1. you are looking at last year model and it looks like, this one was only for the GB/EU market. the US/J/rest of the world gets -X900A/-X850A and they DO support UHD@120Hz AFTER the firmware update (done for free by sony; in-home) 2. (most) models from this year (e.g. ending with B) are already coming with that update, or can get it (free) after purchase. http://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/televisions/x9000b-series#product_details_default 3.i use 4k as a generic, since you will never see full 4k resolution on a home tv (for now), as long as 16:9 is the (broadcasting) standard. only the 4K projectors are native 4k resolution (and back to the fact that they are similar to the ones used in theaters). Sony calls them 4k UHD tvs. i personally dont care, to loose the -UHD, when im NOT talking to a customer. (call me lazy ;-) (im working as a contractor for the gov/military in the US and get my info straight from sony (trainers/technicians), not the websites...)

That link says 24P for 2160P - unless I'm missing something

It looks like Sony's line up of "4K" UHD screens can do 3840x2160/24p, 3840x2160/25p, 3840x2160/30p, 4096x2160/24p and now with the updates 3840x2160/60p. From the Au Sony site: This 4K Ultra HD TV can be upgraded to the latest HDMI 2.0 standard to accommodate 4K/60p content playback via internet software update available now. Obviously not really 4K/60p but 3840x2160/60p. $4500 for the bottom range 65",$5000 for the mid range 65" and the top line 84" is $25000. (Au dollars) I'd hate to imagine what the response times and input lag would be.

It looks like Sony's line up of "4K" UHD screens can do 3840x2160/24p, 3840x2160/25p, 3840x2160/30p, 4096x2160/24p and now with the updates 3840x2160/60p. From the Au Sony site: This 4K Ultra HD TV can be upgraded to the latest HDMI 2.0 standard to accommodate 4K/60p content playback via internet software update available now. Obviously not really 4K/60p but 3840x2160/60p. $4500 for the bottom range 65",$5000 for the mid range 65" and the top line 84" is $25000. (Au dollars) I'd hate to imagine what the response times and input lag would be.

Gonna stick my neck out here and say the input lag will be determined by the panel technology, not the resolution. Currently the top contenders for the least input lag are OLED and Plasma, which is why I use Panasonic Plasma for my Playstation sessions (game mode on). My info could be wrong or out of date, but that's what I'm led to believe.

@the sarge im running 65+55 4kUHDs since april last year and i (plus 99% of the customers) can see a difference compared to the FHD sets next to it. no matter if running 1080p from pc or ps3. all vids im running same thing. when a pixel is 4 times smaller (vs FHD), its 4 times smaller, no matter what content. especially with games its a big jump in quality. i sold my ps3 a while ago since i could look at the pic quality on a 32 FHD. looks so much better on the 65 UHD, that i got one from the store just to show the difference to customers. and im not talking about new/high res games, even the old wipeoutHD looks so good, im thinking of buying a ps3 again (3D vs non 3D on ps4)... of course thats only with the sonys, no one else is doing upscaling to 4k as long as they do, and it has a huge impact on the picture... one of the reasons sony doesnt "NEED" 4k content (which they have). @serialT/Maha guru almost no lag on sony tvs from W series and better. cnet even rate us gaming grade if i remember correctly. and almost every gaming monitor is lcd based, so why should the lcd on a tv be worse on lag/response? i had 25ms monitors without ghosting, and so called ultra fast 5ms screens that showed ghosting... i go by what i see on the screen, no matter the ms. @all yes, native 4K (4096x) only runs at 60Hz and sony is shooting 4K@60Hz, so i guess they havent pushed for 120Hz on the screens yet. but i know the tvs hardware "technically" supports it. might have "confused" it with the hdmi specs..