SONY BRAVIA 3 vs SONY BRAVIA 3 II (XR35M2)

Bravia 3 does not hide the fact that it belongs to a group of TVs that are rather modest in terms of brightness. Our measurements showed around 370 nits, which is a value balancing on the brink where any HDR effect can still be discussed. For some, this is an acceptable level, while for others it is more typical for SDR materials, where spectacular flashes or vivid contrasts are not expected. The impression is that this is not a TV for those focused on the highest image quality in demanding film content. However, this does not mean that there are no advantages to be found here. Compared to its predecessor, the X75WL, the Bravia 3 has gained an additional PFS filter, which works similarly to solutions known from QLED technology. Thanks to this, the DCI-P3 color gamut has been significantly expanded, reaching over 91 percent, which in practice results in more saturated colours and a more pleasing texture of the image. As a result, even everyday content looks a bit more vibrant, and films and series can surprise with their colourful presentation, despite limitations in brightness itself.

The Bravia 3 II isn't exactly a TV that tries to impress with brightness. In our measurements it reached around 450 nits, so it's well short of the brightest models on the market. That doesn't mean HDR is just a paper feature here. Compared with standard SDR material, the brightest parts of the image can already punch through noticeably, and highlights, light sources and stronger exposures have a bit more energy and stand out better from the rest of the scene. You can see this best in simpler shots where the screen contains lots of bright elements. Then the Bravia 3 II can give a taste of a higher-dynamic-range picture. The problem only starts with more demanding content, where much greater brightness headroom is needed. There the TV quickly shows its limits and instead of bold, spectacular HDR we’re left with a merely competent picture.

Colours

The Bravia 3 II uses a QLED panel, although technically it doesn't employ a traditional quantum-dot layer. Instead Sony has used a PFS phosphor-based solution, which performs a very similar role: it allows for more saturated reds and greens, and thus reproduces a much wider colour gamut. In our measurements coverage of the DCI-P3 gamut was about 94%, and of the very wide BT.2020 around 74.4%. Those are good results for this class of hardware, which means the Bravia 3 II has no problem showing suitably saturated colours in HDR material. Colours don't look washed out, and the more intense hues can look really attractive.

We primarily tested the Sony Bravia 3 in movie mode, which immediately turned out to be the best choice among the factory settings. It's not a perfect picture, but compared to the eco mode that the TV suggests straight out of the box, the difference is evident and definitely better. In movie mode, there is a noticeable issue: the picture seems too warm, which is due to the lack of blue colour in the white balance. Nevertheless, in SDR content, the final effect can still be considered quite decent and satisfactory for everyday viewing. Much more serious errors arise in HDR materials. The Color Checker analysis showed significant deviations, and poor brightness management, combined with limited colour gamut coverage, further exposes the shortcomings of the picture in this mode. All of this makes HDR on the Bravia 3 look unconvincing and can ruin the impression left by the otherwise quite decent SDR content settings. Fortunately, it’s not a hopeless situation. Various errors can be somewhat mitigated, and some can even be completely corrected through professional calibration. That's why we decided to check how the TV would perform after such adjustments.

In Professional mode the Bravia 3 II delivers a fairly good level of colour reproduction straight out of the box. In SDR the most noticeable issue is a slightly low gamma, which makes the midtones a little brighter. The white balance isn't perfect either; as brightness increases a bit of blue and red drops away, so whites can sometimes appear a touch warmer with a faint greenish tint. These aren't mistakes that immediately jump out when watching a film. Average error values hover around 3, so the factory setup can be considered quite good. The situation in HDR is similar. Here too there's a slight lack of blue, so the picture is marginally warmer than the reference, but the difference isn't large enough to be distracting during normal viewing.

Calibration allowed us to extract significantly more from ChooseTV 3 than we could have expected at the beginning. First and foremost, it managed to address the deficiency of blue, which previously caused a noticeable warming of the image. After a slight adjustment in white balance, most errors in the Color Checker measurements for SDR content practically disappeared. The whites took on a natural tone, and brightness management in gamma stabilised to an almost ideal level, not exceeding the threshold of what the human eye can perceive. So it is safe to say that in SDR content, after a few adjustments in the settings, ChooseTV 3 performs really well. It fares much worse, although still definitely better than before calibration, when it comes to HDR content. The white balance has been brought in line, but the limitations of the IPS panel are insurmountable. The lack of local dimming means that even the smallest elements can be overexposed, which is immediately noticeable. Colour-wise, the effect has also improved, although it is far from perfect – many errors still exceed the threshold of four, and even five delta E units, remaining visible to the human eye. It was already clear earlier that ChooseTV 3 is not a television designed to impress with HDR quality. Nevertheless, it is pleasing that in SDR content, after calibration, the picture can look really great and in this category, the television pleasantly surprised us.

After calibration you can get a lot out of SDR material. The white balance was set almost perfectly, gamma practically matches the reference value, and average colour errors fell from around 3 to about 1. That’s already the level at which differences from the reference image are very hard to spot in practice. The Bravia 3 II therefore shows that despite its place in Sony’s range it has quite a bit of potential for precise picture tuning. Improvement is also visible in HDR, although here you can’t avoid all the limitations of the TV itself. Once the colours are evened out it’s easier to notice that the EOTF curve in film material runs slightly below the reference value in places, meaning the Bravia 3 II gently darkens parts of the image. That isn’t ideal from a reference point of view, but in this particular TV it also has an advantage. With no local dimming and average black levels this behaviour slightly reduces the visibility of the backlight in darker scenes and helps preserve a stronger sense of contrast. You could say Sony is partly masking the limitations of the panel this way, rather than trying at all costs to stick to the reference brightness.

Bravia 3 brings something more to the Sony television family than just a shared name. It stands out primarily for its ability to enhance the quality of weaker materials thanks to the processor used. Of course, we won’t find the advanced XR chip known from more expensive models here, but nonetheless, it must be said that the image in lower resolution looked surprisingly good. The scaling worked effectively, and most areas of the screen were free from the typical excessive edge roughness found in budget constructions.

Also worthy of attention is the function that improves the smoothness of tonal transitions. In high setting, it works really well, effectively masking gradation imperfections without significant loss of detail. It does happen that the algorithm overzealously smooths elements that should remain sharp – for example, faces – however, in the overall assessment, the effect is beneficial. The best results were achieved precisely at the highest setting, and this is the option we could recommend to those watching lower-quality content.

Bravia 3 II is Sony's first TV to use the new MediaTek Pentonic 800 chip, and you can see a few changes in the image processing. Starting with the basics: the upscaling itself is decent. The TV can sensibly upscale lower-resolution material and doesn't have a strong tendency to over‑emphasise jagged edges or other source imperfections. With regular broadcast TV or lower-quality streaming material the picture therefore remains quite attractive.

We have more reservations about the digital image processing. In this model Sony has replaced the well-known "Smooth Gradation" function with a new setting called "Digital Noise Reduction". Its job is basically the same: to smooth out ugly tonal transitions and artifacts caused by heavy compression. Unfortunately, this function performs noticeably worse than before. At the "Large" setting (the only one that had any visible effect) the TV can smooth away too many image elements at once, which causes film grain to disappear and object textures or even skin to start looking unnatural. Worse still, the effect is not particularly stable. When there's more motion in a scene, the function's effect noticeably weakens and at times it looks as if the TV stops intervening in the image altogether. So for everyday viewing we wouldn't recommend using it at a high level. It can help on static shots, but the trade-off is often too much loss of detail.

Motion smoothness has never been a strong point of televisions equipped with 60 Hz panels, and the Bravia 3 is no exception. Nevertheless, Sony has included something that may appeal to those more sensitive to the way images are displayed. I'm talking about the proprietary motion smoother, Motion Flow, which gives the user plenty of adjustment options. With it, one can make the image smoother, almost theatrical, or stick to a more cinematic style with characteristic judder that many people simply associate with a filmic atmosphere. These functions work with content at lower frame rates, such as films and series recorded at 24 or 30 frames per second, which is the material we deal with on a daily basis. This is precisely where the motion smoother proves to be one of the most important features in everyday TV usage, and here, the Bravia 3 performs really decently.

Motion handling is definitely one of the Bravia 3 II's strongest points. The TV uses a 120 Hz VA panel, a solution that by nature, despite the high refresh rate, doesn't always cope well with motion blur. Sony has, however, managed that issue very well here. Fast-moving objects remain sharp, and the characteristic motion trails and blur are reduced to a very low level, if not to zero. It's one of the least motion-blur-prone LCD TVs we've had the chance to test. Interestingly, in this respect the Bravia 3 II can even outperform the much more expensive flagship True RGB series, the Bravia 9 II.

Bravia 3 is not gear for e-sports enthusiasts or fans of late-night marathons with a controller in hand. The lack of 120 Hz refresh rate and HDMI 2.1 ports shuts down the conversation before it even gets started. This is a TV for casual gamers who, after work, will fire up FIFA or racing games, not for someone who measures every frame in a spreadsheet. Nonetheless, Sony has thrown in a few nice additions so it’s not completely sparse. ALLM works as it should, automatically switching the TV to game mode (low latency). We even find a simple Game Bar here, which is clear and intuitive. However, the biggest curiosity here is the PlayStation Portal app. Thanks to this, you can launch PS5 games wirelessly and see them right on the TV screen. It sounds great, but it only takes a few minutes to feel significant lag. In our opinion, it's more of a showcase of capabilities than something that can be used day-to-day. If someone really wants to game, it's better to plug the console in with an HDMI cable and forget about wireless issues.

The Sony Bravia 3 II is a very good TV for gamers, although not everything has been solved the way we’d like. The biggest change concerns the connectors. For the first time in a Sony TV we get four full HDMI 2.1 ports with 48 Gb/s bandwidth, thanks to the new MediaTek Pentonic 800 chipset. That removes one of the problems that has hung over this manufacturer’s TVs for years. You can connect several devices at once and on each input use the device’s full capabilities, including VRR and ALLM. There’s also a simple Game Bar that lets you check the key signal parameters and change a few useful settings, such as black level, when you want to improve visibility in darker parts of a game.

There are, however, two limitations worth knowing. The first is the lack of support for 1440p at 120 Hz. That won’t be an issue for everyone, but people using that resolution on a console or PC—for example to get higher frame rates in certain games—will have to choose 1080p. We have more reservations about HGiG support. Sony doesn’t let you disable tone mapping on the Bravia 3 II, so the TV keeps processing HDR even when you’d prefer to leave that task to the console. It’s easiest to spot during HDR setup—the checkerboard test pattern doesn’t disappear at the point where it should based on the TV’s actual capabilities. That doesn’t mean HDR in games will look bad. You just need to set up a little differently and, rather than relying on the pattern, manually set the peak brightness to about 450 nits. So the issue can be worked around, but you should know about it before you start configuring your console.