Samsung launches 110-inch ultra-HD TV for $152,000

“Samsung said a 110-inch TV that has four times the resolution of standard high-definition TVs is going on sale for about $150,000 in South Korea,” The Associated Press reports. “The launch Monday of the giant television set reflects global TV makers’ move toward ultra HD TVs, as manufacturing bigger TVs using OLED proves too costly.”

“Last year, Samsung and rival LG Electronics, the world’s top two TV makers, touted OLED as the future of TV. OLED screens are ultrathin and can display images with enhanced clarity and deeper color saturation,” AP reports. “But Samsung and LG failed to make OLED TVs a mainstream that would replace the LCD television sets and still struggling to mass produce larger and affordable TVs with OLED.”

“Demand for U-HD TVs is expected to rise despite dearth of content while its price will likely come down faster than that of the OLED TVs. According to NPD DisplaySearch, global sales of ultra-HD TV sets will surge from 1.3 million this year to 23 million in 2017,” AP reports. “Samsung’s 110-inch U-HD TV measures 2.6 meters by 1.8 meters. It will be available in China, the Middle East and Europe. In South Korea, the TV is priced at 160 million won ($152,000) while prices in other countries vary. Samsung said it received 10 orders for the latest premium TVs from the Middle East.”

Models pose with a Samsung Electronics' 110-inch UHD TV. Samsung on Monday said a 110-inch UHD TV that has four times the resolution of standard high-definition TVs is going on sales for $152,000 in South Korea. (Photo: Samsung/AP)
Models pose with a Samsung Electronics’ 110-inch UHD TV. Samsung on Monday said a 110-inch UHD TV that has four times the resolution of standard high-definition TVs is going on sales for $152,000 in South Korea.
(Photo: Samsung/AP)

 
Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Fred Mertz” and “Lynn Weiler” for the heads up.]

29 Comments

  1. “Four times the resolution”?

    I think its two times the resolution, and four times the pixel count…

    At that size, the pixels aren’t really that small, so you’d need a mini-theater sized room, so you can be far enough away when watching, especially if watching content for “standard” HD.

  2. I don’t get it. I hold my retina display iPad in my hands and I can’t see the pixels. Would I even notice the difference if it were a 4K screen? No. The same is true of my HD TV once I’m the appropriate distance away. I don’t get this push for something I can’t even see. This extravagance is not worth the money as far as I can ‘see’!

    1. Exactly. In order to see the difference between 1080p and 4K, you need to be sitting just a few feet away from a large-screen set (60″ or greater IIRC). The vast majority of consumers won’t be able to tell the difference given how they watch TV.

      (Hell, it’s been demonstrated many times that this group, which again, is the large majority of television consumers, can’t tell the difference between 720p and 1080p! And we’re expecting these people to be blown away by UHD?)

      ——RM

  3. I bet it doesn’t even support 4k @60fps which is what the 4K broadcast standard will be. Most 4K TVs available only support 4k @ 24fps via HDMI 1.4 for films. HDMI 2.0 allows for 4k 60 fps.I would feel like quite the sucker buying a TV for that much (or even the “cheaper” models) only to see newer models with “proper” 4K support come along later.

  4. Already behind the times and too expensive.

    It would appear as though this is UHDTV (2160×3840). Sharp and NHK (among others) were demonstrating almost a year ago a “Super Hi-Vision” TV that is 4320×7680. While general, public availability is projected to be 2016 or later and general transmissions at that resolution is not expected until 2019 or later, demoing a 110″ flat screen for $152,000 is definitely out of step with the timelines of most leading edge vendors.

      1. I do believe that the Sony 55″ XBR Series LED Ultra HDTV – XBR55X900A fits the bill quite nicely.
        One has to see this TV in person to appreciate the picture quality.
        Don’t worry about 4K content…it’s coming to cable and Apple TV.

  5. People asking how you would fit this in your house? Well, I’m pretty sure that if you can afford to spend 150,000 dollars on a tv, then you probably have a big enough house and income to match, I’m sure you can put aside an extra 20k to knock down a wall and have it replaced if necessary.

  6. “Demand for U-HD TVs is expected to rise…”

    Really? It’s all anecdotal, I know, but outside of the “I gotta have the latest everything” crowd, I don’t know of anyone who cares about UHD. If what I’ve read is correct, in order to see a difference between 1080p and 4K, you need a fairly large TV and you need to be sitting close to it. The vast majority of households I’ve been to either have modest TVs with seating nearby (like my house), or large-screen TVs mounted on the other side of the room from where everyone sits. Neither of these groups will see much of an improvement from UHD — the screen are either too small or too far away.

    I’ll get a 4K set eventually, probably because that’s all that will be available by the time I’m ready for a new TV. And at that time I expect the prices to be similar to what we pay for HD sets now. But no way am I dropping large bucks so I can have a UHD set early. It’s a waste of money.

    ——RM

    1. My friend spend twice as much for his Sony 4K set that I did for my new TV. I can’t really see any deference from where I sit. I like you point out, if you need to get close enough to see the deference, how can you enjoy what you are seeing?

      1. I first saw the Sony 55″ XBR Series LED Ultra HDTV – XBR55X900A last September in the Mall of Asia, Philippines and I was amazed. My brother in law, first cousin and I were walking out the shops whilst my wife, her sister and the rest of the clan were shopping.
        You have to see this TV to believe how great the image is on it. We stood about 2 and a half meters from the TV and watched the looped programming for over an hour. It looked like high quality print come to life, the colors and detail was unbelievable; the image was twice as sharp or better than 1080P.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.