Any updates on Mini-LED or Micro-LEDs?

euskalzabe

euskalzabe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
1,478
Just wondering if anyone had read any juicy bits I've missed. I follow PCmonitors and TFTcentral, but it's been quiet for a while on these two fronts. I keep reading 144hz 32" QHD screens! 4K 144hz for the price of your kidney! Meanwhile, they're all the same garbage panels with crappy blacks (yes, even the $2000 panels are poop... have you seen the FALD models with insane blooming the second you move the mouse around? Unacceptable).

I'm "happy" with my current monitor situation, I just expected there to be 32" OLEDs at this point. I'll take the burn-in risk and replace in 3 years, happily. Meanwhile, all players are keeping OLEDs big to justify their high prices - nevermind 6" Samsung phones have hi-res AMOLEDs for $300.

So yeah, wondering when we'll get anywhere close to decent contrast. Micro-LED has been quiet... and seems Minis will only show up in spring or so - I'm expecting delays to fall 2020!

This situation is an embarrassment. Monitors have barely moved an inch in the past 10 years. Blegh...
 
It's pretty dismal. Mini LED FALD will take years to get to the 100k+ zones it needs to pass the cursor/starfield halo test (if it ever gets there at all). OLED is probably too risky for manufacturers due to burn in warranty claims. The one thing I'm cautiously optimistic for is dual-layer. With panel manufacturers like BOE and Innolux working on it, it seems like it may actually be headed for consumer-level products. Even so, that's probably still a couple of years out for a PC-size display, at best.
 
AUO have 1000+ Mini LED coming next year it seems - https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/a...anels-with-1000-zones-and-144hz-refresh-rate/

Step in the right direction anyway, and should be better than what we currently have, but I don't know if anyone's seen these in action yet to comment on the halo-ing etc. That's a real potential problem for sure.

Forget MicroLED for now... that's a solid decade away I'd say, at least for the use case you're talking about.

OLED, fugedaboutit! No manufacturer is even talking about them at smaller sizes.
 
You're starting to see OLED sizes creep into the 47" range; the problem is that larger sizes have higher margins, and OLED is still costs more to produce then LCD/LED.
 
gamerk2 said:
You're starting to see OLED sizes creep into the 47" range; the problem is that larger sizes have higher margins, and OLED is still costs more to produce then LCD/LED.
Click to expand...
Prices are coming down a lot this year for oleds at least. Can get a lg 65" under $2k now.
 
vegeta535 said:
Prices are coming down a lot this year for oleds at least. Can get a lg 65" under $2k now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but remember you can often snag the previous model year for around $1500 or so.

I've currently got a 55" C6, and will probably move to a C9/C10 once HDMI 2.1 capable GPUs come out. I'm waiting to see how wide the VRR range is before I purchase [can't be tested as no HDMI 2.1 source currently exists]; I'm *hoping* LG does better then the narrow 48-60Hz range Sansungs QLEDs provide.
 
gamerk2 said:
Yeah, but remember you can often snag the previous model year for around $1500 or so.

I've currently got a 55" C6, and will probably move to a C9/C10 once HDMI 2.1 capable GPUs come out. I'm waiting to see how wide the VRR range is before I purchase [can't be tested as no HDMI 2.1 source currently exists]; I'm *hoping* LG does better then the narrow 48-60Hz range Sansungs QLEDs provide.
Click to expand...
It is surprising how much stock is left of last year's model is still around. It is almost 2020 and still can find the 2018 model on sale. Still I think getting the 2019 model is worth it for 2.1 for future gaming. Can always wait til 2020 models come out and snatch up a cheaper 2019 model.
 
gamerk2 said:
You're starting to see OLED sizes creep into the 47" range; the problem is that larger sizes have higher margins, and OLED is still costs more to produce then LCD/LED.
Click to expand...


There's an LG 48" OLED coming next year at some point, but still way too big for general desktop use, and with a PPI of 92 which means you'd have to have it nearly twice as far from your eyes as 32" to achieve the same level of sharpness. Also no word if it will even have HDMI 2.1, not that this can be utilised yet anyway, and even if it could, VRR doesn't work on TV's via PC yet either.

Yes OLEDs are coming down in price (because more people are buying them and yield is improving), and the 48" is being targeted at a lower budget which is good news, but this also means it could be stripped down of features. At the same time though, LCD monitors are becoming more expensive. Four figures is the norm now for anything even remotely high end. I don't see this changing anytime soon.
 
bananadude said:
LCD monitors are becoming more expensive. Four figures is the norm now for anything even remotely high end. I don't see this changing anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I have a solution: everyone stop buying overpriced LCD crap with abysmal contrast levels, and manufacturers will get the message very soon.
 
bananadude said:
There's an LG 48" OLED coming next year at some point, but still way too big for general desktop use, and with a PPI of 92 which means you'd have to have it nearly twice as far from your eyes as 32" to achieve the same level of sharpness. Also no word if it will even have HDMI 2.1, not that this can be utilised yet anyway, and even if it could, VRR doesn't work on TV's via PC yet either.
Click to expand...

The C9 already uses HDMI 2.1, so there really isn't any reason to suspect LGs new models won't have it going forward. Likewise, the C9 supports HDMI Forum VRR, although no one can actually use it until there's a source that can output using HDMI 2.1 (I'm guessing the NVIDIA 3000 series will be the first GPUs to offer support). It's also worth noting the Samsungs latest QLED TVs can use Freesync over HDMI, albeit at a narrow refresh range of 48-60Hz.
 
gamerk2 said:
The C9 already uses HDMI 2.1, so there really isn't any reason to suspect LGs new models won't have it going forward. Likewise, the C9 supports HDMI Forum VRR, although no one can actually use it until there's a source that can output using HDMI 2.1 (I'm guessing the NVIDIA 3000 series will be the first GPUs to offer support). It's also worth noting the Samsungs latest QLED TVs can use Freesync over HDMI, albeit at a narrow refresh range of 48-60Hz.
Click to expand...

Realtek is also making a DP 1.4 to HDMI 2.1 adapter but it remains a mystery if it will support VRR.
 
gamerk2 said:
The C9 already uses HDMI 2.1, so there really isn't any reason to suspect LGs new models won't have it going forward. Likewise, the C9 supports HDMI Forum VRR, although no one can actually use it until there's a source that can output using HDMI 2.1 (I'm guessing the NVIDIA 3000 series will be the first GPUs to offer support). It's also worth noting the Samsungs latest QLED TVs can use Freesync over HDMI, albeit at a narrow refresh range of 48-60Hz.
Click to expand...

But VRR on TV's isn't compatible with Freesync on PC. That needs to be rectified first. If a GPU with HDMI 2.1 became available tmrw, you still couldn't use VRR on PC with one of those TV's.

I would concur that the 48" SHOULD have HDMI 2.1, but the point is we don't know anything about these yet, other than LG's intention to make it.
 
euskalzabe said:
I have a solution: everyone stop buying overpriced LCD crap with abysmal contrast levels, and manufacturers will get the message very soon.
Click to expand...
Overpriced? People are buying up all the garbage TVs that are going for $300 for 65". That is the popular market.
 
The halos will get smaller with more zones, but you will always get haloing with FALD no matter how many zones there are until the zone count is the same as the pixel count. At which point you only need to triple the leds and you can drop the lcd panel have a full on micro led display.
 
Here's a mockup of zone size at various zone counts on a FALD display (actual size if you're viewing on a 4k display):

wgGioIl.png


Try placing your mouse cursor over the squares to see how much haloing you could expect at each zone count. Keep in mind in a worst case scenario, your cursor could require 4 adjacent zones to be lit. As you can see, even at ~9k zones it's not amazing. We also rapidly enter the realm of diminishing returns, where adding many more zones only results in small decreases in zone size.
 
Last edited:
bananadude said:
But VRR on TV's isn't compatible with Freesync on PC. That needs to be rectified first. If a GPU with HDMI 2.1 became available tmrw, you still couldn't use VRR on PC with one of those TV's.

I would concur that the 48" SHOULD have HDMI 2.1, but the point is we don't know anything about these yet, other than LG's intention to make it.
Click to expand...

In regards to VRR, HDMI Forum VRR is essentially designed in a similar manner to Gsync; I fully expect NVIDIA to support it when they put out a HDMI 2.1 capable GPU. Longer term, I expect TVs will exclusively use HDMI Forum VRR due to HDMIs dominance, and PC Displays to support both specifications.

It would be unlikely for LGs 48" to "not" support HDMI 2.1; there's no reason for LG to continue using the older standard when HDMI 2.1 capable parts are already in use. It would actually likely be more expensive to use the older parts at this juncture.
 
kasakka said:
Realtek is also making a DP 1.4 to HDMI 2.1 adapter but it remains a mystery if it will support VRR.
Click to expand...

The problem is you have two different VRR implementations; at the end of the day, the PC would be outputting Freesync, and I don't see how you can map Freesync into HDMI Forum VRR. I think the adapter would thus be limited to allowing resolution options that DP 1.4 allows that HDMI 2.0 didn't. At the end of the day, you'd still be found by DP 1.4's protocol and limitations.
 
While semi-transparent microLEDs are cool, I do wish manufacturers focused more on making this cheaper to produce than any further esoteric uses of the technology. Then again, if this catches on, it will spread the use of the technology, bringing the benefits of economies of scale. Whatever path this takes, I just want a 32" microLED 4K monitor for less than $1000. Something like that could last you for years and years barely getting outdated.
 
euskalzabe said:
While semi-transparent microLEDs are cool, I do wish manufacturers focused more on making this cheaper to produce than any further esoteric uses of the technology. Then again, if this catches on, it will spread the use of the technology, bringing the benefits of economies of scale. Whatever path this takes, I just want a 32" microLED 4K monitor for less than $1000. Something like that could last you for years and years barely getting outdated.
Click to expand...

Currently 4K MicroLED commercially available is about $770 000. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for $1000.
 
vegeta535 said:
Overpriced? People are buying up all the garbage TVs that are going for $300 for 65". That is the popular market.
Click to expand...

Reality check: you can buy a much higher quality panel for $300 on a 40" 4K TV (resolution, color, contrast) than you get in a similarly priced monitor (the only downside being refresh-rate).
 
euskalzabe said:
Reality check: you can buy a much higher quality panel for $300 on a 40" 4K TV (resolution, color, contrast) than you get in a similarly priced monitor (the only downside being refresh-rate).
Click to expand...
Well the monitor segment has always been a shit show. Something something small monitor/tv aren't much cheaper to produce then bigger screens.
 
vegeta535 said:
Something something small monitor/tv aren't much cheaper to produce then bigger screens.
Click to expand...

Yeah... I stopped buying that argument from manufacturers when I saw the first 4K phone screens. If you can do it at 6" and at 60", there's 0 reason you can't do it equally cheap at 27-32".

Shit show indeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top