Samsung S95B QD-OLED Black frame insertion

[NeonPizza]

Has anybody tested this TV through the ringer yet? HDTV.Test has confirmed that it's 60hz black frame insertion will give you 650p motion resolution, but no word on Blur reduction/motion persistence and how much nits you're left with. I'm assuming it's BFI will be brighter than the LG C1's since it's QD-OLED instead of regular WRGB.

S95B has also been confirmed to have less BFI flicker than the LG C1's Motion Pro 'high' setting. But i dont know where the LG C1's MotionPro HIGH ranks in terms of motion resolution. Can't seem to get an answer in the AVS forums, but i'm assuming it's close to 700p

Unfortunately, BFI in game mode gives you a whopping 28ms of latency(You get 10ms without BFI, and 5ms with 120fps games). It's such a shame, because in order to get good motion with low latency(that's close to a CRT) is to run games at 120fps...
Nintendo's next console wont be jumping on the 120fps bandwagon, that's a given, since it will be under powered, and will most likely boast the same horse power as a base PS4, with a few extra bells and whistles. I'd be happy and some what content with even 90fps, but that most likely wont happen either.

60fps, without BFI when gaming on OLED looks crappy in motion. it's insane just how much better the same looks running at 120fps.
It's why $4299 CAD for the 65" S95B will be a tough pill to swallow, and then dropping another $500 for a pro calibration to get correct colors and to eliminate the out of box black crushing etc. Heck,the BFI might not even be usable either when streaming if thef flicker becomes too noticeable or gets out of hand too.

Man, so many people seem totally content with OLED motion given how crappy it is without BFI or 120fps, but they're most likely coming from LED's TV that can have very slow motion response times. They all vary of course with different degress of complete suckage. These LED owners are only going up by choosing OLED. I've been a CRT-stickler and plasma lover for years, so OLED, again without BFI or 120fps(gaming) is a big downgrade. Yet Plasma met it's demise in 2013 due to numerous reasons including manufacturing costs etc, and most people jumped on the LED bandwagon, and now OLED in the last couple of years, although LED is still prominant.

[Chief Blur Buster]

HDTV.Test has confirmed that it's 60hz black frame insertion will give you 650p motion resolution

"650p motion resolution" -- I don't like the old analog motion resolution standard. It makes zero sense to me in the modern display modern era. I wish testers would stop using legacy "lines of motion resolution" standards. I totally despise it...

BTW:
www.blurbusters.com/making-of-why-are-testufo-animations-at-960-pixels-per-second

[NeonPizza]

HDTV.Test has confirmed that it's 60hz black frame insertion will give you 650p motion resolution

"650p motion resolution" -- I don't like the old analog motion resolution standard. It makes zero sense to me in the modern display modern era. I wish testers would stop using legacy "lines of motion resolution" standards. I totally despise it...

BTW:
www.blurbusters.com/making-of-why-are-testufo-animations-at-960-pixels-per-second

So what would be the proper term, as far as translating 650p to whatever it's really supposed to mean?
And there hasn't been a single test comparison, compariing motion persistence between the C1's MotionPro High BFI & the S95's BFI.
I seem to be one of the few people interested in BFI whenever i pop in the OLED AVS forums.Yet most people keep yapping on about HDR nits, nits and more nits, as if motion is of no importance.

[Chief Blur Buster]

HDTV.Test has confirmed that it's 60hz black frame insertion will give you 650p motion resolution

"650p motion resolution" -- I don't like the old analog motion resolution standard. It makes zero sense to me in the modern display modern era. I wish testers would stop using legacy "lines of motion resolution" standards. I totally despise it...

BTW:
www.blurbusters.com/making-of-why-are-testufo-animations-at-960-pixels-per-second

So what would be the proper term, as far as translating 650p to whatever it's really supposed to mean?
And there hasn't been a single test comparison, compariing motion persistence between the C1's MotionPro High BFI & the S95's BFI.
I seem to be one of the few people interested in BFI whenever i pop in the OLED AVS forums.Yet most people keep yapping on about HDR nits, nits and more nits, as if motion is of no importance.

I prefer using MPRT (or its inverse) as the modern motion resolution standard.

[Chief Blur Buster]

60fps, without BFI when gaming on OLED looks crappy in motion. it's insane just how much better the same looks running at 120fps.
It's why $4299 CAD for the 65" S95B will be a tough pill to swallow, and then dropping another $500 for a pro calibration to get correct colors and to eliminate the out of box black crushing etc. Heck,the BFI might not even be usable either when streaming if thef flicker becomes too noticeable or gets out of hand too.

I really want to see more BFI innovation such as 35mm-projector-emulator modes. Basically a 96Hz double strobe mode, that does ON-OFF-ON-OFF for the content.

Technically, an external video processor (or a windows indirect display driver) could do it.

[Adi-C]

Has anybody tested this TV through the ringer yet? HDTV.Test has confirmed that it's 60hz black frame insertion will give you 650p motion resolution, but no word on Blur reduction/motion persistence and how much nits you're left with. I'm assuming it's BFI will be brighter than the LG C1's since it's QD-OLED instead of regular WRGB.

S95B has also been confirmed to have less BFI flicker than the LG C1's Motion Pro 'high' setting. But i dont know where the LG C1's MotionPro HIGH ranks in terms of motion resolution. Can't seem to get an answer in the AVS forums, but i'm assuming it's close to 700p

Some answers are in rtings review's graphs, under bfi section- there's a graph there with timescale...
So- oled cx
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/cx-oled
https://imgur.com/d6ABQ5p
is about 3.5ms at bfi high (weird value, but lg did advertise this mode oncehttps://youtu.be/MRFfxJOBubk?t=650), can be enabled @60 and 120hz so you can use low persistence (3.5 being pretty low for oled) at 60hz and 120hz.

C1-
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/c1-oled
(go to bfi section and notice how pulse is longer than cx's, it "fills" more of their 5ms "box" on the graph)
4.2ms is lowest it goes, this mode is usable only at 120hz, 60hz is limited to 8.4ms... So on a c1 you can't even use said 4.2ms @60hz, (which is still a downgrade from cx which is 3.5ms). So it's ok for [email protected], but @60 you only halve persistence to 8.4. C1 is brighter than cx though, according to something like this:
https://youtu.be/YN9xKU1BFqQ?t=260
which makes sense, since pulse is longer (he's testing cx at max, so 3.5ms vs c1's 8.4ms, so obviously brighter).

C2
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/lg/c2-oled
is 8.4ms @60hz, no bfi @120 which suxx, and:

Samsung
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/s95b-oled
is unfortunately same at 8.4ms and only usable @60hz. So yeah, not good.

While you can use their "X" axis for measuring time of the pulse, the "Y" axis of their graphs cannot be used for comparing brightness though.
I heard somewhere that samsung with bfi is brighter that lg (don't remember which one) without bfi... Which bodes well for potential 2023 qd oled models with not just 100/120/144hz bfi modes, but bright ones. Let's hope...

[thatoneguy]

I don't know what these morons at LG Display are doing with them seemingly mandating no 120hz BFI to anyone who uses their panels.
I'm surprised nobody has hacked these things yet to add the 120hz BFI functionality back in.
Why you would allow 60hz BFI but not 120hz is beyond me.

[Chief Blur Buster]

I don't know what these morons at LG Display are doing with them seemingly mandating no 120hz BFI to anyone who uses their panels.
I'm surprised nobody has hacked these things yet to add the 120hz BFI functionality back in.
Why you would allow 60hz BFI but not 120hz is beyond me.

It's a technological limitation of the panel. It can only do 120 refreshes per second. 60Hz BFI was essentially done by running it at 120Hz internally and making every other refresh cycle a black frame.

The C9 could do 240 refresh opportunities per second (up to 120 visible, up to 120 blank), but I think cost-cutting meant the backplane now only supports 120 refresh opportunities of any kind of frame (either visible for blank).

They are trying to find ways to make OLED cheap enough to replace LCD, and... sometimes these things happen at the optimization stage, long before the firmware team discover they can't do 120Hz BFI.

They are not morons, it's simply often a "left hand, right hand" issue at a big company, combined with cost-cutting of OLED.

I would imagine 120Hz BFI (and beyond) will return probably in some future backplane fabbing, but I'm wildly speculating.

[thatoneguy]

^Why do we not have Rolling Scan on OLED TVs yet?
Does it have to do with WOLED not being suited to it?

Also, I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure the C2 wasn't all that much cheaper than the C1 or CX.
And that's not mentioning that the C1's BFI mode was nerfed compared to CX.

[RonsonPL]

They are trying to find ways to make OLED cheap enough to replace LCD, and... sometimes these things happen at the optimization stage, long before the firmware team discover they can't do 120Hz BFI.

They are not morons, it's simply often a "left hand, right hand" issue at a big company, combined with cost-cutting of OLED.

I would imagine 120Hz BFI (and beyond) will return probably in some future backplane fabbing, but I'm wildly speculating.

It may not happen, if it adds even as little as 50 cents to the production cost of each TV.

Just yesterday Sony added 1440p option for Playstation 5. That's over 1.5 years after the console was released. Even as important features like ability to use low latency wired connection for Playstation controllers took them 2 years. And all that had zero cost.
The lack of mainstream interest in a given feature, means it will struggle.
Facebook didn't add proper PC connection to Quest 2, cause it probably would increase the cost of each Quest 2 by like a dollar.

Off-topic the blah blah blah

I'll mark it with a color so it's easier to skip. BTW. Could we get some spoiler feature? Could be useful for off-topic

I'm really not as optimistic it will come back, ever. And the only chance is to get some mainstream attention to it, like when Digital Foundry sent a STRONG message about Sony's stupid lack of "Automatic Low Latency Mode" toggle. It didn't take long before the feature was added and problem solved.
But Digital Foundry doesn't voice their opinions as strongly about the BFI modes. In fact, the only person among their team who realizes the benefits, thinks he's just having some "weird expectations" and always almost apologizes when he mentions that he uses it on his OLED.
I didn't see any "big" youtuber or website "crying" loudly about the current state of BFI in OLEDs. Sadly.
The best I've seen is "too bad, but oh well... not a big deal"

I think they will not return to 240Hz anytime soon, and if they do, I'm afraid they'll add 240Hz input and jack the price up painfully, pushing it as a gaming hardware, and slapping "gaming hardware" somehow allows for magical +100% price hikes.

I'm losing hope, honestly. The biggest chance for good CRT-like displays, in my opinion, lies within VR tech. Sony just announced their PSVR2 will have cineatic mode. 1920x1080 res (per eye) for the virtual screen. For all the non-VR games
It'll be an OLED. Might be the best "TV" for consoles ever released. 1920x1080 with perfect 3D and 60 and 120Hz support. If only they opened it up for PC or somebody hacked it so it could be used on PC.
If the price ends up around 500$ and it actually becomes the best TV for gaming, albeit a virtual one, it would be no brainer at least for me. But Sony is big. If there's no chance of using it with PC, other competitors may not have access to such a good quality display and definitely not at comparable price. Not only they'd pay much more for the display, as Sony can secure bigger orders and use the volume to negotiate the price down, but also the rest of the VR HMD would not be nowhere near the PSVR2, as Sony surely aims to balance the cost of hardware out by profits made on software licencing.