LG 85QNED92AUA 85" VS LG 86QNED85AUA 86"

Both the LG 85QNED92AUA and the LG 86QNED85AUA share a strong display foundation: identical 4K (3840 x 2160) resolution, Mini-LED LCD panels with 10-bit color depth, 1.07 billion colors, and 178° viewing angles in both directions. Their pixel densities are virtually indistinguishable at 52 ppi vs 51 ppi respectively — a difference imperceptible to the naked eye — and both include anti-reflection coatings and ambient light sensors for adaptive brightness in varying room conditions.

The most meaningful differentiator on paper is the 86QNED85AUA's 144Hz refresh rate versus the 85QNED92AUA's 120Hz. In practice, 144Hz delivers noticeably smoother motion in fast-paced gaming scenarios when paired with a compatible source, and combined with AMD FreeSync Premium — which both TVs share — it offers a wider window for tear-free variable refresh rate gaming. However, for standard broadcast, streaming, or cinematic content, this advantage is largely irrelevant. On the flip side, the 85QNED92AUA supports Dolby Vision, while the 86QNED85AUA does not. Dolby Vision is a dynamic, metadata-driven HDR format that can adjust scene by scene, and it is widely supported across Netflix, Disney+, and Apple TV+ — making it a tangible, everyday advantage for streaming households.

The decision here hinges on primary use case. The 86QNED85AUA has the edge for gaming thanks to its higher refresh rate, while the 85QNED92AUA holds an advantage for home theater and streaming use due to its Dolby Vision support. Neither product dominates outright — but for mixed-use living room setups where streaming is the primary activity, the Dolby Vision capability of the 85QNED92AUA carries more consistent, real-world impact.

Connectivity is one area where these two televisions are in complete lockstep. Both ship with four HDMI 2.1 ports, which is a genuinely premium offering — HDMI 2.1 supports up to 4K at 144Hz and 8K at 60Hz passthrough, and having four of them means no compromises when connecting a soundbar, gaming console, streaming device, and cable box simultaneously.

Wireless credentials are equally matched: both support Wi-Fi 6E (802.11ax), the most current consumer Wi-Fi standard available, enabling lower latency and faster throughput on 6GHz band networks — a meaningful advantage in congested home environments with many connected devices. Bluetooth 5.3 on both units ensures stable, energy-efficient connections for compatible headphones or peripherals. Miracast support rounds out wireless connectivity for screen mirroring from Android or Windows devices.

With every port count, wireless standard, and connectivity feature lining up identically across both models, this group is a clear tie. A buyer choosing between these two TVs will experience no difference whatsoever in how they connect to their existing devices or networks.

Audio is another category where these two LG models are mirror images of each other. Both include built-in stereo speakers with a subwoofer, and support the full Dolby ecosystem: Dolby Atmos, Dolby Audio, Dolby Digital, and Dolby Digital Plus. Dolby Atmos is the standout here — it enables object-based surround sound processing, creating a more three-dimensional listening experience even through the TV's own speakers when content is encoded for it.

For users planning to connect external audio equipment, both TVs offer HDMI ARC and eARC. The eARC port is the more important of the two: it carries significantly more bandwidth than standard ARC, meaning it can pass lossless audio formats like Dolby TrueHD and DTS:X to a compatible soundbar or receiver without compression — a meaningful advantage over older ARC implementations if your audio setup supports it.

There is no differentiator to call out here; the audio spec sheets are identical across every data point. This group is a definitive tie, and audio capability should carry no weight in a decision between these two models.

Despite their similar screen sizes, these two TVs diverge sharply in physical design. The most striking contrast is thickness: the 86QNED85AUA measures just 30.5 mm deep, roughly half the 60.9 mm profile of the 85QNED92AUA. For wall-mounted installations, that difference is visually significant — the 86QNED85AUA will sit considerably closer to the wall, lending it a sleeker, more integrated appearance in the room.

Weight tells the opposite story. The 85QNED92AUA comes in at approximately 35.2 kg, while the 86QNED85AUA is substantially heavier at around 51 kg — a difference of nearly 16 kg. That gap has real practical consequences: the heavier 86QNED85AUA requires more robust wall mounting hardware and makes two-person installation essentially mandatory, whereas the lighter 85QNED92AUA is comparatively easier to maneuver and position. Both models support VESA mounting, so neither restricts your bracket options.

There is no single winner here — the right choice depends on installation priorities. The 86QNED85AUA has the clear edge in aesthetics for wall mounting thanks to its slim profile, but the 85QNED92AUA is meaningfully easier to handle and install due to its significantly lower weight. Buyers planning a flush wall mount in a living space where appearance matters most will favor the 86; those prioritizing ease of installation or placing the TV on a stand will find the 85's lighter build more practical.

Smart platform features are identical across both models: AirPlay, Google Assistant, Alexa, smartphone remote support, USB recording, voice commands, and a built-in browser are all present on each. Neither supports Apple HomeKit or Siri, and neither includes a rechargeable remote. For day-to-day smart TV use, these two are functionally indistinguishable.

The standout — and only — differentiator in this group is power consumption, and the gap is substantial. The 85QNED92AUA draws 368W during operation against the 86QNED85AUA's 171W, resulting in annual consumption figures of 675 kWh versus 315 kWh respectively. That roughly 360 kWh annual difference translates to a meaningful gap in electricity costs over the life of the TV — at average U.S. energy rates, the 85QNED92AUA could cost noticeably more per year to run. It is worth noting that the 85QNED92AUA's higher draw may partly reflect its more power-intensive backlighting characteristics, though the provided data does not confirm the cause directly.

On features alone, this group has a clear practical winner: the 86QNED85AUA delivers the same smart platform capabilities at less than half the operating power draw. For energy-conscious buyers or those planning extended daily viewing hours, that efficiency advantage is significant and compounds over time.