New Samsung 40" MU6300

RedWagnum

RedWagnum

Gawd
Joined
Mar 30, 2007
Messages
607
Moving things around and moving the computer into a smaller room that does not have space for both a TV and computer monitor(s). Currently running a 16x10 Samsung 24" and a 16x9 Acer 24". Been wanting to get the KU6290 or 6300 for a while but the Best Buy near me never has them in stock or available for shipping. (???) So I'm looking at the UN40MU6300 which is currently available for pickup. I cant really find any comparison table between the KS/KU series and the MU series. Yes, I know the KS/KU is the 2016 models and the MU is the 2017 model - I just can't find what has been "improved" or "upgraded" for this model year. Anybody got any experience with the 2017 models yet?

Additionally, for the time being I'll be running this monitor (okay, TV) on a Radeon 6950. I don't think this card has HDMI 2.0 so I don't think I'll be able to get 4K/60Hz on it. But I should be able to get 4K/30Hz, right? That will do for desktop work until I build my new system in a few weeks.

Any comments or suggestions? All are welcome!
 
I've been wanting the KU6920/6300 for a couple months now. As luck would have it, I found a BNIB UN43MU6300 on craigslist a couple days ago for cheap. This is my first 4k display, so I can't compare it to others or last years model. I'm also not a visualphile, so I can't tell you about color accuracy, response time, ghosting, or any of that. But I can say the display is gorgeous IMO. 4K content from youtube and Netflix looks great. 1080 and 720 content also looks totally fine to my eyes.

I am running it off an XFX R9 390, which I believe doesn't have HDMI 2.0, so it did output at 4K/30 over HDMI. I then got a Club3D Displayport 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapter and was able to display 4K/60 with 4:4:4 chroma.

I say try it out. And if you don't like it, you can always return it.
 
Thanks for your input Okashii -- it is appreciated. Good luck with your new TV/Monitor. Not too sure how far out a new video card is so I may have to look into the DP -> HDMI adapter. Anyone know if a DVI -> HDMI cable would give me 4K/60Hz? I have those available.
 
Be careful with the HD6950, I don't think it supports 4K at any Hz.

  • DisplayPort 1.2
    • Max resolution: 2560x1600 per display
    • Multi-Stream Transport
    • 21.6 Gbps bandwidth
    • High bit-rate audio
  • HDMI® (With 3D, Deep Color and x.v.Color™)
    • Max resolution: 1920x1200
  • Dual-link DVI with HDCP
    • Max resolution: 2560x1600
  • VGA
  • Max resolution: 2048x1536
http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/graphics/desktop/6000/6950
 
Awww nuts! I guess I should have looked that up. My card has been flashed with the 6970 BIOS and though that makes it faster, I doesn't expand the max resolution. Looks like if I'm going to do this I'll have to get the video card now too. Thanks for pointing that out DooLocsta - that helps me (but puts a big hurt on the wallet!) :)
 
Going to pull the trigger on this TV Friday or Saturday. Just ordered an Asus 1080GTX Strix and the associated water cooling components that should be here Thursday. Thanks for the input!
 
Does anyone have any more info on this TV? I would love to try it to use as a monitor. Anyone know what kind of input lag it has? Response time etc? Mainly using it for PC and Console gaming.
 
From what I've seen in Samsungs "specs' (I laugh when they call that specifications... it's shameless), there seems to be 0 difference technically from my KU 6290. The MU has, according to Samsung, Color Drive Pro and 4K HDR Pro, for color and contrast, respectively. What that means, is that what is new is the marketing name, as the panels are pretty much the same, so they don't have better specifications.

There is a reason they don't really tell you what the nits or color gamut coverage is in these cheaper TVs - because there is no difference. Until you see that these TVs support HDR Premium (literally, that word, Premium), you'll know that nothing relevant has changed. These TVs can neither achieve 1000nits nor 90% DCI P3 coverage. That's why, the KU series has HDR+ mode, and the MU series has HDR Pro. Notice how neither of those is Premium, which is the official validation. AKA, Plus and Pro are bull***t.

If you find a good discount on a KU 6290, go for it: same IQ as the 2017 models for less money. Personally, I won't upgrade it until 2018-19, when I expect most TVs to have actual HDR Premium support (understanding HDR10 signal is not enough. Technically you'd need FALD backlight, but it's still decent with edge backlight).

SoupyFlow said:
Does anyone have any more info on this TV? I would love to try it to use as a monitor. Anyone know what kind of input lag it has? Response time etc? Mainly using it for PC and Console gaming.
Click to expand...

I'm using a 40" KU 6290 as monitor. I can't give you too many specifics, but input lag (according to Rtings review of the KU 6300, which is esentially the same as the 6290) is good for a TV. Response time, some people are really picky, it's more noticeable on warm tones, but I've been using it for months with no problem. Unless you're used to 120hz monitors and play FPS games competitively, frankly for the price you're getting a great display. I play Doom, CoD, Battlefield, Mirror's Edge, Tomb Raider, Hitman, etc... on this display and have 0 problems. I came to this from a 1080p 60hz monitor, so again, unless you're used to ultra-smooth 120hz, you'll be fine.
 
Be very careful with the new MU line. The reason being is they moved all the top end / high end features to the Q series, not the MU line. rtings is saying the 2016 KS series is better than both the MU and Q series.

http://www.samsung.com/us/televisions-home-theater/tvs/qled-tvs/s/_/n-10+11+hv1uh+zq2jh/

And Samsung jacked the prices WAY WAY up on their new fake OLED competitor they are calling the QLED.

So if you can get a KS, get it now ... they are currently on clearance. If you have one like I do, do not let it go. This type of shit happens all the time. LG took out a lot of features on their low-end models 5 or 6 years ago and a lot of people slammed those changed here and on Amazon.

I very briefly had the 49" MU 8000 expecting it to be amazing and was almost instantly ..... hugely disappointed. Side by side, the KS8000 destroyed the new MU 2017 series. I literally took the TV back the following day and then slammed it on Amazon.

I can't speak to the MU low end sets, they still might be a good buy for a PC display.

There is a lot of BS going on right now with 4K and HDR. I would definitely wait for a few years until all the shit settles a bit and these assholes get back to the lower prices hopefully do to increased competition from China. Trust me, they will figure it out.
 
SixFootDuo said:
Be very careful with the new MU line. The reason being is they moved all the top end / high end features to the Q series, not the MU line. rtings is saying the 2016 KS series is better than both the MU and Q series.

http://www.samsung.com/us/televisions-home-theater/tvs/qled-tvs/s/_/n-10+11+hv1uh+zq2jh/

And Samsung jacked the prices WAY WAY up on their new fake OLED competitor they are calling the QLED.

So if you can get a KS, get it now ... they are currently on clearance. If you have one like I do, do not let it go. This type of shit happens all the time. LG took out a lot of features on their low-end models 5 or 6 years ago and a lot of people slammed those changed here and on Amazon.

I very briefly had the 49" MU 8000 expecting it to be amazing and was almost instantly ..... hugely disappointed. Side by side, the KS8000 destroyed the new MU 2017 series. I literally took the TV back the following day and then slammed it on Amazon.

I can't speak to the MU low end sets, they still might be a good buy for a PC display.

There is a lot of BS going on right now with 4K and HDR. I would definitely wait for a few years until all the shit settles a bit and these assholes get back to the lower prices hopefully do to increased competition from China. Trust me, they will figure it out.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info! Yeah I normally only buy Samsung TVs, however I am a huge fan of OLED technology and can't wait until prices come down a bit more and it's more standard. However, it really irks me how Samsung is doing this cheesy QLED marketing crap and of course had to use the letter "Q" since its almost like an "O" and all it does is confuse customers. I recently tried out a Sony TV (X800d) for the first time since the 90s when I bought a Trinitron tube TV and I ended up returning it. I still think Samsung makes the best LCD based TVs, but I will replace everything I have with OLED once it is more affordable.

The HDR battle is also pretty annoying. By the time it's all settled OLED technology will be cheaper and the better choice. You basically don't need HDR with OLED screens though since they already produce literal blacks and amazing colors. HDR seems like another crutch that LCD technology has to use, much like 120/240hz frame interpolation. Can't wait for LCD to just die.
 
SoupyFlow said:
The HDR battle is also pretty annoying. By the time it's all settled OLED technology will be cheaper and the better choice. You basically don't need HDR with OLED screens though since they already produce literal blacks and amazing colors. HDR seems like another crutch that LCD technology has to use, much like 120/240hz frame interpolation. Can't wait for LCD to just die.
Click to expand...

Hey, no offense, but if you don't really understand what you're talking about, don't spread misinformation. HDR is the first huge image quality advancement in the past 4 decades or so. We're still using SDR signal which dates back to around the 60s, if I remember correctly. Much more contrast headroom in highlights and darks, paired with BT2020 colorspace which is ridiculously more ample than the crap we now use (BT 709) is a huge step forward in image quality. This has absolutely nothing, zero to do with LCDs: all screens benefit from this: LCD, cinema, OLED, QLED... whatever you want. An OLED will have great contrast no matter what, but the image will never look as good as what OLED can offer if it's encoded in SDR. HDR is what sets an OLED display free.

Also, maybe don't rain on LCDs so much. If it weren't for them, we'd still be using CRT monitors and people wouldn't have 55" TVs hanging on their wall. LCDs have had a respectable place in history, but now we're finally getting to the point where it'll soon make sense to retire them (although, not yet, and OLED economies of scale + manufacturing improvements still have to show up... and it's taken 5 years so far with little gains, so take that into account.)

For reference:

ColorSpace.jpg


High-Dynamic-Range.jpg
 
Last edited:
euskalzabe said:
Hey, no offense, but if you don't really understand what you're talking about, don't spread misinformation. HDR is the first huge image quality advancement in the past 4 decades or so. We're still using SDR signal which dates back to around the 60s, if I remember correctly. Much more contrast headroom in highlights and darks, paired with BT2020 colorspace which is ridiculously more ample than the crap we now use (BT 709) is a huge step forward in image quality. This has absolutely nothing, zero to do with LCDs: all screens benefit from this: LCD, cinema, OLED, QLED... whatever you want. An OLED will have great contrast no matter what, but the image will never look as good as what OLED can offer if it's encoded in SDR. HDR is what sets an OLED display free.

Also, maybe don't rain on LCDs so much. If it weren't for them, we'd still be using CRT monitors and people wouldn't have 55" TVs hanging on their wall. LCDs have had a respectable place in history, but now we're finally getting to the point where it'll soon make sense to retire them (although, not yet, and OLED economies of scale + manufacturing improvements still have to show up... and it's taken 5 years so far with little gains, so take that into account.)

For reference:

ColorSpace.jpg


High-Dynamic-Range.jpg
Click to expand...
Yeah man, I think he is speaking to all the jockying going on with standards and such right now and not necessarily HDR.

At least that's the way I see it.
 
Wow, thanks for all the input guys! I went to my local BB and looked at the MU6300 and was thoroughly disappointed. They had some kind of Ninja Turtles demo playing on it and the screen really looked bad. Looked like someone had turned the saturation up to 11! Or maybe even 12. Talking to the salesman about it and he said the unit was in "retail" mode which basically sets everything to max. Asked him to set it to normal mode which he did but the thing still didnt look very good. Directly opposite of the Samsung they had an LG 43" 43UJ6300. This TV looked MUCH better than the Samsung. It was running a different demo so I couldn't do a direct compare but it looked so much better -- colors were more natural, whites looked white, blacks looked dark (well, are dark as you are likely to get on an IPS panel). It was three inches bigger and $20 cheaper than the Samsung, so I sprung for it. $429 for a decent 43" UHD display is pretty good in my book. I'm still playing around with it trying to figure out the (basically undocumented) settings and what works best for me.

Right now I have the TV on my desk but my desk has a hutch on it that the TV will not fit in or under so it is sitting about 10" closer than I minimally want it. Due to sitting so close to it the edges of the screen are quite dark with the last 1/4" or so giving this weird 3D effect due to the light guides in the screen. Makes the scroll bar at the right of the screen look like it is detached and pushed back behind the level of the screen. Very weird effect! If I sit back from the screen another foot or so it looks pretty much normal. Tomorrow I plan to remove the hutch and move the TV back as far as I can. That should help a great deal. If not I'll have to wall mount it. That will give me about another 6" or so. This is one of the reasons I was looking at the Sammy 40 incher. I really thought anything bigger than 40" would give me problems like this -- looks like I was right. I think 32" to 40" is the sweet spot for a 4K monitor. Smaller than 32" and I don't think you really get the benefit of the resolution, larger than 40" and you run into viewing angle problems like I'm having. YMMV though.
 
euskalzabe said:
Hey, no offense, but if you don't really understand what you're talking about, don't spread misinformation. HDR is the first huge image quality advancement in the past 4 decades or so. We're still using SDR signal which dates back to around the 60s, if I remember correctly. Much more contrast headroom in highlights and darks, paired with BT2020 colorspace which is ridiculously more ample than the crap we now use (BT 709) is a huge step forward in image quality. This has absolutely nothing, zero to do with LCDs: all screens benefit from this: LCD, cinema, OLED, QLED... whatever you want. An OLED will have great contrast no matter what, but the image will never look as good as what OLED can offer if it's encoded in SDR. HDR is what sets an OLED display free.

Also, maybe don't rain on LCDs so much. If it weren't for them, we'd still be using CRT monitors and people wouldn't have 55" TVs hanging on their wall. LCDs have had a respectable place in history, but now we're finally getting to the point where it'll soon make sense to retire them (although, not yet, and OLED economies of scale + manufacturing improvements still have to show up... and it's taken 5 years so far with little gains, so take that into account.)

For reference:

SixFootDuo said:
Yeah man, I think he is speaking to all the jockying going on with standards and such right now and not necessarily HDR.

At least that's the way I see it.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Exactly what SixFootDuo said. I didn't mean HDR is fake or not needed, I was just saying that by the time the standard HDR format comes to light, OLED will be more affordable and the better choice. But I do hate LCD technology as far as TVs go. It was a shame when Plasma went out, other than OLED, it's my second favorite TV technology.
 
Luke M said:
LG is a bad choice (except for the OLEDs) because they use 1920x2160 RGBW panels.
Click to expand...
Right you were! I used the LG TV for about 10 days and just didn't like it. I think that, for the price, it is a pretty decent 4K TV but as a monitor not so much. Due to my arrangement, I think I will stick with a traditional monitor for now and see if I can squeeze in a 4K TV later.

Thanks for your comments!
 
braamer said:
Rtings.com has done their review on the MU6300, and it doesn't look too bad.

http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/mu6300
Click to expand...

PC gamers take note rtings.com says this:



Better than average for HDR gaming. Input lag remains low at every setting, which is essential. The actual effect of HDR could be better though.


Below average for use as a PC monitor. Essential resolutions are present, but trails following moving objects are a bit longer than desired. The narrow viewing angles also cause corners of the screen to darken if used from up close.
 
euskalzabe said:
Also, maybe don't rain on LCDs so much. If it weren't for them, we'd still be using CRT monitors and people wouldn't have 55" TVs hanging on their wall. LCDs have had a respectable place in history, but now we're finally getting to the point where it'll soon make sense to retire them (although, not yet, and OLED economies of scale + manufacturing improvements still have to show up... and it's taken 5 years so far with little gains, so take that into account.)
Click to expand...

You're forgetting plasma. I just bought a 55" KU6300 to replace a 42" Daewoo plasma that I bought in 2003 or 2004. The Daewoo was my first flat screen and has been proudly hanging on the wall since then. I'm actually a bit sad to see it go, it has served me well. Ultimately some drawbacks of the geometry (it has a native 1024x768 resolution even though it is 16:9 aspect ratio) and the lack of any HDMI inputs (and only a single DVI input) mean it is time to give it up.

Then there was also DLP. I'm actually not an LCD fan, I think most of them look like crap. They have gotten much better with the advent of LED backlighting, but it is still an inferior technology to CRT and plasma in many ways. I will not shed a single tear when OLED delivers the death blow to LCD, as LCD did to plasma, DLP and CRT.
 
I have been looking at new TV the past few days and I believe the KS8000 are far better then all MU. I am not sold on the QLED for the price they asking for. I agree you better off going for the KS8000 over any of the MU and the LG OLED over Samsung QLED if money is no concern. I was going to pull the trigger on a KS8000 today but I can't find one for sell around me anymore. I Waited too long =(
 
Last edited:
vegeta535 said:
I have been looking at new TV the past few days and I believe the KS8000 are far better then all MU. I am not sold on the QLED for the price they asking for. I agree you better off going for the KS8000 over any of the MU and the LG OLED over Samsung QLED if money is no concern. I was going to pull the trigger on a KS8000 today but I can't find one for sell around me anymore. I Waited too long =(
Click to expand...

I been debating whether to get one myself. This is the cheapest I have seen recently:http://www.joesav.com/Samsung-LED-HDTV-p/UN49KS8000FXZA.htm?gclid=CLHtq9zdldQCFYY2gQodaFAFVA Not sure where you live though.
 
My local Best Buy has the 49" 8000 series for $900. Tempted, but don't really have the cash at the moment.
 
vegeta535 said:
I have been looking at new TV the past few days and I believe the KS8000 are far better then all MU. I am not sold on the QLED for the price they asking for. I agree you better off going for the KS8000 over any of the MU and the LG OLED over Samsung QLED if money is no concern. I was going to pull the trigger on a KS8000 today but I can't find one for sell around me anymore. I Waited too long =(
Click to expand...
This Sony X900 looks really good and Rtings.com rates it higher than the KS8500

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01N284JCN/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

EDIT: My mistake. I clicked KS8500 at rtings, instead of KS8000.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Rtings.com says this in comparison between the Sony X900e and the KS8000:

The Samsung KS8000 was our top recommended TV last year and, if you can still find it in stores, will be a slightly better choice over the X900E. Its blacks are deeper and even more uniform, and it's able to produce colors that are even more saturated. Most people will be pleased with either TV, but the KS8000 is a slightly better pick since it is cheaper.


http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x900e

Also if you look at the input lag for the X900e it is 31ms for 1080p and 34ms for 4K while the KS8000 is just under 21ms for both. All this according to Rtings.com
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Well from what I have seen and read I'd get the KS over the MU model and I would get the KS over the Sony as well. This as far as a PC monitor/gaming use. For everything else (TV, movies, etc.,) they are all pretty good and you cant go wrong with either. At some point the MU models may prove better than the KS models but I have yet to see or read that. This all of course is just my own opinion based on my own research.

What has stopped me from buying a Samsung KS model tv for pc monitor/gaming is a worry that if I buy one now then at the end of the year or early next year they come out with TVs that do 4k @ 120Hz. I keep hearing rumors of it coming but nothing concrete from the manufacturers. So I wait. Not always in patience though.
 
Last edited:
Skott said:
...at the end of the year or early next year they come out with TVs that do 4k @ 120Hz. I keep hearing rumors of it coming but nothing concrete from the manufacturers. So I wait. Not always in patience though.
Click to expand...

would you be able to push 4k @ 120hz from a PC? I'm having a hell of a time getting Mac OS to do anything but 4k @ 30hz. Windows is able to do 60hz with my video card but what kind of GPU and connections would it take for 120hz

fwiw I have the MU6300 40" and it works pretty well as a monitor except for the 30hz mac os issues I'm having
 
JohnnyCashout said:
would you be able to push 4k @ 120hz from a PC? I'm having a hell of a time getting Mac OS to do anything but 4k @ 30hz. Windows is able to do 60hz with my video card but what kind of GPU and connections would it take for 120hz

fwiw I have the MU6300 40" and it works pretty well as a monitor except for the 30hz mac os issues I'm having
Click to expand...

No I couldn't push 120Hz currently but I'd hate to buy a tv now and then say come holidays they have the new models that do have 120Hz. I just don't want to buy something that is obsolete in a few short months if I can help it. If you get my meaning? I been going back and forth on this for a short while now. Plus I been waiting to see if Vega RX comes in cheaper and/or better performance than the current NVidia 1080Ti GPU. Now we have to wait for end of July to find out(Vega Frontier releases June 27th). Its part of my equation of what to buy for 4k gaming. nVidias's 1080Ti or the new Vega RX gpu? I'm thinking when Vega RX comes out that's when I'll decide what I am going to do.
 
well I'm just about ready to give up and return this 40" MU6300

it works great in Windows 10 at 4k 60hz but I just can't get it to work at 60hz on Mac OS - 2014 rMBP only does 30hz and my hackintosh with a GTX 970 only does 30hz in Mac OS (60hz in windows)

the vast majority of my usage of this will be in Mac OS for work, I barely can enjoy it at 60hz in windows games so I need something that will freaking work properly at 4k 60hz in Mac OS
 
JohnnyCashout said:
it works great in Windows 10 at 4k 60hz but I just can't get it to work at 60hz on Mac OS - 2014 rMBP only does 30hz and my hackintosh with a GTX 970 only does 30hz in Mac OS (60hz in windows)
Click to expand...

Uh... doesn't that seem like a problem with Mac OS, not the display? Just saying... Try switching to 4:2:2 on MacOS, see if that allows you to use it at 60hz.
 
euskalzabe said:
Uh... doesn't that seem like a problem with Mac OS, not the display? Just saying... Try switching to 4:2:2 on MacOS, see if that allows you to use it at 60hz.
Click to expand...

not sure how to switch to 4:2:2, but nothing I've tried so far as worked. And yeah it does seem like a problem with Mac OS since Windows works fine, but unfortunately for work I don't have a choice. 95% of the usage of this thing will be in Mac OS, I rarely am able to boot into Windows to play any games. So I will need to get something that for sure works at 60hz on a Mac and I guess I will have to get something with a displayport. Unfortunately not a lot of great options for 40" 4k monitors with displayport out there
 
finally got this thing working at 60hz on a hackintosh with GTX 970 with a club 3d active DP->HDMI2 adapter. same configuration was only working 30hz then suddenly the 60hz option showed up randomly in display properties.

too bad I had just ordered a LG 43UD79-B the night before because I was sick of 30hz. now the samsung decides to work at 60hz =P oh well, samsung will be returned unless the LG is a lemon (not many reviews out for it yet)
 
JohnnyCashout said:
finally got this thing working at 60hz on a hackintosh with GTX 970 with a club 3d active DP->HDMI2 adapter. same configuration was only working 30hz then suddenly the 60hz option showed up randomly in display properties.

too bad I had just ordered a LG 43UD79-B the night before because I was sick of 30hz. now the samsung decides to work at 60hz =P oh well, samsung will be returned unless the LG is a lemon (not many reviews out for it yet)
Click to expand...

You gonna use the LG for gaming? Let me know your impressions, seriously. I'm interested, will lose Gsync on the X34 but I'm tired of 21:9. The LG looks pretty neat.
 
delita said:
You gonna use the LG for gaming? Let me know your impressions, seriously. I'm interested, will lose Gsync on the X34 but I'm tired of 21:9. The LG looks pretty neat.
Click to expand...

yeah some casual gaming will be done, I'll update the existing thread for the LG 43UD79-B once I get it and try it out


*update, I am no hardcore fps gamer who needs 200hz refresh rate and all that jazz. I've played some games on the LG 43UD79-B and it has been great for me
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top