120Hz and not 240Hz? Isn't that not good for being future proof?
444428
Refresh rate isn't as important as it was a few years back. Look at the motion rate, This set has a CMR of 1440, that is the highest CMR of any set to date.
370121
It really depends. Nowadays, there are TV manufacturers which releases 120Hz TV. Means that the refresh rate is double compared to the 60Hz. The real difference or he most noticeable between the two is when watching fast action like sports or car racing on HD. Watching non-HD broadcast, under 60Hz images are just the same with 120Hz. Bottomline depending on your eyes/brain that can handle images that will look much better, maybe worse or basically no difference at all. Hope this helps. -Ely
1792431
60 hz, usually they make it a front page thing that the monitor is 120hz since its a selling factor.
1093282
The difference is $1,000 - $1,200. With all else being the same, I saw no noticeable difference between the 120 & 240Hz Samsung models, or with other 120 & 240 sets I have for that matter. The difference in the price is very noticeable.
360076
Excellent question! My invoice (purchased late Jan.) also states 120Hz, but I just looked on the back of my set and it clearly indicates 60Hz. Interesting.
1141019
i don't think the 120Hz is going to effect gaming at all. This tv also has a 2.4ms response time so you need not worry even if it's not in game mode (which it has). i just bought this tv for my dad who doesn't game of course. I have a 46" Samsung 60Hz myself. I may have read a few years back about 120Hz effecting gaming so you may want to research that online before you pull the trigger. overall game mode should negate the 120Hz but you should still research this to confirm.
1609639
I had tried this TV but the 120hz wasn't fast enough for me. I returned it and purchased the 240hz model 7100. It's more expensive, but the picture looks much better. I'm very happy with it. It will give you the effect you mentioned.
1901155
Connecting the Nvidia 3d on HDMI Cables is not recommended because it will not deliver the 120 hz, you wont enjoy it at all
2222066
These are unreliable. I have bought several and they have a 50% failure rate within a month of first use, even when you don't need an active adapter (i.e. after failure it will not work even as a passive adapter). Unfortunately I can not answer the 120hz question for certain, but I know I did have them working at 1920x1080. I replaced them all with MiniDisplayPort to DVI adapters marketed for Apples, and they have proven 100% reliable... but you do need mini-ports or a mini to regular adapter.
809738
120hz standard, but 240hz enhanced. Excellent picture, I leave it at 120hz for most viewing; I have not found a need to switch to 240hz. Granted, I did check it out at 240 but find 120 is better for regular shows/movies. Haven't watched football yet... we'll see ;-)
1522046
240 hz refreshes much faster than 120 so better for action or sports. No one is broadcasting in 4K maybe in the future but for now save your money.
48654
There is no guarantee that any of these monitors will go any higher than 60hz. From what I've seen most of them will reach 96hz pretty easily, some will reach 120hz, and some might not even go above 60hz. 60hz is the only guarantee you have.Now, to answer your question - I found something which you might find more useful than asking questions on Amazon:http://lmgtfy.com/?q=qnix+overclocking+guide
2260019
Yes, as a matter of fact, it's connected to my rig via HDMI. I'm think I'm getting 120Hz but have to reconfirm.
2246119
The tv is 120hz in 3D mode, but no tv has support for 240hz in 3d mode yet. everything else can be set to 240hz, games, movies, etc
1930087
Then you'll be fine with the 60Hz. The best thing to do is stop in a store and see if you can notice the difference between 60 & 120Hz. But read some reviews on the 60Hz and you'll see that there's no mention of blurry pictures, etc. Save your money and just get the 60! That's my .02. Good Luck!
1006481
You're mixing apples and oranges. It's the HDMI 1.4 ports that can only accept a maximum resolution of 3,840x2,160p30 (or 3,840 by 2,160 @ 30 frames per second) assuming 24-bit color because the bandwidth is not wide enough to handle any more than that. HDMI 2.0 (standard just agreed a few months ago) doubles that bandwidth to accommodate 60 fps keeping everything else constant. You're talking about the refresh rate when you mention 120Hz meaning that the TV is refreshing its picture faster than the fps rate of the source material. As of right now, there is no 120 fps video that I'm aware of, but it's supposed to be the standard for UHTV (4k) whenever they start producing 4k native content. Of course, at that point, not even HDMI 2.0 will have a sufficiently wide bandwidth to handle the 120 fps content at 4k resolution. The short answer to your question is that it's not the TV or its refresh rate, but rather the limit of its HDMI ports that is the problem with the current generation of 4k sets.
354925
I had the same concerns as you regrading Hz. There is a CONSIDERABLE difference that you can notice between 60Hz and 120HZ when watching fast paced movies (fast n furious) or sports. However, there is less of a difference when you move from 120Hz to 240Hz. I've read that the 650B series/model is the same as the 850A series, except the 850A is just somewhat slimmer/thinner. I opt'ed for the 750B because I got a great price from SEARS ($1999.00) and I compared it to Sony's XBR9 series and I liked the Sammy better. Also, I was reading the blogs and although the 850A is a great TV, the majority of comments stated the 750 is the way to go. So you are aware, BB was selling the 850A for $1899.00 on their web-site. I had the same concerns as you regrading Hz. There is a CONSIDERABLE difference that you can notice between 60Hz and 120HZ when watching fast paced movies (fast n furious) or sports. However, there is less of a difference when you move from 120Hz to 240Hz. I've read that the 650B series/model is the same as the 850A series, except the 850A is just somewhat slimmer/thinner. I opt'ed for the 750B because I got a great price from SEARS ($1999.00) and I compared it to Sony's XBR9 series and I liked the Sammy better. Also, I was reading the blogs and although the 850A is a great TV,... » Read More I had the same concerns as you regrading Hz. There is a CONSIDERABLE difference that you can notice between 60Hz and 120HZ when watching fast paced movies (fast n furious) or sports. However, there is less of a difference when you move from 120Hz to 240Hz. I've read that the 650B series/model is the same as the 850A series, except the 850A is just somewhat slimmer/thinner. I opt'ed for the 750B because I got a great price from SEARS ($1999.00) and I compared it to Sony's XBR9 series and I liked the Sammy better. Also, I was reading the blogs and although the 850A is a great TV, the majority of comments stated the 750 is the way to go. So you are aware, BB was selling the 850A for $1899.00 on their web-site. « Show Less