Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Samsung's 55-inch 4K TV to Cost £4K in UK

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 17 comments

Poetic. Poetic and expensive.

Ultra HD TVs, also referred to as UHD TVs or 4K TVs, were huge at CES. Each booth we visited seemed to have bigger TVs than the last. Samsung just recently launched an 85-inch 4K TV in the United Kingdom. The S9 costs a whopping £35,000. Still, it looks like Samsung is keen to cater to living rooms of all sizes, as it's just announced two more 4K TVs for the UK.


Samsung on Tuesday announced that its UHD F9000 TV is now available to purchase in the United Kingdom. Though the UHD F9000 is considerably smaller than the S9, you'll still want some serious cash on hand to jump on this trend. The 55-inch model is priced at £3999.99. If a 55-inch TV seems a little on the dinky side for you, you can always drop an extra two grand on the 65-inch model, which is priced at £5999.99.

Featuring quad-core CPUs, 70 W Speaker output and DTS Premium Sound 5.1 capability, the TVs also pack Samsung's own Smart Evolution technology, which the company claims makes them 'Future Ready.' There's Samsung's built-in S Recommendation with voice interaction, and the company's Micro Dimming technology, which promises deeper blacks and more vivid colors.

No word on which retailers will be offering these beauties, but we'll keep you posted.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
  • 2 Hide
    sgadadish , July 18, 2013 2:55 AM
    Expensive? are u kidding me ? for a 4K TV its one of the cheapest out there ( and most of us can't afford it anyway..)
  • 8 Hide
    mauller07 , July 18, 2013 2:56 AM
    i still would like a higher resolution 24 inch monitor.
  • 1 Hide
    The_Trutherizer , July 18, 2013 5:19 AM
    Are you kidding? 40inch is big - Real big. 55inch if you can afford it. There's no content for the 4K standard yet anyway.
  • Display all 17 comments.
  • 2 Hide
    mapesdhs , July 18, 2013 7:05 AM

    Indeed, without content, what's the point? Heck, atm there are hardly any free
    normal HD channels here, never mind 4K.


  • 2 Hide
    snurp85 , July 18, 2013 7:09 AM
    Still waiting to get that resolution on my monitor... My old 19inch Samsung Syncmaster 957 monitor had a resolution of 1920x1440. And that was back in 2003... on a 19inch monitor!
  • 2 Hide
    jn77 , July 18, 2013 7:40 AM
    There actually is 4k content available now, infact it is easier to make your own with the $5000 USD JVC handheld 4K camcorder..... Saying there is not any 4k content out there now is not true. Commercially there may not be much though.
  • 3 Hide
    CaedenV , July 18, 2013 7:49 AM
    I am soooo excited about 4K and how quickly the price is dropping. 55" is about the smallest you want to go for your average living room (any smaller and there is very little difference between 4K and 1080p), but I am holding out hope for a 40-45" 4K display for use as an oversized computer monitor. First company to do such a display that can hit 60Hz and treat the whole screen as a single display for ~$1000 will get my business.
    I may have to wait a bit before this happens, but considering how quickly the prices have dropped since their introduction last November, I can't imagine that it will take more than a few years. I'll have to wait a few years before single GPUs can properly drive 4K displays above 30fps anyways, so I suppose I can sit back and wait patiently.
  • -1 Hide
    mapesdhs , July 18, 2013 7:57 AM

    So in the UK, the 4K channel I can tune into is what exactly??

    My point is that we don't even have a decent HD service yet, never mind 4K.


  • 0 Hide
    gm0n3y , July 18, 2013 10:00 AM
    That is actually a pretty decent price. Personally I prefer a bigger screen, but not until I can get a 65-70" for around $2500. So hopefully in another couple of years, assuming that enough content is available for it to be worth the investment.
  • 0 Hide
    hannibal , July 18, 2013 2:31 PM
    Allso you can upscale your 1080p content to 4K, just like you can convert normal dvd to 1080p resolution. It is not perfect, but in most cases better than looking native 480i or 576i used in DVD movies! (compare it like playing a games with PC with or without anti-aliasing)

  • 0 Hide
    thomasxstewart , July 18, 2013 6:04 PM
    4k review of computer for signal playing dirt buggy, took 4 NVidia 6 GB game cards, newest @999.00 each to render 60 fps. other game card 2 GB mempory showed definite flutter & errors on screen.

    seems today, to use 4k take $8k computer. wait some time for signal.

  • 0 Hide
    thomasxstewart , July 18, 2013 6:12 PM
    mauler: 39" 4k sicko is $700 usd,Poor rating except in 4k, 2/5 stars.. asus announced few days ago 55" considered best performer of all $3,500.00 in fall.
  • 0 Hide
    thomasxstewart , July 18, 2013 6:26 PM
    btw top nvida game card with 6 GB memory is 7.2 billion transistor. with 4 game cards & cpu, over 30 billion transistors to run 4k similar to articles.

  • 0 Hide
    drwho1 , July 18, 2013 7:19 PM
    Price is not a concern when you know how to sit and wait to become mainstream and prices to drop. What it does concern me are all this extra features that I don't care for.

    I simply want a 4K TV, no need for any "smart features", no need for fancy CPU's nor make believe DTS 5.1 audio. (NO TV speakers will ever sound like a real set of speakers)

    Take off this absurd extra "gadgets" and watch the prices come down closer to earth.
  • 0 Hide
    John Bauer , July 18, 2013 11:06 PM
    Are you kidding? 40inch is big - Real big. 55inch if you can afford it. There's no content for the 4K standard yet anyway.

    You're right about no standard content- unless you have 4 Titans laying around
  • 0 Hide
    cats_Paw , July 19, 2013 5:41 AM
    4k pounds? Id rather wait for Occulus Rift and spend 300 dollars... or less.
    I know i aint buyin one till i pay a similar price that i paid for my full HD tv, 400 Bucks.
  • 0 Hide
    CrArC , July 19, 2013 6:15 AM
    55"? Useless, unless you sit within 6 feet of the telly, you won't notice the difference between this and 1080p. 2.5 feet if you want to full appreciate the 4K benefits.

    4K Tellies NEED to be BIG. Our eyes are just not good enough to pick up the details otherwise.