LG 48CX

kasakka said:
LG in some CES interview already stated they are not interested in chasing lower input lag when it is already in sub 1 frame area for supported refresh rates. You have to remember that OLED also does not have response time related input lag like LCDs do.

So both input lag and response time on these TVs are issues you don't have to consider at all.
Click to expand...

Yep, and it's not only sub 1 frame, it's basically as low as it can go at those framerates. There really isn't a significant amount they can improve it.

Also like you said there is no pixel response time like with LCDs. So the input lag measured is for the actual final image.
Some of the pixels don't even finish transitioning before the next frame on the fastest ".5 ms" response time LCDs, so you may have 6 ms input lag on an LCD, but that's the measured input lag for displaying partially transitioned pixels.
 
I'll be happy with ~6ms on a monitor with such great OLED per pixel visuals and other features (hdmi 2.1, VRR, 120hz 4k 4:4:4, etc.) while also not being limited to a slim ~13' tall or so belt model .

120hz is 8.3ms per frame and that is only if, even if ignoring a few frame rate "potholes" in your graph, you are getting 120fps solid all of the time as a common frame rate low.... which most people aren't in any kind of demanding games and settings near or at 4k resolution.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

120fps-Hz (solid, not average):
.................8.3ms per frame
.................50% reduction in sample and hold blur to a "soften blur" compared to baseline 60fps-Hz smearing blur (~ 8ms persistence vs 16ms persistence)
.................double the motion definition 2:1 ("# of unique pages~action states in a flip book flipping twice as fast"), incl. viewport movement, path articulation
................. 10 frames shown to every 5 at 60fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 8.3 shown at 100fps-Hz solide
................. 10 frames to every 10Hz refresh on a 120hz screen at 120fps solid (1:1)


115fps-Hz rate cap (solid frame rate, not average)
................. 8.7ms per frame
................ ~ 45% +?? reduction in sample in hold blur (8.7ms image persistence)

100fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 10ms per frame
................. ~40% reduction in sample and hold blur (10ms image persistence)
................. 10 frames to every 6 shown at 60fps-Hz solid (1.6:1)
................. 10 frames to ever 10 shown at 100fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 12 shown at 120fps-hz solid (1.2:1, 20fps-hz short of 120fps-hz)

75fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 13.3ms per frame
................. 15 ??? % reduction in sample and hold blur? (13.3ms persistence) .. still smearing blur, slightly moderated
................. 10 frames to every 8 shown at 60fps-Hz solid (1.25:1)
................. 10 frames to every 13 shown at 100fps-Hz solid (1.3:1)
................. 10 frames to every 16 shown at 120fps-Hz solid (1.6:1)

60fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 16.6ms per frame
................. baseline "100%" smearing blur "outside of the lines" of individual objects as well as viewport movement of the whole game world at speed
................. 1:1 motion definition vs 60fps-Hz baseline
................. 10 frames at 60fps-Hz to every 16.6 frames shown at 100fps-Hz
.................. [6 frames to every 10 shown at 100fps-Hz solid (5:3)]
..................10 frames at 60fps-Hz to every 20 frames shown at 120fps-Hz
.................. [5 frames to every 10 shown at 120fps-Hz solid (2:1, half)]

40fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 25ms per frame
................. baseline smearing blur (or worse) page-y choppy motion , sluggish
................. 10 frames to every 15 shown at 60fps-Hz solid (1.5:1)
................. 10 frames to every 25 shown at 100fps-Hz solid (2.5:1)
................. 10 frames to every 30 shown at 120fps-Hz solid (3:1)

30fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 33.3ms per frame
................. smearing blur, page-y/choppy animations ~ "molasses" movement and FoV movement ~ motion definition
................. 10 frames to every 20 shown at 60fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 30 shown at 100fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 40 shown at 120fps-Hz solid
 
Last edited:
I know you could always run a 2560x1440 rez upscaled even on the C9's - but I wonder if you could run a ultrawide rez or other letterboxed rez on 1:1 on a LG CX at 4:2:2 chroma 120hz off of a 1000 series or 2000 series nvidia gpu (with VRR) as long as it was within the bandwidth limit of hdmi 2.0. I think at least one person in this thread mentioned they already have a 65" LG CX so maybe someone could try it out. Just curious.
 
elvn said:
I know you could always run a 2560x1440 rez upscaled even on the C9's - but I wonder if you could run a ultrawide rez or other letterboxed rez on 1:1 on a LG CX at 4:2:2 chroma 120hz off of a 1000 series or 2000 series nvidia gpu (with VRR) as long as it was within the bandwidth limit of hdmi 2.0. I think at least one person in this thread mentioned they already have a 65" LG CX so maybe someone could try it out. Just curious.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately only the 2000 series can do VRR over HDMI. I have a 1080ti and I want to wait for a 3000 series card before I upgrade so I probably won't buy a 48" CX until then.
 
sharknice said:
Unfortunately only the 2000 series can do VRR over HDMI. I have a 1080ti and I want to wait for a 3000 series card before I upgrade so I probably won't buy a 48" CX until then.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat with the 1080ti. I haven't been that thrilled with it honestly, I hate seeing the 5700xt top our card when it clearly should not but Nvidia just optimizes for current gen. My R9 290 got faster as it aged, the 1080 ti is the opposite.
 
Starting prices in Finland: 1599€ (including 24% VAT)
Available 12.5.2020
1585896185325.png
 
demu said:
Starting prices in Finland: 1599€ (including 24% VAT)
Available 12.5.2020
View attachment 235223
Click to expand...

Dang, that's lower than I expected. Very tempted to order one now.

elvn said:
I know you could always run a 2560x1440 rez upscaled even on the C9's - but I wonder if you could run a ultrawide rez or other letterboxed rez on 1:1 on a LG CX at 4:2:2 chroma 120hz off of a 1000 series or 2000 series nvidia gpu (with VRR) as long as it was within the bandwidth limit of hdmi 2.0. I think at least one person in this thread mentioned they already have a 65" LG CX so maybe someone could try it out. Just curious.
Click to expand...

I'd say no, but maybe at 4:2:0. The CX supports 4K 120 Hz 8-bit 4:2:0 over HDMI 2.0 so that would be the max before HDMI 2.1 GPUs are available. Basically the display itself does not support anything but select 16:9 resolutions on its own scaler, but with GPU scaling you can have ultrawide resolutions that are then upscaled to 4K so the TV knows no better. This means the bandwidth limits apply. It might be a bit tricky to get working right and you would probably be best setting your desktop resolution to the custom one before launching games. DisplayFusion is great for changing the resolution with a hotkey but it doesn't allow setting 4:2:0 and I have not found any other app that would do that either. I wish Nvidia had display presets in its own functionality.
 
Last edited:
Pastuch said:
I'm in the same boat with the 1080ti. I haven't been that thrilled with it honestly, I hate seeing the 5700xt top our card when it clearly should not but Nvidia just optimizes for current gen. My R9 290 got faster as it aged, the 1080 ti is the opposite.
Click to expand...
I'm waiting for the 3080Ti as well before upgrading. Not sure whether I'll get the CX 48" or one of these new 38/49 inch monitors we're seeing now. Either way I want a 3080Ti first.
 
Armenius said:
Yes. Availability in North America is expected around June.
Click to expand...

I close on my new house May 28 and I need this in my office the first day it's available. PRAY FOR ME THAT I CAN FIND AN EXTRA $1500.
 
demu said:
Starting prices in Finland: 1599€ (including 24% VAT)
Available 12.5.2020
View attachment 235223
Click to expand...

Damn, that is expensive, especially considering we can get last year models for less than that, at 55" size mind you.

But as of this moment my plans for desktop OLED are on hold because I got a good deal on Samsung S34J550 ultrawide, which was overclockable to 96hz. Slow as molasses pixel response time but picture quality is good and this was one of the few PC VA panel monitors with contrast ratio above 4000:1. Maybe 48" OLED will find its way on my desktop but now the actual living room TV is a priority, that will be changed into OLED the next Black friday.
 
MaZa said:
Damn, that is expensive, especially considering we can get last year models for less than that, at 55" size mind you.
Click to expand...

That's totally normal though. MSRP of 2020 models is always designed to be well above the sale price of previous years models, and then gradually come down over ~6 mo until rock bottom around holiday season sales. It's pretty clearly intentional price discrimination("If you want the newest and best right away, pay up, otherwise wait."). And probably supply chain management as well.
 
kasakka said:
Shame about the input lag increase. BFI would be useful for games with fast motion and those are usually also the ones that require the lowest input lag. That said, 22 is quite alright. It's about what my Samsung KS8000 had at best and I did not really notice it as a problem even in games that require fairly precise input timing like the Souls series for example.
Click to expand...


Yeah, 22 is ....pretty bad. My 2018 Samsung NU8000 is around 8.9ms?

Question, can this BFI be turned off?

I just need the OLED, 120hz at 1440p out of this monitor which I planned on buying until now and super low input lag .... I need to read a bit more.

But I need super low input lag period ... this is a deal breaker if I can't turn this off. Thought I read the input lag was around 12 or 13. Maybe I just need to stick with my amazing Samsung.
 
demu said:
Starting prices in Finland: 1599€ (including 24% VAT)
Available 12.5.2020
Click to expand...
Found it at the same chain website in Norway, and have put in my order to receive it by mid-May.

A bit more reasonable here at 15990 NOK = 1397 EUR at present exchange (incl. 25% VAT). It seems like LG set the prices in different currencies before the most recent fluctuations, as in January 15990 NOK was worth more than 1599 EUR.
 
SixFootDuo said:
Yeah, 22 is ....pretty bad. My 2018 Samsung NU8000 is around 8.9ms?

Question, can this BFI be turned off?

I just need the OLED, 120hz at 1440p out of this monitor which I planned on buying until now and super low input lag .... I need to read a bit more.

But I need super low input lag period ... this is a deal breaker if I can't turn this off. Thought I read the input lag was around 12 or 13. Maybe I just need to stick with my amazing Samsung.
Click to expand...

BFI can be disabled but here's the thing, none of the input lag tests that have been done so far have been done at native resolution at 120hz so we still have no idea what the actual input lag numbers for PC use will be. Wait for the Rtings review.

We suspect that this display can do around 5 to 6ms input lag at 4k at 120hz because that was what LG claimed at CES and they have been honest about that number for the last few years.
 
Pastuch said:
BFI can be disabled but here's the thing, none of the input lag tests that have been done so far have been done at native resolution at 120hz so we still have no idea what the actual input lag numbers for PC use will be. Wait for the Rtings review.

We suspect that this display can do around 5 to 6ms input lag at 4k at 120hz because that was what LG claimed at CES and they have been honest about that number for the last few years.
Click to expand...

^ This.

5 to 6ms is well under the fluctuating wave of frame rates most people are going to be rolling at 4k resolution when using VRR and a moderate frame rate average where the lower ranges of their actual frame rates aren't above 100fps-Hz.... (10ms per frame).

elvn said:
I'll be happy with ~6ms on a monitor with such great OLED per pixel visuals and other features (hdmi 2.1, VRR, 120hz 4k 4:4:4, etc.) while also not being limited to a slim ~13' tall or so belt model .

120hz is 8.3ms per frame and that is only if, even if ignoring a few frame rate "potholes" in your graph, you are getting 120fps solid all of the time as a common frame rate low.... which most people aren't in any kind of demanding games and settings near or at 4k resolution.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

120fps-Hz (solid, not average):
.................8.3ms per frame
.................50% reduction in sample and hold blur to a "soften blur" compared to baseline 60fps-Hz smearing blur (~ 8ms persistence vs 16ms persistence)
.................double the motion definition 2:1 ("# of unique pages~action states in a flip book flipping twice as fast"), incl. viewport movement, path articulation
................. 10 frames shown to every 5 at 60fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 8.3 shown at 100fps-Hz solide
................. 10 frames to every 10Hz refresh on a 120hz screen at 120fps solid (1:1)


115fps-Hz rate cap (solid frame rate, not average)
................. 8.7ms per frame
................ ~ 45% +?? reduction in sample in hold blur (8.7ms image persistence)

100fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 10ms per frame
................. ~40% reduction in sample and hold blur (10ms image persistence)
................. 10 frames to every 6 shown at 60fps-Hz solid (1.6:1)
................. 10 frames to ever 10 shown at 100fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 12 shown at 120fps-hz solid (1.2:1, 20fps-hz short of 120fps-hz)

75fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 13.3ms per frame
................. 15 ??? % reduction in sample and hold blur? (13.3ms persistence) .. still smearing blur, slightly moderated
................. 10 frames to every 8 shown at 60fps-Hz solid (1.25:1)
................. 10 frames to every 13 shown at 100fps-Hz solid (1.3:1)
................. 10 frames to every 16 shown at 120fps-Hz solid (1.6:1)

60fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 16.6ms per frame
................. baseline "100%" smearing blur "outside of the lines" of individual objects as well as viewport movement of the whole game world at speed
................. 1:1 motion definition vs 60fps-Hz baseline
................. 10 frames at 60fps-Hz to every 16.6 frames shown at 100fps-Hz
.................. [6 frames to every 10 shown at 100fps-Hz solid (5:3)]
..................10 frames at 60fps-Hz to every 20 frames shown at 120fps-Hz
.................. [5 frames to every 10 shown at 120fps-Hz solid (2:1, half)]

40fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 25ms per frame
................. baseline smearing blur (or worse) page-y choppy motion , sluggish
................. 10 frames to every 15 shown at 60fps-Hz solid (1.5:1)
................. 10 frames to every 25 shown at 100fps-Hz solid (2.5:1)
................. 10 frames to every 30 shown at 120fps-Hz solid (3:1)

30fps-Hz (solid, not average):
................. 33.3ms per frame
................. smearing blur, page-y/choppy animations ~ "molasses" movement and FoV movement ~ motion definition
................. 10 frames to every 20 shown at 60fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 30 shown at 100fps-Hz solid
................. 10 frames to every 40 shown at 120fps-Hz solid
Click to expand...

(source of image below: back2gaming.com)

dota2-2160_18136_image001.png

-----------------------

No vrr on 1000's ack.... Never had to worry about that with g-sync monitors. I agree with most of the 3080ti mentions -- I'll upgrade from 1080ti to a 3080Ti whenever that is. Not worth upgrading gpu until I can get 120hz 4k 4:4:4 chroma with VRR on a die shrink.
 
Last edited:
I think this might be my next monitor. 48 is still in the 'way too big' category but it's a step down from 'obnoxiously big'. But then I look at the price of the 38gl950g and I think I can deal with the 'way too big' tv. Now, burn in, is another issue altogether. I can't watch a news channel on my C9 for more than an hour or 2 before I see temporary image retention.
 
48" is not huge at all. it becomes very small after a few days. Trust me on this.

48" is no different than having 2 or 3 monitors on your desk. Lot of guys do this. The only difference is, you have less bezels.

I never understood why people are fine with more than one monitor but if they go over 40" they start to freak out. I think most guys look at this wrong.
 
SixFootDuo said:
48" is not huge at all. it becomes very small after a few days. Trust me on this.

48" is no different than having 2 or 3 monitors on your desk. Lot of guys do this. The only difference is, you have less bezels.

I never understood why people are fine with more than one monitor but if they go over 40" they start to freak out. I think most guys look at this wrong.
Click to expand...

It's all about how that single display feels. As a super ultrawide owner it does feel different even though it's the equivalent of two 27" 1440p displays. The 48" 16:9 is both wide and tall and you can't arrange it as comfortably as you can multiple monitors where they are angled a bit or you can turn off one of them when you don't need it.

Thankfully the OLED has tiny bezels and that will help make it seem smaller perceptually. It's a shame LG does not make a curved version of this though as it would be the one time where being curved would be helpful on a TV.
 
SixFootDuo said:
48" is not huge at all. it becomes very small after a few days. Trust me on this.

48" is no different than having 2 or 3 monitors on your desk. Lot of guys do this. The only difference is, you have less bezels.

I never understood why people are fine with more than one monitor but if they go over 40" they start to freak out. I think most guys look at this wrong.
Click to expand...
First, my main issue is PPI. Second, regarding size, this is way bigger than most 2 monitor setups. Like Luke M mentioned, this is like having 4 24" monitors. I don't know anyone personally that has that. Sure, I've seen it on the internet (very rarely compared to most setups, I might add) but I've never seen someone have that in a home setup. But again, my main issue is PPI. 4k on a 48" is going the wrong direction for modern PPI.
 
thelead said:
First, my main issue is PPI. Second, regarding size, this is way bigger than most 2 monitor setups. Like Luke M mentioned, this is like having 4 24" monitors. I don't know anyone personally that has that. Sure, I've seen it on the internet (very rarely compared to most setups, I might add) but I've never seen someone have that in a home setup. But again, my main issue is PPI. 4k on a 48" is going the wrong direction for modern PPI.
Click to expand...


Oh I was confused I guess. Not sure why you're apart of this tread if the smallest 48" is too big for you.

And yeah, that's fine. There are a lot of gamer dudes, etc that use 27" monitors.

I think you can even get a 4K 27" if you want. That would def satisfy your craving your ultra tiny pixels.

I'm a gamer, I like to be immersed, I love huge beautiful pixels in all their glory slammed right into my face. I also love to kick back and relax and watch a movie or 4K youtube, or emails, web content, content creative etc without having to strain my eyes.

As far as if LG will make a smaller display for you, smaller that the 48", I am not sure. If I see anything or if anyone else does, I am sure we will help you out and post our findings here for you.

Come to think of it, is there even an OLED 27" or 32" monitor on the market? Sorry, I should probably go and look that up myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
SixFootDuo said:
Oh I was confused I guess. Not sure why you're apart of this tread if the smallest 48" is too big for you.

And yeah, that's fine. There are a lot of gamer dudes, etc that use 27" monitors.

I think you can even get a 4K 27" if you want. That would def satisfy your craving your ultra tiny pixels.

I'm a gamer, I like to be immersed, I love huge beautiful pixels in all their glory slammed right into my face. I also love to kick back and relax and watch a movie or 4K youtube, or emails, web content, content creative etc without having to strain my eyes.

As far as if LG will make a smaller display for you, smaller that the 48", I am not sure. If I see anything or if anyone else does, I am sure we will help you out and post our findings here for you.

Come to think of it, is there even an OLED 27" or 32" monitor on the market? Sorry, I should probably go and look that up myself.
Click to expand...
Nothing in the consumer market. I would love a 32-40" 4k oled or mini-led gsync panel but we're still waiting. There is an Asus 32" mini-led panel that was announced but I'm sure it will be ridiculously priced ($3,000+).
 
Yeah, if they made a 42" model, I would probably replace my 34" ultrawide with it, as I came from a cheap 42" curved Samsung LCD before the ultrawide and I thought the size was pretty much perfect for desktop usage. But despite supporting 4:4:4 chroma, text was still a bit off looking, not sure if it had an odd sub-pixel layout or what.

For gaming, I def appreciate the ultrawide 120 Hz and Gsync more if just for the wider FoV and better performance (in games due to lower res), but for desktop usage having that big of a screen at 4K made it nice to snap apps in each corner like their own 1080p monitor was nice as well. I could "make do" with either setup at this point, but I have a 65" C9 OLED as well in my living room and have been tempted to move my PC to it to test out some games at 1440p/120 Hz on it since it supports Gsync as well now.
 
I've been using a 48.5" for almost a year now, and it does not ever not feel huge to me. I have a deep desk and a flexible setup and I'm happy enough with it (I also have a 27" monitor on the side), but it's always a big screen.
 
thelead said:
Nothing in the consumer market. I would love a 32-40" 4k oled or mini-led gsync panel but we're still waiting. There is an Asus 32" mini-led panel that was announced but I'm sure it will be ridiculously priced ($3,000+).
Click to expand...


It is ridiculously priced, Acer already announced their X32 will be $3,599. I'm sure it will be a decent monitor, but the pricing here is just beyond Insane. When you realise this would buy TWO 48" OLEDs, with enough money left over for a top end 144Hz 1440p monitor, it's absolutely laughable and really quite shocking. But some people will still pay it, of course. o_O
 
Well, if we believe the rumors, Samsung Display (a separate company from Samsung) is switching their Korea and China LCD production exclusively to QD+ OLED (and so is LG Display - again, not LG), so maybe there will be smaller options from them outside of the TV line. In the meanwhile, this 48 looks like a great option for those can make this display size work (I am one of them!)
 
Just sit farther away if you can redo your setup somewhere that allows it, even using a separate freestanding tv mount and separate desk(s). Perceived size and perceived ppi are relative to viewing distance. I understand that some computer areas don't have the space for larger monitors though. I found out that space concerns are even worse for VR (including vertically) depending what kind of gameplay you want to do.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a separate smaller command center half circle desk on caster wheels. When I bought it it had a shelf that could be installed but I wanted it as a flat surface so that I could use it better with larger monitors and so that I could face it out from a wall instead of against the wall like a book shelf. I use a separate narrow bench like desk for my monitors. I bought both desks on sale at different times years ago from officemax or officedepot at $150 or less each but they are solid. The side monitors were $230 and $270 on sale each, respectively. The middle LG 32" GK850G 1440p I'll be replacing with the LG 48" CX was about $650 on sale back when I got that.

iWm1yYq.jpg


The half circle rolling desk is height adjustable with "T" screw in pins, like some workout machines. This allowed me to raise it high enough so that I could slide it over the top of the bench style desk the monitors are on. At least that is how I had it originally, with the far end of the circular desk overlapping the bench desk slightly. As my monitor array grew wider, I started rolling the half circle command center desk back farther to see more of the monitors so now, unlike in the picture, they are close to but not actually touching.


Once I get the LG 48 CX, I'll have to move my whole setup 90deg to the wall on my left and considering how much cabling and peripherals I have that will take some work. The reason I want to shift it 90deg to the adjacent wall is that it is a rectangular room around 11' 6" x 9' 2" and I think it would work out better having it setup the long way. I measured my current 3 monitor array length and it is 7' long from outer edge to outer edge of the bezels of the outer monitors. I already used some monitor size calculator to figure out how wide the 48" LG CX would be (in landscape obviously) with my current 43" end monitors rotated into portrait mode and it surprisingly came out to be 7' again.


However this time I will be moving my half circle~xbox controller looking desk on wheels farther back. From my experience, 48" would require at least 40" viewing distance as a minimum but that is as a single monitor.
A7gEgdY.png

Considering the two side monitors making it an overall 7' array along with the much larger size of the new 48" center monitor I will probably move it back a bit farther - but not so much that I see all 3 monitors in their entirety without spinning my chair a bit or turning my head. I'll start around 4' away and see how well I like it. What's nice about having the separate wheeled desk is that I can make a peripheral wiring bound umbilical cord and roll the desk back as far as I want while still being able to roll it right up against the monitor "bench style" desk when not in use.. or if I want to use the room for a small VR space. I'll also be able to move the desk and chair closer or farther away depending on what type of game I'm playing and even what aspect ratio if I play some in 16:10 rez at 1:1 pixel.

New array layout "schematics" (imgur gallery)
 
Last edited:
sethk said:
PPD is like PPI but with distance baked in and it's the relevant number.
Click to expand...

Correct, I used this calculator to determine that at 20" and 36" respectively the PPD of a 27" monitor and a 48" monitor, both 3840x2160, are 63 and 64 PPD respectively. So pretty much identical, perceptually, aside from the fact that the 48CX will have somewhat worse text rendering due to lack of ClearType, but we've already been over that topic and it's immaterial if you are using scaling.
 
For me personally... I was 3' away but now I'm set up at 3' 7" (~ 43") from my 43" monitors currently. 3' (36") would be fine as a minimum for them singly but I'm using multiple monitors. 40" away for a 48" 16:9 would be my minimum distance singly but with the multiple monitors I'd prob roll my desk a little farther away. If playing a game in 21:10 for immersion like a racing game I might move it closer though. Modularity. :watching:
 
Last edited:
So now we're talking a big (deep) desk to go along with the big monitor? lol

Don't get me wrong, I am considering it but I can't see many people going out to get a dining table as a desk for their 48" monitor.
 
thelead said:
So now we're talking a big (deep) desk to go along with the big monitor? lol

Don't get me wrong, I am considering it but I can't see many people going out to get a dining table as a desk for their 48" monitor.
Click to expand...

We've been over this topic as well, to properly position this as a monitor you need to mount it behind your desk, either on a floor stand or a wall mount. It's not a big deal as long as you have the space. If you don't have the space, then you probably shouldn't use this as a monitor cause it's going to be awkward.
 
Sancus said:
We've been over this topic as well, to properly position this as a monitor you need to mount it behind your desk, either on a floor stand or a wall mount. It's not a big deal as long as you have the space. If you don't have the space, then you probably shouldn't use this as a monitor cause it's going to be awkward.
Click to expand...

My thought would be to use a heavy duty monitor arm so you can move it back when using at 4K and forward if you want to run ultrawide or less than native without scaling (smaller picture) for example.
 
sharknice said:
If you're someone willing to spend $1500 on a "monitor" you're probably willing to make some adjustments to your desk/setup to accommodate it.
Click to expand...
For me, it's more about the aesthetics and practicality of it all. I already have a 65" c9 in the office. Might as well buy a few more oled panels and fill up a wall :)

Of course, everyone has their own situations, reasons and justifications for such a panel.

I'm just talking myself through it in this thread :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top