TCL QM89From real comments

Verdict distilled from 42 mentions across 12 aspects in comments under product review videos.

Positive sentiment41%
PROS 41%
CONS 59%

Rank based on 42 mentions across 12 aspects

View the verdict as

Buy this if...

  • You want a projector-killing, ultra-bright big-screen theater experience
  • You already love TCL's smaller Mini LED TVs and want to go bigger
  • You have the budget and room access to justify a 115-inch giant

What users love

Skip this if...

  • You're price-sensitive, since MSRPs cited range from $13K-$27K
  • Your home has doorway, stairway, or wall-mounting constraints
  • You're concerned about electricity costs or reflections in bright rooms

What users complain about

Compare in seconds

Based on user comments

Best choiceBest value
1Budget
Exceptional value for priceNear-OLED picture qualityStrong gaming performanceLimited peak brightness in bright roomsBlooming around bright objectsInconsistent customer service
Exceptional value for price
Near-OLED picture quality
Strong gaming performance
Limited peak brightness in bright rooms
Blooming around bright objects
Inconsistent customer service
2Premium
Near-OLED black levelsExcellent color and picture processingHigh brightness for HDRGaming mode shortcomingsHigh priceWeaker performance in smaller screen sizes
Near-OLED black levels
Excellent color and picture processing
High brightness for HDR
Gaming mode shortcomings
High price
Weaker performance in smaller screen sizes
3Premium
No OLED burn-in riskExceptional brightness and HDR performanceExcels in bright, sunlit roomsBlooming and haloing artifactsBuild quality and software issuesOnly one HDMI 2.1 port
No OLED burn-in risk
Exceptional brightness and HDR performance
Excels in bright, sunlit rooms
Blooming and haloing artifacts
Build quality and software issues
Only one HDMI 2.1 port
4Mid
Excellent value for priceNear-OLED picture qualityBig-screen affordabilityLong-term reliability concernsInconsistent brightness/spec reportsStill not quite OLED for some
Excellent value for price
Near-OLED picture quality
Big-screen affordability
Long-term reliability concerns
Inconsistent brightness/spec reports
Still not quite OLED for some
5Mid
Near-OLED contrast and black levelsOutstanding value for priceSharp, vibrant overall picture qualityNarrow viewing anglesSoftware and HDMI reliability issuesBacklight bleed and blooming in dark scenes
Near-OLED contrast and black levels
Outstanding value for price
Sharp, vibrant overall picture quality
Narrow viewing angles
Software and HDMI reliability issues
Backlight bleed and blooming in dark scenes
6Mid
Great value for priceNear-OLED picture qualityGood built-in sound and remote designSoftware rough edgesSuboptimal upscalingDolby Vision and black crush complaints
Great value for price
Near-OLED picture quality
Good built-in sound and remote design
Software rough edges
Suboptimal upscaling
Dolby Vision and black crush complaints
7Budget
144Hz Refresh RateAffordable PricingCrisp Display QualityNOW TV App Streaming Limitations
144Hz Refresh Rate
Affordable Pricing
Crisp Display Quality
NOW TV App Streaming Limitations
8Mid
Strong Value for PricePicture Quality and Color AccuracyBuild Quality and Brand ReliabilityFire TV OS Is DivisiveNarrow Viewing AnglesNo Dedicated Input Button
Strong Value for Price
Picture Quality and Color Accuracy
Build Quality and Brand Reliability
Fire TV OS Is Divisive
Narrow Viewing Angles
No Dedicated Input Button
9Budget
Easy to calibrate for better pictureExcellent value for the priceImpressive mini-LED picture with deep blacksPanel inconsistency across sizesSoftware bugs and interface glitchesWeak built-in speakers
Easy to calibrate for better picture
Excellent value for the price
Impressive mini-LED picture with deep blacks
Panel inconsistency across sizes
Software bugs and interface glitches
Weak built-in speakers
10Premium
Excellent black levels and contrastHigh brightness and vivid picturePreferred over OLED for burn-in peace of mindWeak upscaling of lower-resolution contentNo Dolby Vision or DTS supportSoftware updates may degrade performance
Excellent black levels and contrast
High brightness and vivid picture
Preferred over OLED for burn-in peace of mind
Weak upscaling of lower-resolution content
No Dolby Vision or DTS support
Software updates may degrade performance
You are here
13Premium
TCL QM89
Massive, immersive screen sizeBetter than UST projectors for manyHigh brightness and dimming zonesVery high priceDifficult shipping and installationUnclear or inconsistent specs
TCL QM89
Massive, immersive screen size
Better than UST projectors for many
High brightness and dimming zones
Very high price
Difficult shipping and installation
Unclear or inconsistent specs

Who wins on what

Ranked by what users actually praise

Overall Impression

Commenters were awed by the scale and picture quality of the QM89. Multiple viewers said this TV makes UST projectors irrelevant, praising its vibrant colors, high nits, and dimming zone count as a genuine step up. One user called it 'amazing' compared to their 110-inch projector screen, while another highlighted that at typical viewing distances, a 120-inch screen is needed to fully use 4K resolution. Existing QM8 owners expressed enthusiasm about upgrading to the larger model.

Getting the TV into a home is a recurring practical worry. Several commenters raised concerns about shipping such a massive panel through doors, around corners, and up staircases, with one referencing a well-known struggle to install a similar unit. Others asked about wall-mount availability and structural wall strength, and one wanted exact dimensions for building custom cabinets. These logistics concerns tempered enthusiasm even among people who loved the picture quality.

Price and running costs are the biggest barrier for most viewers. Commenters cited wildly different price points from $13K to $27K, with many saying it's still out of reach compared to cheaper 98-inch or smaller TCL models. Some directly compared the cost to buying a high-end UST projector and ALR screen setup, which could be far less expensive. Electricity consumption and bright-room reflectivity were also flagged as ongoing downsides versus projector alternatives.

Outdated / Not-accurate data?