem.

While technological excellence of Samsung’s Q900-series Ultra-HD televisions is well known, the key feature of the 55-inch model is its price. The 8K television carries a price tag of $2,499, which is in line with higher-end 4K TVs. Considering the fact that retail prices tend to fall below MSRPs, the 55-inch Q900 will likely be considerably more widespread than its larger counterparts.

Related Reading:

Source: Samsung

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • remosito - Friday, September 6, 2019 - link

    does it come with the connect box like its bigger siblings from last year? And if yes, with the new version with hdmi 2.1 or the old version? And if not. What version are the direct hdmi inputs?
  • Alistair - Friday, September 6, 2019 - link

    I don't have good hearing, so I use subtitles frequently, and the local dimming can't be turned off and looks bad with subtitles, so I prefer OLED still. Interesting TV though, I think 8k will hit low prices very quickly.
  • Santoval - Sunday, September 8, 2019 - link

    8K is a blessing for all of us more sane people who think 4K is the "resolution sanity limit" because it will mean drop of prices. Hopefully of 4K OLED prices as well.
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, September 10, 2019 - link

    Economy of scale can mean producing 8K sets will eat into 4K production, keeping 4K pricing higher. And, if people don't want 8K then demand will also push up 4K pricing.

    The best time to get sale pricing is when there is an excess of product and when something has been truly surpassed in terms of quality. Companies are very good at avoiding excess product.
  • quiksilvr - Friday, September 6, 2019 - link

    In what UNIVERSE does a 4K 55" TV cost more than $1000? This TV is going for 2.5x the price for a resolution NO ONE is going to be able to appreciate given the small TV size unless you are literally less than a foot away from the screen.
  • eek2121 - Friday, September 6, 2019 - link

    Early adopters' tax. Also, the other part of your statement is false. As has been demonstrated with 4K computer monitors, there is much to be gained from a higher resolution. Sharper text, reduced need for anti aliasing algorithms, etc.
  • Beaver M. - Friday, September 6, 2019 - link

    Errr... this is not a computer monitor. I would agree on computer monitors that 8K is useful... even on much smaller screens than 55". But on a 55" TV 8K is completely useless.
  • haukionkannel - Monday, September 9, 2019 - link

    No it is not. You can look it much closer distance than 85” tv.
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, September 10, 2019 - link

    8K is useless for television and film because of viewing distance and visual acuity, which drops off quickly with distance.

    The only use 8K sets have is for up-close work.
  • dullard - Tuesday, September 10, 2019 - link

    We are discovering that the conventional idea that visual acuity drops off quickly, is in fact wrong.

    While it is true that you might not be able to see an individual 8K pixel from a distance, you can see textures that cover large swaths of pixels. Textures that are gone in 4K are visible in 8K, even at great distances. Maybe you don't care in TV or film to know what type of material the shirt is made from, to see the goosebumps on the actresses arm, to see exactly how rough the mountain is as the hero slides down it, etc. But, you can finally see it, for those of us who do care.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now