Recent content by MrPacoPepe

thanks, I didn't knew pixel shifting reserved space was so big, then it makes now sense why this screens are advertised ass 26.5 and not 27", and also they must be real pixel size like 100 extra on vertical and horizontal.

oday looking at the screen, with light to clean it, I find this strange effect, the screen doesn't go all to the sides to the true bezel, it's like a double bezel, the real one, and then like 0.3cm of screen that is not used even when I put the windows in full screen, and that is part of the...

if you can't even see the screen controls at 0%, or you have a faulty panel or you have an extremely bright light focused on your screen. https://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ASUS_ROG_Strix_XG438Q-BrightnessContrast.jpg all reviews of that monitor show the same, around 90 nits at...

Your display at 18% is about 160 nits if we follow the measured levels from tftcentral, even at 0% is almost 100 nits lol https://i.imgur.com/fiV2ivl.png

sure, thanks for telling me what's my kind of scenario is and what me and a lot of other people use and how we should interpret the results based on what you want to be and not what it really is Any other advice of how people should live their lives and how wrong they are because it doesn't fit...

rtings tests is a completely realistic scenario for desktop usage, it isn't for a media usage like a tv for netflix and some sporadic console gaming but desktop? yeah, it's a totally fair scenario hiding the taskbar won't save you from the programs UI elements which you will rack that without...

I talk about the ratio of cost per longevity for example, the QD oled burned to the point of being a trash display already without salvation because the CNN logo burned in in 1800 hours, costs 1300€ A 27 360 ulmb2 PG27AQN, that costs exactly the same 1300€, will last not 1800 hours, but about...

Oh surprise for everyone and pretty good news QD-OLED is burned, and completely destroyed (cnn logo), but suddenly, what it looked like burn-in in the LG W-OLED pannel, it isn't anymore and it was just dirt on the camera lens used to take the photos by rtings So, for the moment, W-OLED...

so, your point is as a new technology comes to the street, none of the old tech should be considered? hope you change of gpu to the top tier every new gen, have a 7800x3d, an oled 240hz because the old 120 doesn't cut it, etc must be great being so affluent and out of touch with society, but...

read again what I wrote not what you want to understand. An LCD can lasts over 40.000 hours, you can justify spending 1000€ for that and using it 3/4 years before changing it for the next flashy thing, and still have more than 50% of life expectancy left. But 1000€ for something that's...

That's it, it's the cost/benefit I sold my OLED because with the burn in tests, I can't afford to replace a display because after 2000 hours starts to burn in when I use my monitors about 5000 hours yearly, but when they last 10.000 hours and cost 200€, won't be a problem to change it every 2...

ironically, the #1 place is the most burned in display on the rtings test lol

yep, that was my point, the general consumer who is purchasing this monitors, is the complete opposite of the TV's buyers, so the rtings test was a reality check for everyone telling us in which point we are with this technology and how it isn't mature enough for desktop usage

I agree that it's the worst case scenario but for TV's for computer monitors their test is a pretty common usage, at least, it fits mine so much that I was forced to sell the display, because 1800 hours having that, would have last me less than a year.

5000 hours is absolutely nothing, even 10.000 hours as I said, my 144hz already have 16.000 hours of use in about 3 years, the OLED would have burned in less than year just with normal computer usage, I would have had the chrome static elements burned in for sure in 9 months lol