Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Samsung's 85-inch 4K TV to Cost €40,000

By - Source: Telegraph | B 22 comments
Tags :

Better start saving.

Samsung's booth at CES this year was TV heaven. One of the glorious TVs on display was an 85-inch UHD 4K unit dubbed the S9. Of course, we fell in love, knowing full well that we probably didn't want to know the price of this easel-style TV. Still, these things have a way of coming out, even when you don't want them to.

 

The Telegraph last week reported that the S9 will come to Europe this coming spring with a €40,000 price tag. Though the newspaper didn't report on a UK-specific price, it translates to just shy of £35,000 by today's rates.

If an 85-inch TV still seems a bit on the dinky side to you, you'll be pleased to know Samsung is also planning a 110-inch version of the S9 for launch later this year. We don't dare hazard a guess as to the price of that particular gadget.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback                 

Display 22 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • -3 Hide
    cozmosis , February 12, 2013 9:07 AM
    I'm pretty in to my home cinema - I have a whole room built around it. But the thing is, those who get serious enough with it to spend that sort of money, don't buy a TV, they buy projectors. This is a pointless market segment at that price bracket.
  • 2 Hide
    cats_Paw , February 12, 2013 9:47 AM
    Well said, Untill the rpice drops and becomes "mainstream" (assuming it ever does), this is basicly a marketing stunt.
  • 5 Hide
    xerxces , February 12, 2013 9:49 AM
    It no different than when LCDs first came out. They were ungodly expensive. It will be another 5 yeas at the least before 4K even becomes a household possibility.
  • 1 Hide
    Angry Bellic , February 12, 2013 10:08 AM
    oo my god. Good that I already own a Sony Bravia.
  • 3 Hide
    virtualban , February 12, 2013 10:20 AM
    If I start saving now, by the time I have that kind of money, that resolution will be projected directly into my retina.
  • 0 Hide
    virtualban , February 12, 2013 10:24 AM
    virtualbanIf I start saving now, by the time I have that kind of money, that resolution will be projected directly into my retina.

    I was being optimistic. Probably they will just tap into my optic nerve by then.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_made_by_Ray_Kurzweil#The_Age_of_Spiritual_Machines_.281999.29
  • -3 Hide
    hero1 , February 12, 2013 10:53 AM
    They can keep their TVs. We're not stupid enough to fork out that kind of money even if it was 8K. Who asks for that price when the content providers don't have anything near that quality. Absurd! And even if they did I still wouldn't pay over 5Gs for a TV let alone 40Gs.
  • 1 Hide
    drwho1 , February 12, 2013 11:22 AM
    LOL
    I just wait until 8K TV's are standard and retail for just 2K-5K average.
  • 0 Hide
    dthx , February 12, 2013 12:14 PM
    Great TV, I want two of them ... but whait... I've been screwed! As a consumer, I cannot buy any 4k contents to feed the beast ???

    NB: for that kind of money, you can buy an excellent home cinema with a top notch beamer, a screen and speakers and even a few sofa's. But it's nice that some manufacturers are actually doing the effort to bring this to the market as a proof of concept. This is how the technology evolves...
  • 0 Hide
    george21546 , February 12, 2013 1:05 PM
    It don't matter how high the resolution is what content will support it. When I see the difference between cable and OTA it's going to be a long time before my favorite TV show is shown in 4K
  • 0 Hide
    freggo , February 12, 2013 1:21 PM
    It's called an S9 ?

    Hmmm. let me see, so I upgrade my S3 not to the S4 phone then but to the S9 making me the owner of the worlds largest smart phone :-)

    OK, I'll lay off the silly juice now :) 
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , February 12, 2013 1:25 PM
    my mate could buy his flat for that kind of money. lol madness
  • 0 Hide
    jn77 , February 12, 2013 1:58 PM
    I have a 40inch Sony XBR, looking to replace it with a 46inch Samsung 8000 series..... but when I see these70+ inch screens, it makes me wonder who buys them, especially at 40k.

    I think Samsung would make more profit if that screen was $7000 and they sold 200 in a year instead of 1 huge tv at 40k where they sell 1 every 2 years.
  • 1 Hide
    jn77 , February 12, 2013 2:00 PM
    dthxGreat TV, I want two of them ... but whait... I've been screwed! As a consumer, I cannot buy any 4k contents to feed the beast ???NB: for that kind of money, you can buy an excellent home cinema with a top notch beamer, a screen and speakers and even a few sofa's. But it's nice that some manufacturers are actually doing the effort to bring this to the market as a proof of concept. This is how the technology evolves...



    JVC has a 4k camcorder for under $5000, came out 18 months ago. This is one area consumers are ahead of the broadcasters. So, yes content in 4k is available and it has been.
  • 0 Hide
    enewmen , February 12, 2013 2:12 PM
    If you must ask "how much?" , YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT
  • -2 Hide
    alchemy69 , February 12, 2013 2:17 PM
    4K is a marketing gimmick, you'd have to sit 4 feet from a screen that size to be able to tell the difference between 4K and 1080P.
  • -1 Hide
    hannibal , February 12, 2013 3:11 PM
    4K is not a marketing gimmick. Have you seen the difference between iPad 2 and retina iPad. 1080p looks like a crap when lookin at any closer distance. But yeah at longer distance the difference becomes less important.
  • -1 Hide
    kinggremlin , February 12, 2013 4:21 PM
    jn77JVC has a 4k camcorder for under $5000, came out 18 months ago. This is one area consumers are ahead of the broadcasters. So, yes content in 4k is available and it has been.


    Buying a TV this expensive without any material available is pretty stupid. Buying a TV this expensive to watch someone else's crappy home videos might just be worse.
  • 1 Hide
    kinggremlin , February 12, 2013 4:23 PM
    jn77I have a 40inch Sony XBR, looking to replace it with a 46inch Samsung 8000 series..... but when I see these70+ inch screens, it makes me wonder who buys them, especially at 40k.I think Samsung would make more profit if that screen was $7000 and they sold 200 in a year instead of 1 huge tv at 40k where they sell 1 every 2 years.


    They're not trying to make money off of this. It's a halo product. Probably also a technology testbed for Samsung. What they learned from designing and manufacturing this set will be applied to future generations of the product.
  • 0 Hide
    kinggremlin , February 12, 2013 4:31 PM
    alchemy694K is a marketing gimmick, you'd have to sit 4 feet from a screen that size to be able to tell the difference between 4K and 1080P.


    An 84" 4k TV has a PPI of about 52. That's about half the density of a 21" 1920x1200 monitor. If you can't tell the difference beween a 21" 1920x1200 monitor and a 21" 960x540 monitor from a significant distance, you are blind as a bat.
Display more comments