He updated the article after getting ahold of the QN65Q9FN:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...-the-tv-titans/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
"[UPDATE: Since writing the article below, I've been able to repeat my head to head tests using a Samsung 65-inch Q9FN rather than the 55-inch available to me for the original head to head. And strangely, despite both sets seemingly using the same number of dimming zones, the 65-inch model clearly looks brighter - especially in mid brightness color tones - than the 55 inch.
So much so that it essentially reverses the situation described in the original report below where the LG OLED could quite often look brighter than the Samsung set with mid-bright HDR content.
As a result, while the 55-inch Q9FN available in Europe is still a class-leadingly good 55-inch TV, if you decide to go the Q9FN route rather than the OLED route, I'd strongly recommend stepping up to Samsung's 65-inch model if finances allow.
I would also say that the latest Samsung firmware (1023 versus 1020 when I tested the 55Q9FN) seems to have raised slightly the 55-inch model's typical brightness level with HDR content. Though the 65-inch running the same 1023 firmware still clearly has a brightness advantage."
This reeks of:
Their QC is abysmal, no way going from last year's shit, could John Archer just say "stump up for the 65" he would need more Q9's to definitively say that.
It's like the 75" owners, with some saying the bars are really grey in particular films, but others say they are jet black.
Also Flatpanels said that OLED's had brighter looking peaks too, in certain scenarios, but who knows how much of Samsung's poor build quality has a bearing on this.