Samsung QN90D vs TCL C855: Do you really get what you pay for?

The Samsung QN90D and TCL C855 represent mid-range options within their respective line-ups, with both 4K HDR TVs offering similar specifications. However, the Samsung model is priced at a premium over its TCL alternative, with the Korean giant prioritising performance over affordability.

This raises an interesting question: does Samsung’s claims of superior picture quality justify the price premium? Let’s take a detailed look at these two Mini LED TVs, with an emphasis on testing the picture quality to objectively establish which one offers the best value relative to performance.

For the purposes of this evaluation I have directly compared and tested the Samsung 75QN90D against the TCL 75C855. All the objective measurements were conducted using Portrait Displays’ C6 HDR5000 colour meter, VideoForge Pro pattern generator, and Calman calibration software.

Price

The Samsung QN90D is the cheapest of the brand’s 2024 Neo QLED 4K TVs, and is currently available in a range of screen sizes. There are 43-inch (£999), 50-inch (£1,099), 55-inch (£1,299), 65-inch (£1,749), 75-inch (£2,599), 85-inch (£4,199) and 98-inch (£7,999) models to choose from.

The TCL C855 sits towards the higher end of the brand’s line-up, with the focus on larger screen sizes but at more affordable prices. If you want smaller screens look elsewhere because the C855 only comes in 65-inch (£1,299), 75-inch (£1,699), 85-inch (£2,089) and 98-inch (£3,999) sizes.

There’s not much in it in terms of looks, control and connections

The Samsung QN90D and TCL C855 both follow the standard template for modern TV design with a narrow metal base, angled stand and bezel-less screen. The build quality and finish is good, although the Samsung feels a little more polished and at 28mm deep from top to bottom, compared to the C855’s 56mm, it is also sleeker and easier to wall mount.

The connections on these TVs are located at the right rear as you face the screen, and while both include USB connectors, an Ethernet port, satellite and terrestrial tuners, a CI (Common Interface) slot, and an optical digital output, they do differ when it comes to HDMI.

The QN90D sports four HDMI 2.1 inputs compared to the C855’s two (along with two HDMI 2.0 inputs). So if you’re already using one of the HDMI 2.1 inputs on the C855 for eARC, you can only use the other for one next-gen gaming console at a time.

On the plus side, while all the HDMI 2.1 inputs support HDR10, HLG, HDR10+, VRR, ALLM, and 4K/144Hz, the C855 can also handle Dolby Vision, giving it an advantage in this regard.

In terms of wireless connectivity both TVs have Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, while the QN90D supports Apple AirPlay 2 and the C855 includes Chromecast. So I guess we’ll call it a draw on this one.

The QN90D comes with two controllers: a standard black zapper, and the Solar Cell remote with its rechargeable batteries. It uses Bluetooth and is more eco-friendly. There’s a choice of Bixby or Amazon Alexa for voice control, and the excellent SmartThings app for setup and operation.

The C855 infrared remote is a fairly standard but capable controller that’s finished in silver and has its volume controls located on the side, which is unusual. There’s the option of voice control via Google Assistant, and a degree of additional setup and control through the Google Home app.

There’s not much in it as far as control is concerned, although the QN90D just beats the C855.

The Samsung QN90D edges ahead in terms of smarts and sounds

The Samsung QN90D uses the brand’s Tizen-powered smart system, while the TCL C855 includes Google TV. The two platforms are fairly similar, and both have an extensive choice of streaming apps. However, I did find the QN90D to be more responsive when navigating the system, and due to ongoing issues with Google the C855 is missing the UK TV catch-up services. So overall I’d say the QN90D wins the battle of the smarts.

The two TVs are well-endowed sonically, with the QN90D boasting a 4.2.2-channel speaker configuration, with Object Tracking Sound Plus and 60W of amplification; while the C855 also has 60W of onboard juice driving a 2.1.2-channel Onkyo sound system. Both support Dolby Atmos, but the C855 can also handle DTS, which is something of a rarity these days.

They each have sufficient grunt to reach unsociable volumes without distorting, and overall the sound quality on both was good with a clean midrange and treble, effective delivery of overhead channels, and even a surprising amount of bass. However, I did find that the QN90D had a wider soundstage compared to the C855, and overall it was a little more refined in its delivery.

Both make great gaming TVs

The Samsung QN90D and TCL C855 are both very impressive TVs for gaming, with support for 4K/144Hz, VRR (including Freesync Premium Pro), ALLM, and pop-up game bars. In the case of the QN90D there’s also a Game Hub for cloud gaming with an optional controller.

As previously mentioned the QN90D has four HDMI inputs rather than the C855’s two, and the former is a smidge more responsive with an input lag of 9.8ms compared to the latter’s 14.4ms. But overall there really isn’t much to differentiate the two TVs in terms of gaming features.

The actual game play on the QN90D and C855 is incredibly smooth and generally responsive, and the motion handling is equally impressive with no signs of tearing or other artefacts, even at the highest frame rates. However I did find the motion handling on the QN90D to be a touch sharper.

The TCL C855 is brighter with more dimming zones

The Samsung QN90D and TCL C855 are both 4K TVs that use LCD VA panels with Quantum Dot colour filters and Mini LED backlights. They each support HDR10, HLG and HDR10+, but as previously mentioned only the C855 can handle Dolby Vision. Their LCD panels have native refresh rates of 120Hz, and the two TVs can also accept 144Hz via their HDMI 2.1 inputs.

So far, so similar, but where the two deviate is in terms of their Mini LED backlights. On paper at least the C855 is the clear winner here with its 2,160 independent local dimming zones compared to the QN90D’s 900 separate zones. In addition, while the QN90D can hit a very respectable peak brightness of 2,100 nits, the C855 is capable of a massive 3,200 nits with HDR content.

The remaining picture features are largely proprietary, with Samsung including its Anti Reflection filter, Ultra Viewing Angle tech to widen the off-axis performance, and NQ4 AI Gen2 processor with 20 neural networks for optimal upscaling, processing and motion handling. The C855 includes TCL’s AiPQ Pro AI-enhanced processor for its own upscaling and picture processing.

But the Samsung QN90D has better overall picture quality

Of course all these marketing specifications don’t necessarily translate into superior picture performance, so let’s compare the two TVs directly and start taking objective measurements.

Kicking off with the basics both the Samsung QN90D and TCL C855 use VA panels, which means they have good native black levels for LCD TVs. They also have filters to minimise reflections, although I found Samsung’s implementation to be more effective at rejecting ambient light.

If you look at both TVs from dead centre they appear quite similar, but as soon as you start moving off-axis there is a noticeable difference in picture quality. Traditionally VA panels suffer from poor off-axis performance, with the contrast and colours washing out when viewed at an angle. Samsung has invested a lot of R&D into addressing this weakness, and the QN90D is a great example of its success in this regard. There is a clear difference between the two TVs when viewed off-axis, with the QN90D maintaining its contrast and colour in comparison to the C855.

The overall panel uniformity also differs between the two, and while the QN90D shows no signs of clouding, banding or dirty screen effect, there is some clouding on the C855, which surprised me considering it has over double the number of LEDs in its backlight.

This more effective use of the LEDs in the QN90D’s backlight extends to the local dimming as well, and despite having 900 independent zones compared to the C855’s 2,160 zones, the

Samsung was clearly superior. It’s often said it’s not what you’ve got but what you do with it that counts, and Samsung’s decades of experience in this area is clearly paying dividends.

When comparing the two TVs in a darkened room there’s obvious blooming around bright objects on the C855, which is exacerbated by the increased luminance of HDR and the TCL’s inferior off-axis performance. The QN90D by comparison is free of any blooming or haloing on bright objects, even when watching in HDR or at extreme viewing angles.

Watching Ryan Gosling in a spotlight during the live concert sequence in La La Land reveals well defined light and shadow on the QN90D but a definite glow around the beam of light on the C855. The same is true in another Ryan Gosling film, as Apollo 11 enters lunar orbit in First Man. The Moon’s surface appearing through the command module’s window is a real torture test, but the QN90D handled it with great skill, while the C855 struggled to minimise the blooming around it.

In terms of picture accuracy the QN90D delivers excellent greyscale, gamma and colour measurements in Filmmaker mode (whether SDR or HDR), with errors well below the visible threshold. There are extensive calibration controls if necessary, but this excellent out-of-the-box accuracy ensures images that reflect the content creators’ original artistic intentions.

The C855 isn’t as impressive as the QN90D when it comes to picture accuracy, with errors in greyscale, gamma and colours in its Movie mode (there’s no Filmmaker mode). I didn’t find the calibration controls to be as effective either, and as a result there’s discolouration in the whites, a reddish tinge to flesh tones, and over-saturated colours in both SDR and HDR.

The QN90D picture processing is also excellent with precise and detailed upscaling that doesn’t introduce unwanted artefacts. There are additional features for enhancing compressed or noisy content, with the resulting images looking clean regardless of the quality of the original source. The C855’s processing is generally effective as well, and if you feed the C855 a high quality image the results are often excellent, but with lower resolution or compressed content the upscaling and image processing aren’t quite as impressive as the Samsung.

The Samsung delivers smooth motion handling with no signs of judder, tearing or other annoying artefacts, and overall the movement is clean and clear. The C855 isn’t quite as good with motion, showing occasional artefacts like stuttering as objects move across the screen. These can be distracting, and as a result the QN90D is better at handling motion with movies, games and sport.

While the C855 delivers a peak brightness of 3,200 nits compared to the QN90D’s 2,100 nits, this isn’t as important as accurate HDR tone mapping. In testing it was clear the QN90D tracks the tone mapping target more accurately than the C855, and this was confirmed with measurements.

As a result the Samsung delivers the original creative intent, ensuring the shadows are free of crush and details aren’t clipped in the highlights. This is obvious when running through HDR demo footage graded at 1,000, 4,000 and 10,000 nits. Conversely the C855 was crushing the shadows and losing detail in the brighter parts of the image on 1,000 nits content, and this got progressively worse moving to 4,000 and 10,000 nits scenes.

In Aquaman during the scene where he is chained up in Atlantis, the environment is mostly white with bright lighting, and thanks to its superior tone mapping the QN90D reveals more detail in the backgrounds during direct comparison with the C855. As a result the image has better contrast and thus more impact, despite not technically being as bright. The same is true with The Greatest Showman, where the superior contrast, improved detail and richer, more accurate colours of the QN90D produce an image with extended depth and pop. In direct comparison the C855 appeared brighter but the image was more washed out, lacking the depth and visual punch of the QN90D.

Verdict

The Samsung QN90D and TCL C855 are both excellent TVs, and whilst the former edges out the latter in many respects, it’s with picture quality that the QN90D really stands out. Samsung is the more established of the two brands, and has decades of experience, research and development when it comes to panel design, image processing and local dimming.

This is evident in every aspect of the QN90D’s performance, from its wider viewing angles, better picture accuracy, smoother motion, superior image processing, more precise local dimming and superior tone mapping. All of which combines to deliver a premium performance that’s objectively more sophisticated and refined, and easily justifies any additional cost.