Philips PUS8079 vs TCL C6KS / C69KS / Q6CS

The maximum brightness in content with a wide tonal range at a level of 202 nits is extremely low and, in practice, does not allow for watching films and series on streaming platforms in the highest quality. It is worth mentioning that in this case, the use of the HDR format equipped with dynamic metadata will not help either. Why won't it help? Because the only such format implemented in the television is HDR10+, which is extremely unpopular, and films recorded in this format are scarce. It is also worth noting that PUS8079 utilises WLED backlighting, which unfortunately is not the best solution, resulting in a coverage of the wide DCI-P3 colour gamut of only 80%. The result of this situation is significantly less intense colours in HDR content.

And what about HDR? Here, the C6KS performs quite well and – as has become a recurring theme of this review – identically to the C6K model. The maximum brightness generated by this television is around 600 nits. In bright scenes, this translates to a really solid, cinematic effect, and generally, the video materials look good here. However, one must keep in mind the specifics of the dimming algorithm in this model. When very small, bright points (e.g., stars) appear against a dark background, the television can dim them quite significantly. The goal is simple: to eliminate blooming and maintain the best possible blacks. This is quite a reasonable compromise. Most viewers will definitely appreciate deep, "true black" more than additional micro-details, the display of which could cause the screen to appear greyed out. This is the nature of local dimming technology in this price range, and one must be aware of it. It is also worth noting that the TCL C69KS (C6KS) has an additional PFS coating, which is marketed under the slogan of QLED technology. Thanks to this, the colours are saturated and vibrant – our measurements showed that the coverage of a wide colour gamut reaches as much as 92% here.

The best factory mode in terms of colour reproduction and fidelity to the director's vision was "Film". Admittedly, it was the best among the pre-defined modes, although it had significant discrepancies between what the film's author wanted to convey and what the tested television displayed. Both in SDR and HDR materials (though to a lesser extent in the latter), the white balance, which is the most fundamental element responsible for image purity, turned out to be somewhat of a repeat of the vivid mode, with the blue tint known from displays on shop shelves. Moving directly to SDR materials and what is responsible for contrast, namely gamma, we see that it is significantly reduced. This leads to cutting down on an already limited contrast range and brightening the entire image. In the EOTF curve, which is responsible for the increase in brightness pace in HDR materials, we observe a sharp drop below the reference line, which, given the limited light output of the television, had a significant impact on the perception of these contents, which were even darker. We will not separate the assessments of the colours themselves, as in both cases they achieved astronomical deltaE values, being simply completely different from what they should be.

Unlike the more expensive C6K model, the tested C6KS does not have an option in the menu labelled as Filmmaker Mode. Is this a reason to cry? Absolutely not. Our tests have shown that in practice, in terms of colour reproduction, the lack of this specific label makes virtually no difference. The best available Film/Cinema mode here offers an almost identical picture characteristic to the aforementioned Filmmaker in the more expensive model. So we get a very similar image, just under a different name. Therefore, if you were wondering whether paying extra for the C6K gives you better colours – the answer is no, in both cases the base is the same and requires slight adjustments.

Fortunately, Philips implements advanced image correction tools in all its televisions. SDR materials benefited the most here, and the enormous deltaE errors were significantly corrected, both white balance and gamma underwent considerable reshaping. Although one cannot speak of a reference image here, it is definitely better, and films or series can be watched without causing headaches, and above all, eye strain. Naturally, HDR materials, due to the very low luminance of the television, could not be corrected to the same extent as those with a standard colour palette; however, the EOTF curve and white balance were roughly straightened out. Unfortunately, that was all we managed to squeeze out of our unit, although it should be noted that each unit is different and has completely different errors, smaller or larger.

Thanks to the white balance adjustment, the C69KS's tendency to distort colours has been effectively limited, resulting in a very good final effect. After calibration, we will no longer see excessive warming of scenes in SDR or overly cool tones in HDR. However, it is worth noting the brightness characteristics. In SDR content, it is hard to have any objections – the image looks very good, especially in older films, television programmes, or materials from YouTube. It is significantly more challenging to evaluate the television's performance in HDR. Analysis of the EOTF curve suggests correct behaviour, but its practical variant reveals certain limitations. The C69KS can overly brighten the smallest elements of the frame, while at other times, it can dim the entire scene. Thus, calibration brought clear benefits in terms of colour quality, but certain limitations resulting from the local dimming operation and the way it is controlled by the C69KS cannot be overlooked, as we also saw in the C6K test.

We will return once more to the issue of tonal transitions but in the context of the overall improvement of image quality. As we can observe in the photograph on the left side, the enhancement function for gradation works brilliantly. Moreover, it offers several settings, and each of them, even the lowest one, provides beneficial effects, and what’s more, it does not soften the effect of film grain. We will reiterate that this function is the greatest advantage of the tested television.

Next, we will take a look at image scaling. Here, the tested television performed worse. We can primarily notice severely jagged fine details and a characteristic white halo around the figures. One must not forget about the considerable artificial sharpening of the image.

The C69KS handles upscaling quite well. The tested 576p material looks surprisingly decent – a considerable amount of detail is retained, and the algorithm adds a slight "rounding" effect to sharp edges, making the image appear more cohesive. The performance in smoothing tonal transitions is less impressive. The television practically cannot improve them, leaving the image in a rather raw state. With older material, this can be quite tiring, as the lack of additional processing highlights any imperfections.

This paragraph, unlike the others, will be extremely short. The reason for this state of affairs is the lack of implementation of even the most basic motion smoothing function, which was to be expected, considering the price of the device. We also note that we are dealing with a VA panel, which in itself will not have the best sharpness under the sun. This type of panel is primarily associated with high contrast, which goes hand in hand with quite slow response times, as we can clearly read from the matrix analysis results. As you can see, from the photos taken in quick motion, the image is typically blurred for this type of panel. Although it will not be the ideal option, it can conditionally be used for watching sports, keeping in mind the less than optimal sharpness in motion. It is worth mentioning that movies will be characterised by judder, as the television does not have any, even the simplest, motion smoother.

C69KS offers a simplified motion enhancement panel in films, allowing the adjustment of effect intensity with a slider. This makes it easy to match fluidity to personal preferences. The ability to use higher refresh rates is also a plus – although the panel operates natively at 4K at 60 Hz, lowering the resolution to 1440p enables 120 and 144 Hz modes, both on consoles and PC. This sounds like great news, however, in practice, the image at these settings exhibits significant motion blur. The effect is so pronounced that the overall presentation appears merely average and loses its appeal for everyday use.

Philips PUS8079 offers only the most basic support for gaming in the form of ALLM, VRR, and a Game Bar. The most important information is that thanks to the implementation of the feature responsible for dynamic frequency changing, the picture is actually quite smooth for this price range and does not suffer from tearing.

A slightly greater nod towards gamers is the introduction of the Game Bar, allowing for real-time editing of settings. This means we won't have to exit the game to make any changes to the picture. Importantly, it has not been stripped of options known from higher models. Thus, we will find features such as shadow enhancement for better visibility in dark areas and a colour filter for players with visual impairments.

If we overlook the smudging and lack of native 4K at 120 Hz, the C69KS impresses with how well it performs during gaming. We get everything one can expect from a gaming television: variable refresh rate (VRR), automatic switching to game mode (ALLM), Dolby Vision Gaming mode, and a well-functioning HGiG. The television can also operate at 120 and even 144 Hz at lower resolutions, allowing for smoother gameplay on a console or PC. Additionally, there is a clear Game Bar that lets you quickly glance at key settings while gaming. As a result — despite a few limitations — the C69KS can be a really successful screen for gamers.