Samsung QN65Q80DAFXZA

The Samsung QN65Q80DAFXZA is a tough sell. Its HDR performance is a real letdown, landing in the bottom 14th percentile of all TVs we've tested. For a staggering $44,550, you get a below-average display, weak gaming features, and a sluggish smart platform. You're essentially paying a luxury tax for a thoroughly mediocre television.

Let's talk about the panel, because that's the whole ballgame. The display score puts this Samsung in the 29th percentile of all TVs we've tested. In plain English, that means the raw image output is below average. Colors aren't as accurate, and the peak brightness likely isn't high enough to fight off glare in a well-lit room, which is a problem for a TV supposedly aimed at sports fans. The HDR performance is a letdown, scoring in the 14th percentile. You're not getting the deep, inky blacks or brilliant specular highlights that make 4K Blu-rays and modern streaming shows look stunning. It's a flat, uninspiring image.

Gaming is another area where this set falls behind most of the pack, sitting in the 18th percentile. We're probably looking at higher input lag and a lack of full-bandwidth HDMI 2.1 ports that can handle 4K at 120Hz with VRR. For a TV this expensive, that's a tough pill to swallow. The audio system doesn't pick up the slack either, with a 16th percentile score that suggests tinny, bass-light sound. You'll almost certainly need to budget for a soundbar, which feels absurd at this price point.

Stacked against the competition, the QN65Q80DAFXZA gets completely outclassed. The Hisense U8 Series 65U8QG is a direct competitor that likely delivers far superior HDR brightness and gaming features for a fraction of the cost. The LG OLED evo AI 4K G5 Series is in a different universe of picture quality, with perfect blacks and infinite contrast that make this Samsung's 14th percentile HDR score look like a joke. Even the TCL QM7K Series will offer a much brighter, more colorful image with better smart features. The only reason to look at this Samsung is if you find it on a fire sale for 90% off, and even then, you're still stuck with a mediocre panel and terrible smart TV software.

Value is almost impossible to find here. At $44,550, this TV is priced like a piece of professional mastering equipment or a top-tier luxury OLED, but it delivers performance that's consistently below average. The price per performance ratio is frankly terrible. You're paying a massive premium for the Samsung name and the 65-inch size, but getting a panel and feature set that a $1,000 TCL would embarrass. There's no price difference to compare across stores since we only have one listing, but it doesn't matter. This is a bad deal at any price above bargain-bin clearance levels.

The Samsung QN65Q80DAFXZA lands in a weird spot. Its best score, a 10.4 out of 100 for sports viewing, still puts it in the 37th percentile for picture quality, which is frankly mediocre. For a set priced at $44,550, you'd expect it to be a standout in at least one category, but it's not. The display itself sits in the 29th percentile, meaning the panel's core brightness, contrast, and color performance are underwhelming compared to what else is out there. We're looking at a TV that struggles to justify its existence on paper before we even get to the smart features or gaming chops.

And those gaming chops? They're a real weak spot, landing in the 18th percentile. HDR performance is even worse, down in the 14th percentile, so don't expect those highlights to pop the way they should. The audio is thin, the smart platform is lagging behind the competition, and there's very little social proof from buyers to lean on. This is a heavy, expensive screen that seems to have been built for a market segment that doesn't really exist, especially when you look at what the competition offers for a fraction of the price.

Almost everyone should skip this TV. If you care about picture quality, the 29th percentile display score is a dealbreaker. Gamers should absolutely look elsewhere due to the 18th percentile gaming performance. Movie fans will be let down by the 14th percentile HDR. Even casual viewers who just want a smart TV will be frustrated by the 9th percentile smart platform. The only person who might consider this is someone who needs a 65-inch screen for a bright, non-critical viewing environment like a waiting room or a sports bar, and even then, only if they can get it for a tiny fraction of its current asking price.

We can't recommend the Samsung QN65Q80DAFXZA. The data is brutal and consistent across the board. It's a below-average performer in nearly every category that matters, from the core display quality to gaming and HDR. The $44,550 price tag is disconnected from reality, especially when competitors offer dramatically better picture quality and features for much less money. Unless you have a very specific, non-negotiable need for this exact model, you should run, not walk, to look at an OLED from LG or a mini-LED set from Hisense or TCL.