Extremely-thin TVs have new names however they nonetheless suck

I am going to admit upfront that the headline is an exaggeration. I do not hate ultra-thin TVs — clearly, in at the least a method, they’re superb in comparison with what I had rising up. As late as my early 20s, I used to be nonetheless utilizing a 40-inch CRT that was so cumbersome it took two folks to get it into an residence, even with the assistance of a dolly. Conversely, the 65-inch model of Samsung’s The Frame Pro is so skinny and lightweight that I may grasp it excessive on a wall with no stepladder if my arms stretched that a lot.

What made me consider this matter is the most recent darling of the ultra-thin world, the LG evo W6. It is dubbed the Wallpaper TV, primarily as a result of it is 9mm thick — about the identical because the show on my laptop. It is spectacular on a number of ranges, really, at the least from what was proven at CES. It isn’t in shops but as of early February 2026. But it surely jogs my memory that when ultra-thin TVs are achieved effectively, they’re nonetheless not a superb worth. They will not be till thinness stops being a bulletpoint, a declare that ought to make extra sense in a minute.

What’s so horrible about ultra-thin TVs?

Two paths, each sketchy

In lots of respects, nothing. Even for those who gave me a small and (comparatively) low cost one — just like the 32-inch non-Professional Body — I might nonetheless get pleasure from watching it in the best context. The image goes to be effective, and I might admire the load financial savings, having moved a stunning variety of instances up to now 15 years. I’ve lived in two international locations and 4 cities. In Austin alone, I went via three residences and my first home.

The overarching downside is that, a method or one other, you are paying a premium for the privilege. Gadgets like The Body or Hisense’s Canvas TVs are what are generally known as “artwork” TVs — they’re skinny as a result of they’re meant to resemble (and present) framed work or images, mixing in along with your room’s wall decor. They ship with ornamental bezels, and have matte screens to cancel out reflections. That will be all effectively and good besides that even that 32-inch Body is $600, and bigger units from a number of manufacturers are concurrently dearer than their non-art counterparts whereas continuously being inferior spec-wise.

Particularly, the recurring situation is that almost all of them use QLED. That is an evolution of the usual LCD format, however one which’s already on the way in which out. It is rapidly being changed by mini-LED, which supplies superior shade, distinction, and brightness. For lower than $600, you may get a 55-inch mini-LED set which can blow any QLED out of the water for those who care about image high quality over vogue.

You could be questioning why extra artwork TVs aren’t outfitted with OLED, which is nice for thinness whereas beating mini-LED in shade and distinction. The reason is that other than being much more costly, OLED is weak to burn-in when static photographs are left onscreen for hours at a time. That makes the tech distinctly unsuited for mimicking artwork, regardless of in case you have a TV swap photographs each jiffy and benefit from upkeep options like pixel refresh cycles.

As an instance you are keen to desert the pretense of an artwork TV, although, and chase after an ultra-thin product with zero efficiency compromises. The LG evo W6 checks these packing containers. It is a 4K OLED set that gives 0.1ms response instances, 77- and 83-inch sizes, and customized anti-glare tech to protect the distinction most matte screens sacrifice. Its thinness is feasible as a result of it makes use of a high-speed wi-fi field for inputs — the one factor it’s good to plug into the TV itself is an influence cable.

The catch is that it is liable to be wildly costly. Whereas the W6’s pricetag has but to be introduced, the earlier Wallpaper TV price as much as $20,000. It is uncertain the brand new one will price a lot, however an equal 77-inch LG G5 is $3,500 with no wi-fi connection field. It isn’t onerous to think about the W6 beginning at $7,000, as some folks on-line are speculating. Simply $5,000 can be ridiculous, on condition that you could possibly afford two or three typical OLEDs with the identical display screen dimension.

A solution to a query nobody requested

The worth of being skinny

Credit score: LG

Within the cellphone market, there’s been some extreme whiplash with regards to ultra-thin designs. Heading into 2025, Apple, Samsung, and different manufacturers had been seemingly all-in on the concept, anticipating the general public to adore gadgets that had been extraordinarily snug to carry, regardless of if it price them additional and did not do as effectively within the digicam and battery departments.

Then the iPhone Air launched. Whereas it has its followers, the product has offered worse than Apple anticipated. A lot in order that Samsung and different rivals have reportedly scrapped plans for future imitators. Because it seems, nobody was actually complaining about how thick or heavy smartphones are, and nearly all of folks aren’t keen to pay almost as a lot as they’d for an iPhone 17 Professional for one thing that is inferior in some respects to the iPhone 17.

Extremely-thin TVs have had extra endurance, however I might argue that there is a related unhealthy premise behind them: that present merchandise are someway too cumbersome. That argument may’ve been legitimate within the early 2010s. Certainly, after I initially moved to Austin, I purchased a 40-inch LCD that was simply barely skinny and lightweight sufficient to hold up three flights of stairs on my own. In 2024, nevertheless, I used to be capable of purchase a 65-inch mini-LED set that was really lighter, and thinness wasn’t one in every of its promoting factors.

Merely put, expertise has advanced to the purpose the place most TVs are already as skinny and lightweight as anybody wants. It is no downside sitting one on high of an leisure heart, and you are going to need assist mounting a 65-inch one in your wall no matter how a lot it weighs.

Naturally, additional progress is welcome, and it is no pores and skin off my again if wealthy customers are keen to pay a whole lot or 1000’s extra for luxurious designs. For the common shopper, although, there’s way more worth in prioritizing specs that can maximize the expertise of flicks, exhibits, and video games for longer. Ask your self — 5 to 10 years from now, will you get extra out of an ultra-thin TV, or one that will not really feel as outdated by way of its efficiency or display screen dimension?

Talking of which, this whole debate may turn into moot within the subsequent few years. Enhancements in miniaturization inevitably turn into cheaper as manufacturing scales up. By the 2030s, what you see in present artwork TVs or the W6 may turn into de facto in common fashions, or at the least extra commonplace. If that’s the case, there will not be a lot motive in any respect to market TVs on their thinness, until maybe foldable and rollable fashions take off in a approach they have not to date. And there is a likelihood that a few of us can be utilizing AR glasses as a substitute — for those who’re not watching a film with different folks, who wants a 65-inch rollable when you’ll be able to simulate a 100-inch TV wherever you go?