SONY BRAVIA 3 vs TCL A400 PRO

Bravia 3 does not hide the fact that it belongs to the group of televisions that are rather modest in terms of brightness. Our measurements showed around 370 nits, which is a value balancing on the borderline where one can still speak of any HDR effect. For some, this is an acceptable level; for others, it is rather typical for SDR materials, where spectacular highlights or vivid contrasts are not expected. The impression is that this is not a television for those focused on the highest image quality in demanding film content. However, this does not mean that we won't find any advantages here. Compared to its predecessor, the X75WL, Bravia 3 has gained an additional PFS filter, functioning similarly to solutions known from QLED technology. Thanks to this, the DCI-P3 color gamut has been significantly expanded and reaches over 91 percent, which in practice provides more saturated colors and a more pleasant image texture. As a result, even everyday content looks a bit livelier, and movies and series can surprise with their colorful presentations, despite the limitations in brightness itself.

The TCL A400 Pro is a moderately bright TV. Its peak brightness reaches about 600 nits. That level already allows for a real HDR effect and in many movies it does produce a noticeably more attractive picture than SDR. However, it is not a level that overwhelms by brightness alone. The A400 Pro is not one of those TVs that "attack" the viewer with a powerful flash in every dramatic scene. The biggest limitation is visible with small bright elements on a dark background. Due to rather aggressive control of the dimming zones, the TV can significantly reduce their brightness — in extreme cases down to around 100 nits. That means small lights, sparks, stars, or single highlights can be much less visible than they should be. That said, this is not done without reason. The A400 Pro does this to keep blacks as deep as possible and to limit haloing around bright objects. It's a deliberate compromise: the TV more often chooses deeper blacks over maximally bright, point-like highlights. On one hand this is understandable, especially with a limited number of dimming zones, but on the other hand you should be aware that the HDR effect will not always be as strong as the peak brightness alone would suggest.

On the plus side, the colors are worth noting. The PFS LED filter used here, marketed by the manufacturer as QLED, produces suitably saturated colors. Our measurements showed about 94% coverage of the DCI-P3 gamut and about 74% of BT.2020, which is a solid result for this class.

We primarily tested the Sony Bravia 3 in movie mode, which immediately proved to be the best choice among the factory settings. The picture is not perfect, but compared to the eco mode that the TV suggests right out of the box, the difference is significant and for the better. In movie mode, one can notice a certain problem—the image seems too warm, which results from a lack of blue in the white balance. Despite this, in SDR content, the final effect can still be considered quite decent and satisfying for everyday viewing. Much more serious errors occur in HDR materials. The Color Checker analysis showed significant deviations, and poor brightness management combined with limited color gamut coverage further exposes the shortcomings of the image in this mode. All of this makes HDR on the Bravia 3 look unconvincing and can spoil the impression left by the quite decent SDR content settings. Fortunately, this is not a situation without a solution. Various errors can be somewhat mitigated, and some can even be completely corrected through professional calibration. Therefore, we decided to check how the TV would perform after such adjustments.

As standard, we carried out color measurements in the best-calibrated mode, Filmmaker Mode, the one that is supposed to be closest to the creators’ intent. The A400 Pro, of course, also offers other picture modes, but in practice they suffer from much larger color errors and alter the image character more strongly. We won’t go into those modes in detail in this part of the test. So how does the factory color reproduction perform? In short: really very well. In fact, looking at our measurement results, it’s excellent. Both the white balance and the luminance response were set surprisingly precisely. The errors were so small that during testing we genuinely rubbed our eyes in disbelief. Such good out-of-the-box settings don’t happen often, even in TVs operating in Filmmaker Mode. All the more reason to praise TCL, because the A400 Pro right out of the box can produce an image very close to how the source material should look. The results were so good that you could easily think someone had already paid extra attention to that unit and tried to calibrate it.

Our nitpicking really comes down to just one thing. In SDR content the image was slightly brighter than the reference for a dark room, because the factory gamma was set closer to 2.3 than to 2.4. It’s not a big error and most viewers probably won’t even notice it.

However, it should be noted that we’re talking about our specific review sample. With factory colors there can always be some variation between units, production batches, or screen sizes. So we don’t assume that every A400 Pro will look identical straight out of the box.

The calibration allowed us to extract significantly more from ChooseTV 3 than we could have expected at the beginning. First and foremost, we managed to address the shortage of blue color, which previously caused a noticeable warming of the image. After a slight adjustment in white balance, most of the errors in Color Checker measurements for SDR content practically disappeared. The shades of white gained a natural quality, and brightness management in gamma stabilized to a level that is nearly perfect, not exceeding the threshold of human eye perception. Therefore, it can be confidently said that in SDR content, after a few tweaks in settings, ChooseTV 3 performs really excellently. HDR content, however, fares much worse, although it is still definitely better than before calibration. The white balance has been corrected, but the limitations of the IPS panel are insurmountable. The lack of local dimming means that even the smallest elements can be overexposed, which immediately stands out. Color-wise, the effect has also improved, although it is far from ideal—many errors still exceed the threshold of four or even five delta E units, meaning they remain visible to the human eye. It was already clear before that ChooseTV 3 is not a television designed to amaze with HDR quality. Nonetheless, it is gratifying that in SDR content, after calibration, the image can look really great, and in this category, the television pleasantly surprised us.

Despite its excellent factory tuning, we couldn't resist checking how the TCL A400 Pro would respond to a professional calibration. Since the starting point was so good, we were even more curious whether we could squeeze even more out of this TV. And here we have to boast: we managed to bring our unit to absurdly low color errors. Results below 1 are something you don't see every day, even on very good TVs. Such results are more often associated with professional reference monitors than with a lifestyle TV for the living room. In terms of white balance and color reproduction, the A400 Pro after calibration simply performed outstandingly. The only thing we can pick at after a deeper analysis concerns the brightness behavior. The TV can manipulate luminance levels depending on the content being displayed, and quite often the image is a bit darker than it should be according to the standard. This most likely stems from the way the Mini-LED backlight and local dimming algorithms work in this model. However, that doesn't spoil the overall impression, because in terms of color precision alone the A400 Pro after calibration reached a level we really didn't expect.

Bravia 3 brings something more to the Sony television family than just a common name. It stands out primarily for its ability to improve the quality of weaker materials thanks to the applied processor. Of course, we won't find the advanced XR chip known from more expensive models here, but it must be acknowledged that the image at a lower resolution looked surprisingly good. Scaling worked effectively, and most parts of the screen were free from the typical excessive jagged edges found in budget constructions.

The feature that enhances the fluidity of tonal transitions is also worth noting. In the high setting, it works really well, effectively masking the imperfections of gradation without significant loss of detail. It does happen that the algorithm overly smooths elements that should remain sharp – for example, faces – however, in overall terms, the effect is beneficial. The best results were achieved precisely at the highest setting, and this option could be recommended to those watching lower-quality content.

Digital video processing is unfortunately one of the weaker points of the TCL A400 Pro. That doesn't mean the TV performs badly, but it's hard to call it anything clearly above standard. The upscaling itself is adequate: edges are smoothed fairly well, the image doesn't look overly sharp or pixelated, and lower-quality content can be watched without major discomfort. At the same time the overall look is slightly soft and it lacks the precision that the best image processors in more expensive TVs can deliver.

Much worse, however, is its handling of tonal transitions caused by heavy compression. TCL equipped the A400 Pro with a "Gradual Smoothing" feature that in theory should reduce visible color banding and artifacts in lower-quality content. In practice its effectiveness is very limited. It does not improve tonal transitions in any noticeable way, and at higher settings it can also smooth out image details, giving the picture an artificial, slightly blurred character. For that reason we think it's best to leave this feature off. The A400 Pro handles basic image scaling decently, but if you often watch heavily compressed content with visible posterization, this model won't be one of the best choices.

The fluidity of motion has never been a strong point of TVs equipped with 60 Hz panels, and the Bravia 3 is no exception. Nevertheless, Sony has added something that might appeal to those who are more sensitive to the way images are displayed. We are talking about the proprietary Motion Flow motion smoother, which offers users a lot of adjustment options. Thanks to it, one can make the image smoother, even theatrical, or stick to a more cinematic style with the characteristic stuttering that many simply associate with the film atmosphere. These features work with content at lower frame rates, such as movies and series recorded at 24 or 30 frames per second, which are the materials we encounter on a daily basis. It is precisely in this area that the motion smoother proves to be one of the most important features in everyday use of the television, and here the Bravia 3 performs really well.

The TCL A400 Pro is equipped with a 144 Hz panel, but in practice we're most interested in how it performs at 120 Hz. That's the refresh rate used by most consoles today, as well as many sports broadcasts and high-frame-rate content. In this range the TV performs quite well. Motion clarity is really good, especially after properly configuring the motion smoothing. The "Motion Clarity" feature improves smoothness. Its settings include two sliders that let you tailor the motion smoothing to your preferences — separately for lower- and higher-frame-rate material. That way you can achieve either a more cinematic look or a noticeably smoother picture. If you don't want to tweak settings manually, you can use presets such as low, medium, high, cinema, or nature.

Bravia 3 is not a device 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 wraps up the topic before it can even develop. This is a TV for casual gamers who, after work, want to fire up FIFA or racing games, not for someone who measures every frame in a spreadsheet. Nevertheless, Sony has added a few nice extras so it’s not too barren. ALLM works as it should, automatically switching the TV to game mode (low latency). We even find a simple Game Bar here that is clear. However, the biggest curiosity is the PlayStation Portal app. With it, you can launch games from PS5 wirelessly and immediately see them on the TV screen. It sounds great, but it only takes a few minutes to feel significant delays. In our opinion, it’s more of a showcase of capabilities than something usable on a daily basis. If someone really wants to play, it’s better to connect the console with an HDMI cable right away and forget about wireless problems.

When it comes to features for gamers, the TCL A400 Pro performs excellently. The TV has practically everything you can expect from a gaming TV today: 4K support at high refresh rates, VRR, ALLM, correct implementation of HDR formats in games, including Dolby Vision, and HGiG. Because of that it works well with both next-gen consoles and PCs. Another plus is the inclusion of a Game Bar, a special panel with the most important settings for gamers. From it you can quickly check basic signal information, refresh rate, and active features, and also adjust the look and behavior of some settings to your own preferences. This is a solution that may not change picture quality by itself, but it greatly improves the convenience of using the TV while gaming.

The only thing to complain about is the number of full HDMI 2.1 ports. The A400 Pro has only two such ports out of four, and one of them also functions as eARC. In practice this means that if someone wants to connect two next-gen consoles and a soundbar, they may hit some limitations. In that scenario you'll have to either swap devices or use extra equipment, for example an AV receiver or a soundbar with HDMI inputs. Despite this, it's hard not to rate the A400 Pro very highly as a gaming TV. The gaming feature set here is really powerful.