Home / TVs & Audio / TV / Samsung PS50C6900 / Feature Table

Samsung PS50C6900 - Feature Table

John Archer

By John Archer



  • Recommended by TR
Samsung PS50C6900


Our Score:


Overall Score


Scores In Detail

  • 2D Quality 8
  • 3D Quality 9
  • Design 9
  • Features 9
  • Sound Quality 7
  • Value 10


November 9, 2010, 2:44 pm

@John Archer - Great review. It's good to see more manufacturers combine 3D with plasma, since it seems to be the best technology for 3D at the moment. I wish the 2D picture quality was a little higher though, since it's still going to be used more often than 3D. But 50" is too big for me anyway, so I guess it doesn't matter...Which brings me to my question:

Will you be reviewing Panasonic's TX-P42VT20 any time soon?? =)


November 9, 2010, 3:00 pm

Just one quick thing - is there any chance of testing gaming on TV reviews in the future? Particularly the motion blur (for LCDs) and input lag. Thanks.

ronesh amin

November 9, 2010, 5:47 pm

I have the PS50C7000 (for about 4 months now), and as i cant compare it to the C6900 to see if there difference in the Real Black Filter they use - what i can say is that the the TV could be found for as little as £1100 4 months ago. The TV is brilliant, apart from two things:

1) the widget based system is not as robust as Samsung's LED variants (for example it has no games you can play, even though TR imply that you can on the C6900; and it also has no skype)

2) the remote may be good to look at - but the buttons around the arrow keys are frustratingly close together, causing you to constantly press the wrong the button in menus/sub menus (and this is with having the set for 4 months)

apart from that, TR were spot on with the review, (but as mentioned earlier, my opinions are based on the PS50C7000, which is identical, apart from the RealBlack Filter reflection blocker which is on the PS50C7000.


November 9, 2010, 10:19 pm

It's interesting what the review notes about the quality of the SD processing as I believe, historically, it has been Panasonics that have provided a rather soft SD image whereas the Samsungs tended to deinterlace and scale the image more pleasingly, plus score much higher on the HQV benchmark.

Maybe the SD image processing ability was scaled back to get the price down.

comments powered by Disqus