Samsung BNDL_QN85QN70FA-WRTY5-AMBER-SC Review
Our review of the Samsung QN85QN70FA TV hit a wall: the performance data is for a phone. This product listing is fundamentally broken, and you should look elsewhere.
The 30-Second Version
The data for this TV listing is completely broken. The specs say premium 85-inch display, but the scores scream 'budget phone.' Do not trust this page.
Overview
This is a weird one. We're looking at an 85-inch Samsung Neo QLED TV, but our database is feeding us percentile scores that look like they belong to a budget phone. The display score is strong, which tracks for a high-end TV, but everything else—performance, features, even connectivity—ranks near the bottom. The one thing to know? This product listing is a complete mess, and you should absolutely not buy it based on this data. Something is very wrong here.
Performance
The performance score is in the 16th percentile, which is a real letdown. For a TV with a supposed 'NQ4 AI Gen2 Processor,' that's baffling. It suggests that, compared to other products in its supposed category, it's lagging behind most. This is the biggest red flag in the data.
Pros & Cons
Pros
- The display ranks well above average (81st percentile), which is the only positive signal. 81th
- It's an 85-inch screen, so it's physically massive.
- Includes a 5-year protection plan from the retailer listing.
- The price spread is huge, so maybe someone is selling it for $187 (but probably not).
Cons
- The performance score is terrible for any device, let alone a premium TV. 6th
- Feature and social proof scores are among the worst we've seen. 6th
- The listed 'competitors' are all phones, confirming the data is corrupted. 16th
- Build quality and connectivity scores are mediocre at best. 33th
Specifications
Full Specifications
Display
| Refresh Rate | 144 Hz |
Value & Pricing
With a price range from $187 to $1780 and scores this contradictory, the value proposition is nonexistent. If it were $187 for an 85-inch TV, it'd be a steal, but that's almost certainly a data error. At anything close to its likely real price, it's a terrible value based on these metrics. The 'best deal' here is to walk away.
Price History
vs Competition
Forget the listed competitors like the Motorola Moto G stylus or Google Pixel 10—they're phones. If you're actually shopping for an 85-inch TV, you'd compare this to other high-end models from Samsung's own lineup, like the QN90 series, or offerings from LG and Sony. Based on this data, any of those would be a safer and better-performing bet. This listing can't be trusted for a real comparison.
| Spec | Samsung BNDL_QN85QN70FA-WRTY5-AMBER-SC | Motorola Moto G Motorola - moto g stylus 2025 256GB (Unlocked) - | Google Pixel Google - Pixel 10 128GB (Unlocked) - Frost | Apple iPhone Apple - Geek Squad Certified Refurbished iPhone 12 | 8849 Tank 8849 Tank 3 5G Rugged Smartphone, 23800mAh 6.79" | FOXX S13 FOXX S13 5G Cell Phone, Android 14 Unlocked |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen Size | - | 6.7 | 6.3 | 6.1 | 6.8 | 6.7 |
| Display Type | - | OLED | OLED | OLED | - | - |
| Refresh Rate | 144 | 120 | 120 | 60 | 120 | 120 |
| Processor | - | Snapdragon 6 Gen 3 | 3.78 GHz | Apple A14 Bionic | Octa-Core | Dimensity 900 |
| RAM (GB) | - | 8 | 12 | - | 16 | 12 |
| Storage (GB) | - | 256 | 128 | 64 | 512 | 256 |
| Rear Camera Mp | - | 50 | 48 | 12 | 200 | 108 |
| Front Camera Mp | - | 32 | 11 | 12 | - | 32 |
| Battery Capacity Mah | - | 5000 | 4970 | - | - | 5000 |
| Charging Wattage | - | 68 | - | - | - | - |
| Wireless Charging | - | true | false | true | false | - |
| Five (g) | - | true | true | true | true | true |
| Water Resistance | - | IP68 | IP68 | IP68 | IP68 | - |
| Operating System | - | Android 15 | Android 16 | iOS | Android | Android 14 |
| Compare | Compare | Compare | Compare | Compare |
| Product | Build | Camera | Battery | Display | Feature | Performance | Connectivity | Social Proof |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samsung BNDL_QN85QN70FA-WRTY5-AMBER-SC | 40.2 | 34.8 | 35.3 | 80.5 | 5.8 | 16.2 | 32.8 | 6.3 |
| Motorola Moto G stylus 2025 Compare | 99.9 | 96.9 | 99.9 | 99.7 | 100 | 86.6 | 99.9 | 99.8 |
| Google Pixel 10 Compare | 99.3 | 98.4 | 91.6 | 97.3 | 88.9 | 75.2 | 97.2 | 98 |
| Apple iPhone Geek Squad Certified Refurbished 12 5G Compare | 96.3 | 93.8 | 70.5 | 95.8 | 92.3 | 87.3 | 97.9 | 95.2 |
| 8849 Tank 8849 Tank 3 5G Rugged Compare | 92.7 | 86.5 | 70.5 | 92.6 | 96.9 | 84.7 | 87.5 | 92.6 |
| FOXX S13 S13 5G Cell Compare | 40.2 | 87.2 | 95.8 | 92.6 | 83.4 | 78.8 | 87.5 | 20.5 |
Common Questions
Q: Is this really an 85-inch TV?
The description says it is, but the performance and feature scores are from the bottom of the barrel. It's likely a real TV model, but the review scores attached to this listing are for something else entirely.
Q: Why are phones listed as competitors?
It's the clearest sign the data is messed up. Our system has matched this TV listing with performance metrics from the mobile phone category. It's a garbage-in, garbage-out situation.
Q: Should I buy it if I find it for $187?
If you see an 85-inch Samsung Neo QLED for $187, it's either the deal of the century, a misprint, or a scam. We'd bet on the latter two. Steer clear.
Who Should Skip This
Everyone. Skip this listing. If you're looking for a big, high-end TV, go read a proper review from a site that hasn't mixed up its database. This page is useless.
Verdict
Do not buy this product based on this listing. The technical data is clearly corrupted or misapplied. The percentile scores contradict the product description, and the listed competitors are for a completely different product category. This is a case where the numbers tell a story of a faulty listing, not a faulty product. We recommend finding a different, verified source for reviews of the Samsung QN85QN70FA TV.