LG 48CX

kasakka said:
Any recommendations and how to do this? I am assuming some sort of RDP setup which means you are at the mercy of network lag, image compression etc.
Click to expand...
Winsplit is one. Some of the built in win shortcuts (win key + arrow etc) can work too. I just use windows as windows on a tiny 27" 1440p... like the name suggests ;D Can get 2-3 windows side by side for productivity.
More reading here;


elvn said:
AMD FreeSync compatibility - will be available via a future firmware upgrade at the end of 2020;
Click to expand...
Heh? Doesn't VRR work already or is it just Freesync specific stuff (VRR w/HDR etc) not working? Surely VRR should still work regardless of Freesync as active sync...?
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Have you tried any PCM 7.1, ATMOS or other uncompressed audio movies? What about uncompressed from an xbox or ps4?
Click to expand...
I only have 5.1. I don't have an xbox or a ps4. My setup can't play 4k blu rays because of shit HDCP. I need to transfer my blu ray player to my main computer first.

I played Infinity Wars non-4k blu ray with Leawo and the app shows PMC, 192kHz and the front of the AVR says DDS.

I downloaded a trailer here and played with VLC. App shows Dolby Digital+, 48kHz. Front panel of AVR says DDD+.
 
N4CR said:
Winsplit is one. Some of the built in win shortcuts (win key + arrow etc) can work too. I just use windows as windows on a tiny 27" 1440p... like the name suggests ;D Can get 2-3 windows side by side for productivity.
More reading here;
Click to expand...

Nowhere even near the same thing. WinSplit, Displayfusion, MS Powertoys FancyZones and many more only let you split the screen into segments for easier window management, but they don't allow separate inputs in those segments, they don't allow running fullscreen mode in those segments and so on. That's where you need Picture by Picture modes (which the LG does not have, at least not a usable one) or HDMI multi-viewers etc.
 
PCM 192 kHz is good... however your 1080p bluray isn't pushing the same bandwidth overall compared to 4k + uncompressed. It sounds like they need to fix the last 12Gbps lane's avaiability for a full 48Gbps in the EIDE which could make a difference in having enough bandwidth for 4k content and uncompressed sound being input to the TV (with the sound being passed through the eArc output unaltered if they get it working properly). The fact that you can use a CRU EIDE hack to get 7.1 PCM working fully shows that it should be possible by default with a later firmware update.

Hopefully they will also fix the DTS-HD pass-through in time but it sounds like they haven't for the C9 yet either.

N4CR said:
Heh? Doesn't VRR work already or is it just Freesync specific stuff (VRR w/HDR etc) not working? Surely VRR should still work regardless of Freesync as active sync...?
Click to expand...

HDMI VRR and Nvidia G-sync aren't the same as Freesync. I'm taking this to mean that LG displays work with "G-sync compatible" HDMI VRR but not with AMD's Freesync implementation just yet.

**NVIDIA G-SYNC compatible with RTX 20 and GTX 16 graphics card series.
***G-SYNC included only in ZX, GX, CX and BX models. FreeSync included in ZX model; software update required for GX, CX and BX models. FreeSync may not be available at the time of purchase of this product.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
HDMI VRR and Nvidia G-sync aren't the same as Freesync. I'm taking this to mean that LG displays work with "G-sync compatible" HDMI VRR but not with AMD's Freesync implementation just yet.
Click to expand...

I heard the same thing. It's good to go now for Gsync, but Freesync support will come later in an update, probably around the new console releases since they will both use Freesync. There's also an argument about the difference between Freesync compatible and "Freesync Ultimate", the latter of which the LG CX will never have. I saw some YT vids on it, but I think the difference is probably overblown.
 
elvn said:
HDMI VRR and Nvidia G-sync aren't the same as Freesync.
Click to expand...
To expound, HDMI VRR is it's own thing.

Nvidia supports it, but AMD does not yet. AMDs implementation of Freesync over HDMI was not standardized the same way that Freesync over DisplayPort was.
On the LG OLED TVs, HDMI VRR is currently the only VRR standard supported, thus VRR only works on Nvidia GPUs from Tesla on at this time.

DrekkenRidge said:
There's also an argument about the difference between Freesync compatible and "Freesync Ultimate", the latter of which the LG CX will never have.
Click to expand...
'G-Sync Ultimate' is Nvidia's original holistic VRR solution over DisplayPort. While anything else will fall short one way or another, any VRR is significantly better than no VRR.

Of course, that's comparing the best G-Sync Compatible displays with G-Sync Ultimate displays on DisplayPort. I don't think we have a good read on how well HDMI VRR is implemented yet.

The basic reality is that in this class, there's no other option without sacrificing something else.
 
I'm not an AMD GPU guy but thought I'd mention that there is some confusion on the amd side because AMD has several names and tiers of freesync now. A properly functioning real nvidia g-sync chip might still be the best overall VRR for any scenario since it probably has some buffering~frame duplication on chip and the monitors are vetted and tweaked to work with that chip through nvidia certification. However hdmi VRR should be fine if you keep the low end of your frame rate high enough so that you don't have to rely on LFC. G-sync chips have reports of glitches when enabled in certain setups on certain monitors too, and I've also heard of some heat issues, active fans, etc.

Freesync is usually 48fps-Hz minimum with no compensation and doesn't have to be 120hz capable even at 1080p (e.g. 48Hz - 60Hz monitors, 48Hz - 75Hz monitors)
Freesync Premium has LFC (low framerate compensation) for sub 48fps frame rates like 30fps for example, doubling it to 60. Has to be 120hz capable at 1080p.
Fresync Premium Pro is Freesync 2 HDR which means LFC, at least 120hz refresh at 1080p, some type of HDR standard, low latency in SDR and HDR.


https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2020/01/08/ces-2020-amd-freesync-premium/
FreeSync is still FreeSync

At the bottom of AMD’s new variable refresh rate tech tier, we’ve still got regular old FreeSync. This is the same as it’s always been. Pair an AMD graphics card with an AMD FreeSync monitor and you’ll get a smooth, tear-free gaming experience within the monitor’s specified FreeSync range (normally 48fps up to whatever its maximum refresh rate is) and low latency guaranteed.


Regular FreeSync also works if you’ve got an Nvidia graphics card, but the experience can be a bit hit and miss. To absolutely make sure your Nvidia GPU can take advantage of a monitor’s variable refresh rate tech, you’ll probably want to opt for one of the officially certified G-Sync Compatible monitors, which have been internally tested by Nvidia. Otherwise, you might find your games subject to weird visual defects, such as blinking, tearing, stutter, or brightness pulsing.

FreeSync Premium is a new standard for high refresh rate monitors

Next up we’ve got FreeSync Premium. This is a brand-new tier that sits between FreeSync and FreeSync Premium Pro and effectively clarifies some of the murkiness that surrounded the old, regular FreeSync standard. You still get low latency and a variable refresh rate for tear-free gaming, but FreeSync Premium monitors will now offer the following features as well:


  • Low frame rate compensation (LFC)
  • At least a 120 Hz refresh rate at minimum FHD resolution

LFC improves how a monitor performs below their minimum frame rate threshold. It does this by essentially duplicating the number of frames being shown onscreen when the frame rate drops too low, bringing 30fps up to 60fps, for example. A handful of regular FreeSync monitors used to have this feature built in, but most didn’t, so at least that’s one thing that’s been cleared up by this new Premium standard.

FreeSync Premium Pro is the new FreeSync 2 HDR

Lastly, we’ve got FreeSync Premium Pro, which is pretty much the new name for FreeSync 2 HDR monitors. Monitors with a Premium Pro sticker on it will include everything you get on a normal Premium monitor (the LFC and at least a 120Hz refresh rate at 1080p), but will also include the following:


  • Support for HDR “with meticulous colour and luminance certification”
  • Low latency in SDR and HDR

Helpfully, AMD still haven’t elaborated on what “meticulous colour and luminance certification” actually means (it’s currently thought to sit somewhere between VESA’s DisplayHDR 400 and 600 specifications, but no one knows for sure), but from the looks of things, this new tier is pretty much just a straightforward name change. As a result, you’ll probably still see a variety of VESA DisplayHDR stickers appear alongside AMD’s FreeSync Premium Pro badge on a monitor’s product page depending on its HDR capabilities.


There were also a handful of games that had specific FreeSync 2 HDR support on the past, and these will continue to function as normal on FreeSync Premium Pro monitors, AMD have said. These include Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, Borderlands 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 4, Devil May Cry 5, Far Cry 5, Far Cry 5: New Dawn, Resident Evil 2, Strange Brigade, Ghost Recon Breakpoint and The Division 2.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Skott said:
SixFootDuo If counting pennies and I had the 55" you currently have I'd keep it and just splurge on the 3080Ti when it comes out. The 3080Ti wont be cheap anyhow. Some day you'll need to change out that tv and when you do the 48CX will be old and newer and better will be out. Just a thought anyway. If you have money to burn then ignore what I just said. ;-)
Click to expand...

Well, I am now the new proud owner of the 55" LG OLED.

It's only money, I don't smoke or drink or fuck off money so I treated myself. However, common sense kept nagging at me from start to finish.

Also, didn't realize that Best Buys are closed on the inside. They only offer curbside pickup.

Box was not as big as I expected.

I will play with it here in the next few days. My cleaning lady is coming today after being absent the past 3 weeks because of COVID-19. Once it place looks neat I will put it all out.

What I am most excited about is the remote pointer. Been wanting one of these things for a minute.
 
elvn said:
Freesync is usually
Click to expand...
The biggest problem with 'Freesync' is that it wasn't defined. G-Sync was defined to a T before release, while Freesync still just means supporting the protocol.

Jury's still out on what HDMI VRR has been defined as, and what it has actually been implemented as, but the spec hopefully well exceeds 'Freesync'.
 
SixFootDuo said:
Well, I am now the new proud owner of the 55" LG OLED.

It's only money, I don't smoke or drink or fuck off money so I treated myself. However, common sense kept nagging at me from start to finish.

Also, didn't realize that Best Buys are closed on the inside. They only offer curbside pickup.

Box was not as big as I expected.

I will play with it here in the next few days. My cleaning lady is coming today after being absent the past 3 weeks because of COVID-19. Once it place looks neat I will put it all out.

What I am most excited about is the remote pointer. Been wanting one of these things for a minute.
Click to expand...

The remote is awesome. The pointer is super nice, most apps support it. The microphone on the remote is also nice. You just press it and say what you want to watch and it will search every streaming service and video file you have then you can just click it and play.
I hear a lot of people say they wish they had some sort of UI or service that consolidated every streaming service into one. This TV does that for you.
 
I'd just like to remind people that freesync is already working on the C9 (not a typo) if you use CRU:

/r/AMD @ Reddit - Working Freesync mod for VRR displays. Tested on LG C9 OLED!


And the video linked from the above Reddit thread showing the entire "how to" CRU process, though you can skip the majority and focus on the Nvidia Pendulum demo at the end demonstrating the freesync working:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
SixFootDuo said:
Well, I am now the new proud owner of the 55" LG OLED.

It's only money, I don't smoke or drink or fuck off money so I treated myself. However, common sense kept nagging at me from start to finish.

Also, didn't realize that Best Buys are closed on the inside. They only offer curbside pickup.

Box was not as big as I expected.

I will play with it here in the next few days. My cleaning lady is coming today after being absent the past 3 weeks because of COVID-19. Once it place looks neat I will put it all out.

What I am most excited about is the remote pointer. Been wanting one of these things for a minute.
Click to expand...

Can you do some testing for us?

If you create a custom resolution of 2880x2160, can you run that at 4:4:4 @ 120hz?

How about a custom resolution of 2160x1620? Can you run that at 4:4:4 @ 120hz?
 
bigbluefe said:
Can you do some testing for us?

If you create a custom resolution of 2880x2160, can you run that at 4:4:4 @ 120hz?

How about a custom resolution of 2160x1620? Can you run that at 4:4:4 @ 120hz?
Click to expand...

Very interested in 3840x1600 m 3840x1200 at 120hz VRR and how much chroma. I'll have a 3080ti in the long run so the chroma won't be an issue then but running the letterboxed ultrawide resolutions with VRR, 120Hz, and HDR would be great.

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

Saw this on reddit today and thought I'd put it on here. It's only a 55" TCL but the layout is pretty neat.

f9up4b5683w41.jpg

I'd like do something similar putting a screen (or two screens at first) as a bar under the 48" but set nearly all the way down at the desk level. I wouldn't want the 48" sitting so far up above. A 24" - 27" diagonal monitor's height worth of monitors underneath would only be 13" tall. My chair sits fairly high on 3" roller blade style caster wheels I upgraded to and my chair can do some tilt supported by a headrest which helps raise the center of my viewpoint. It might work out to be two cheap 24" screens or a few of my old 27" screens at first, ,whichever fits best. I could probably fit a 43.4" ultrawide under the 48" LG CX but they jumped in price during the pandemic by a few hundred dollars and I'm already pretty set on dropping money on the LG CX and a 3080ti by the end of the year while there is a big financial crisis going on as it is.

Here are a few mockups I configured.. the first one has a 27" in portrait on each side, the second uses a 43" screen in portrait on each side.

dBNd9Hg.png

CQNxOuK.png
 
elvn said:
Very interested in 3840x1600 m 3840x1200 at 120hz VRR and how much chroma. I'll have a 3080ti in the long run so the chroma won't be an issue then but running the letterboxed ultrawide resolutions with VRR, 120Hz, and HDR would be great.

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

Saw this on reddit today and thought I'd put it on here. It's only a 55" TCL but the layout is pretty neat.

View attachment 241998

I'd like do something similar putting a screen (or two screens at first) as a bar under the 48" but set nearly all the way down at the desk level. I wouldn't want the 48" sitting so far up above. A 24" - 27" diagonal monitor's height worth of monitors underneath would only be 13" tall. My chair sits fairly high on 3" roller blade style caster wheels I upgraded to and my chair can do some tilt supported by a headrest which helps raise the center of my viewpoint. It might work out to be two cheap 24" screens or a few of my old 27" screens at first, ,whichever fits best. I could probably fit a 43.4" ultrawide under the 48" LG CX but they jumped in price during the pandemic by a few hundred dollars and I'm already pretty set on dropping money on the LG CX and a 3080ti by the end of the year while there is a big financial crisis going on as it is.

Here are a few mockups I configured.. the first one has a 27" in portrait on each side, the second uses a 43" screen in portrait on each side.

View attachment 241999

View attachment 242000
Click to expand...

The problem will be that most 43" super ultrawides are curved whereas the rest of your screens are flat so it won't look quite so neat. Personally I have a hard enough time to find good uses for my 49" super ultrawide's desktop space for non-work use that I don't know what the hell I would do with this much screen.
 
That’d be far too tall in the config with the 49” wide under the 48” 16x9.
 
Yeah if you read what I said and looked at the layout "schematics" I said two cheap (~ "$130) 24 inch which is the same as a 43.4 inch 3840x1200 ultra wide, (or two 27 inch might work). Yes the ultra wide would have a slight curve as does the one under the 55inch in the actual screens picture I linked. Most ultrawides are only around 13" tall (to 15" physical in the 43.4" uw) so you if you set it down on top of the desk (on an arm, etc) instead of above on a stand it would work.
 
Last edited:
Archaea said:
That’d be far too tall in the config with the 49” wide under the 48” 16x9.
Click to expand...
elvn said:
Yeah if you read what I said and looked at the layout "schematics" I said two 24 inch which is the same as a 43.4 inch 3840x1200 ultra wide, (or two 27 inch might work). Yes the ultra wide would have a slight curve as does the one under the 55inch in the actual screens picture I linked.
Click to expand...

You both need to read my message better. My mentioning the 49" model was just a sidebar about not knowing what to do with 2x 43 + 48 + 43 super ultrawide amount of desktop space.

The curved super ultrawide on the bottom will just look a little bit off visually if you put all the displays close to each so 2x24 might be better.
 
Tend to agree - and a lot cheaper on 2x24. I would almost always be using sbs windows on that length anyway and not using expensive gaming features of ultrawides.

I already have the 43 inch ones in my array so I will experiment. I may end up dropping one in the long run after I get a 48" LG CX, will see how it goes. Next time I'm able to at home I'll lift a 43 inch screen 13" and 15" above the desk on its ergotron arm and see how it looks to me.

SNoMaNl.png
 
Last edited:
kasakka said:
You both need to read my message better. My mentioning the 49" model
Click to expand...

The picture I posted of someone's 55" TCL 4k tv with a 49" CRG9 ultrawide beneath it. I was replying to Archeaa regardless of whether or not he was misunderstanding at glance which setup scenario had a 49" uw or who was suggesting a 49"uw or not.. the schemiatics I posted had a 43.4" 3840x1200 ultrawide which is similar to two 24" 1920x1200 side by side.
 
Last edited:
SixFootDuo said:
Come to think of it, I wonder if more TV manufactures besides LG and Samsung venture into these sizes of TV's ( 48" for LG ) to possibly capture some of the PC gaming community market as they tinker to compete / add in performance functionality in the common years. I am really excited to see what CES 2021 holds. One can only expect Samsung to possibly match LG's 48" ..... and I suspect Sony might join into the fray.
Click to expand...

Yeah TCL/Vizio could make things interesting. Sony makes great TVs but most of their current tech is focused on TV/Movie watching, and the input lag is a bit higher.
 
A big issue you need to consider when using normal sized monitors with a TV is you don't want to view them at the same distance. I plan on having my 48" in the middle then my other monitors on the sides but closer and angled so they're pointing at me.

An obvious issue is when you mount a TV above your monitors you can't use it like a monitor without causing a major pain in the neck. Yet you see it all the time. It's in a bad spot when you just want to watch TV from further back, and it's in a very bad spot if you want to use it while using your monitors. It's a very poor choice.


IMO usability is much more important than making it look nice in a picture.
 
sharknice said:
A big issue you need to consider when using normal sized monitors with a TV is you don't want to view them at the same distance. I plan on having my 48" in the middle then my other monitors on the sides but closer and angled so they're pointing at me.

An obvious issue is when you mount a TV above your monitors you can't use it like a monitor without causing a major pain in the neck. Yet you see it all the time. It's in a bad spot when you just want to watch TV from further back, and it's in a very bad spot if you want to use it while using your monitors. It's a very poor choice.


IMO usability is much more important than making it look nice in a picture.
Click to expand...

I had considered your type of setup before going this route. It's not a bad plan. I also do agree with very high monitors in over/under setups and wouldn't do the actual photo setup since it is very high up. I also dislike TVs set over fireplaces for example. I prefer having an invisible line between my eyeballs and a middle ratio band across the center of a monitor personally.

Still, if I can manage stuffing a few 24" diagonal monitors at desk height directly on top of the desk w/o stand in a 13" - 15" gap under the 48" diagonal (~ 23.5" screen height) LG 48 CX comfortably I will do it. I sit a bit higher up with 3" roller blade style wheels on my desk and I also sit on top of a thick memory foam car/seat cushion and arm cushions. The separate desk I use as my command~gaming station under my arms and hands is height adjustable (manually with "T" pins like workout equipment) so it is still at a height perfectly in line with my elbows and forearms. My chair has a memory foam head cushion on a headrest built into the chair. Clicking my seat back even slightly from 90degree upright results in a different, slightly higher viewing angle across a 40" to 50" viewing distance.

At 40 to 50" distance I'd have to use some scaling on 24" monitors but they would essentially be used as one window each rather than a full desktop. The 43" screen(s) shouldn't need much scaling if any at ~48" viewing distance so can still used as desktop(s). 43" in portrait split vertically into two windows above/below each other would result in 2160 x 1920 windows (around 21.1"L x 17.75"h), or one 2160 x 3840 desktop ~37.5" tall.


JCT2OH7.png

alternately..
iCy3VtQ.png

Note that I am pretty much writing off using the OLED part of the array for any static desktop/apps. It will be primarily a stage for gaming and when not gaming running movies, "tv" shows, streams, youtube, high rez photography/art/gaming slideshows, perhaps even audio visualizations on occasion. I'll have a black wallpaper and no taskbar or icons on the OLED.
 
Last edited:
Seems like this thread has gone from talking about the actual TV to debating viewing distances. Anyways happy May everyone just one more month to go until the supposed released date of the 48CX. I'll be picking one up as soon as they become available.
 
Yeah I got obsessive about planning out my room and monitor layouts since I don't have the TV yet. Thinking out loud in the thread resulted in a lot more mockups and permutations to choose from. Looking forward to the OLED .

Dumped it all in an imgur gallery of 48 CX monitor array plans so I won't spam the thread with as many pics anymore. :spam:
 
I had back surgery recently so I can't even pick the thing up to put on my desk, so I'll be waiting a while before I pick one of these up anyways. I can read your reviews. lol

In the meantime I have my eye set on a pair of (as yet unreleased) JVC Exofield XP-EXT1 headphones...
 
Countries like Canada and the UK already have their 48CX available, I'm curious why there arent any reviews yet.
 
AngryLobster said:
The 55" CX is already down to $1600 so I expect this to be in the $1200-1300 range in a couple months and $999 or less by Black Friday.

I've been doing some measuring and debating if I should get one. I sold my C9 because it was just too damn big + all the babysitting but I'm getting the itch again.
Click to expand...

Did you have a 65"? I just bought a 65" C9 in January coming from a 55" C6 and I couldn't believe how much larger it was. It takes up the majority of the wall in my tiny apartment.
 
AngryLobster said:
No I was using a 55" as my main monitor. I use to have a 49" x900f and still thought it was too big.

Sucks that there's nothing in the 40-43" range worth buying.
Click to expand...

Whoa! I couldn't even imagine using a 40" as my main. I would love a 4k 120hz with HDR monitor at 32", but it would seems those monitors will be prohibitively expensive. I'll probably still bite if the reviews are good enough.
 
You just have to sit farther away if able to. That is if things like your available space, mounting options, desk options, cohesion with existing hardware, personal taste and willingness to re-do your setup and any other constraints allow for it of course. Perceived screen size (incl how much of the screen you can see in your direct view) and perceived ppi are relative to your viewing distance.


How I ended up using 43" monitors
=============================
I jumped from a 27" 144hz g-sync 1440p gaming monitor with side monitors up to a 32" 1440p g-sync VA. I wanted something bigger than my side 27" monitor to pair with it. I would have gone with a 32" inch to 40" screen to pair with it but I saw a 43" 4k 60hz TCL on sale for $230 at the time and decided to try it. It was big and I had to sit back farther but I realized I'd be better off sitting even father away from the desk. At that point I cleaned up a heigh-adjustable black 1/2 circle ~ kidney bean shaped desk on caster wheels I had in the basement and set it high enough to overlap the original "bench" style desk that the monitors are on. I liked this setup so much that I added a second 43" 4k TV I got on sale. That required me to move back a bit more in order to use both side monitors more comfortably. As it is now I can comfortably angle my eyes left or right and see whatever is on the nearer 60% of the side monitors or I can slightly pivot my chair to focus fully on one or the other 43" monitor using the whole 100% width. I have a bunch of displayfusion pro hotkeys set up on my streamdeck so that I can pop windows into quadrant locations on each monitor, a full height 60% / 40% of the screens, or a few other windows sizes and positions I commonly use.

36" - 40" away is perfect for my 43" monitors. My 32" in the middle would be small for my current viewing distance of 36" - 40" away if the 32" resolution wasn't 2560x1440 - but with that lower ppi at 1:1 scaling it works. I mostly use the 32" 1440p for gaming. I won't even play movies or videos on the 32" because the samsung 43" 4k VA screen has so much better (6100:1) contrast ratio and resulting black depths. I had been looking forward to replacing my 32" 1440p gaming screen with one of the 43" gaming monitors that came out at the end of 2019 but once they were released and I learned more about them I decided they weren't that great and were greatly overpriced.

40" diagonal screen's height of ~ 19.6" high would be great for a sitting nearer but I'd have even loved for this LG OLED to be 43" since that is what I'm set up for with my current monitors. I will re-do my monitor array lawout and move my whole setup to a different wall for the 48" size and viewing distance though since I think it is worth it. I'll have to move back to at least 40" - 48" with the 48" LG CX, especially using side monitors in an array. Using my second desk with a single combined bound peripheral "umbilical cord" will allow me to roll my desk and chair up against the monitor stand desk when not in use or if I want a small VR space in the room.
Click to expand...


You could theoretically run this OLED in 21:10 at 3840x1600 1:1 scaling and it would be the same height as a 35.7" 16:9 screen (as long as there aren't LG specific issues preventing you from doing so).
I have zero problem with black bars, especially once I get a 48" OLED where BLACK = OFF pixel emitter. If I was more picky about it I would just paint my wall black or use a black backdrop.

You still end up with a pretty huge screen at 17.4" tall and 41.8" wide.

I could also sit closer for 21:10 gameplay which would make the screen even larger to my perspective .. especially if I'm playing a racing/offroad game for immersion where I wouldn't be seeing content in focus on the sides without moving my head.

.
-------------------------------------------------


---48" display 23.5" tall. 2160px tall divided by 23.5" = 91.91489 px per inch. (Or just figure by multiplying by % of screen the pixel count is)
--- So if my calculations are correct:

1600px high ~> 17.5" tall letterboxed ... leaving 3" top and 3" bottom bars

.
So........

- A 48" 16:9 tv displaying 21:10 letterboxed 3840x1600 content 1:1 would be ~17.4" tall viewable screen out of 23.5" originally.

- 35.7" 16:9 .. a 17.5" tall 1600p 21:10 mode letterboxed 48" is the same height as a 35.7" 16:9 screen but the 48" screen is 10.8" wider (or adds 5.4" to each side of a 35.7" screen)

- A 40" 16:9 monitor's regular display is around 19.6" tall.

- A 43" 16:9 monitor's regular display is around 21.1" tall. The bars on my 43" screen at 21:10 end up being 2 7/8" tall (measured with a measuring tape) - in both the top and the bottom which is in the ballpark of my per pixel height calculations.



-my 32" 16:9 is around 15.7" tall so the 48" in 21:10 would be just under 2" taller (and about 14" or +7"+/7"wider).
Click to expand...
-----------------------
Screen Heights:
-----------------------
72svAR0.png
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure exactly how to put this into words but there's basically a paradigm shift that can, and I believe should take place if you move to such a large screen. For the most part, I've learned to only use somewhere around that 3840x1600 worth of pixels in the middle of the screen (and maybe more like 3400x1600). It's just something I started doing because it works best. The same type of thing had to occur when moving from a single monitor to multi-monitor, and then from multi-monitor to ultrawide.

Much of peoples' "It's way too big" belief is coming from thinking that they are going to format their windows on the giant screen the same way as they do on their small screen. It's understandable. It's just something you have to try out before you realize that it can work.

I hadn't seen until today that people are running the CX at 4k60@120Hz, 4:2:0. I've actually been wondering if 48" is going to be too small for me and maybe I should go grab the 55" CX...


Just real quick on the custom resolutions...I run my C9 at 3840x1600 for most games. I've got no issues with HDR. Still stuck at 60Hz so I can't say for sure that refresh rate is no problem but I doubt it is.



elvn said:
You just have to sit farther away if able to. That is if things like your available space, mounting options, desk options, cohesion with existing hardware, personal taste and willingness to re-do your setup and any other constraints allow for it of course. Perceived screen size (incl how much of the screen you can see in your direct view) and perceived ppi are relative to your viewing distance.
Click to expand...
 
Tol said:
I'm not sure exactly how to put this into words but there's basically a paradigm shift that can, and I believe should take place if you move to such a large screen. For the most part, I've learned to only use somewhere around that 3840x1600 worth of pixels in the middle of the screen (and maybe more like 3400x1600). It's just something I started doing because it works best. The same type of thing had to occur when moving from a single monitor to multi-monitor, and then from multi-monitor to ultrawide.

Much of peoples' "It's way too big" belief is coming from thinking that they are going to format their windows on the giant screen the same way as they do on their small screen. It's understandable. It's just something you have to try out before you realize that it can work.

I hadn't seen until today that people are running the CX at 4k60@120Hz, 4:2:0. I've actually been wondering if 48" is going to be too small for me and maybe I should go grab the 55" CX...


Just real quick on the custom resolutions...I run my C9 at 3840x1600 for most games. I've got no issues with HDR. Still stuck at 60Hz so I can't say for sure that refresh rate is no problem but I doubt it is.
Click to expand...

At the same time I feel like part of my 5120x1440 monitor is wasted when I am not using more than 2/3 of its available screen space unless I am working. Most applications should not be run in fullscreen on anything but laptop size monitors, e.g web browsers generally don't benefit from being wider than about 1280 pixels as few websites properly scale to even that wide and having very long lines of text is not good for readability.

Around 3840x1600 is a good compromise on resolution and size where you can fit a couple of big windows side by side comfortably and it's also a fantastic resolution for games.
 
kasakka said:
Around 3840x1600 is a good compromise on resolution and size where you can fit a couple of big windows side by side comfortably and it's also a fantastic resolution for games.
Click to expand...
I just investigated the possibility of stacking two -- one the 38" US$1800 LG gaming model, then perhaps a Viewsonic IPS with great color output / calibration.

kasakka said:
At the same time I feel like part of my 5120x1440 monitor is wasted when I am not using more than 2/3 of its available screen space unless I am working. Most applications should not be run in fullscreen on anything but laptop size monitors, e.g web browsers generally don't benefit from being wider than about 1280 pixels as few websites properly scale to even that wide and having very long lines of text is not good for readability.
Click to expand...
My main screen is meant to have games full-screen, 2560x1440 for now. I'll also toss a pair of other windows side by side, be they documents or web browsers, pretty happily when working.

However, I've found 24" 1080p IPS panels to be just about perfect for stacking off to the side. Sharp, great PPI, great colors, and enough room for one major app per panel with room to spare or two or more ancillary apps. I'm considering tossing two above said LG 38" side by side, as that will be significantly cheaper.

You know, if I don't grab the 48CX...
 
AngryLobster said:
I'm also not a fan of wasting real estate you paid for with black bars
Click to expand...
kasakka said:
At the same time I feel like part of my 5120x1440 monitor is wasted when I am not using more than 2/3 of its available screen space unless I am working. Most applications should not be run in fullscreen on anything but laptop size monitors, e.g web browsers generally don't benefit from being wider than about 1280 pixels as few websites properly scale to even that wide and having very long lines of text is not good for readability.

Around 3840x1600 is a good compromise on resolution and size where you can fit a couple of big windows side by side comfortably and it's also a fantastic resolution for games.
Click to expand...

It's not really a waste if you aren't using it as a desktop/app monitor and I also suggested it because it could work better for some people who might not have the space or have other restrictions preventing them from sitting back far enough.

Personally I'm more or less dedicating the 48 CX to being a multimedia stage for games and videos, perhaps a slideshow "screensaver" dedicated to that monitor alone on a timer and a hotkey (via displayfusion). I'd swap to 21:10 mode for some games to get more game world real estate (since most games use HOR+) .. but at the regular viewing distance I'm setting up full 16:9 mode should work fine to my perspective. I'm avoiding using this as a static window app monitor. To me that is not the purpose of this thing, I'll have other monitors for that. I've been using one monitor mostly for gaming and other monitor(s) for desktop/apps since at least 2008 when I had a pale low Hz LCD next to a FW900 crt. It will also be safer to use the OLED without much static content and with a black wallpaper, no icons or taskbar, and otherwise running a video stream, movie, art/photo slideshow or visualizations.

IdiotInCharge said:
My main screen is meant to have games full-screen, 2560x1440 for now. I'll also toss a pair of other windows side by side, be they documents or web browsers, pretty happily when working.

However, I've found 24" 1080p IPS panels to be just about perfect for stacking off to the side. Sharp, great PPI, great colors, and enough room for one major app per panel with room to spare or two or more ancillary apps.
Click to expand...

I was looking at a few cheap 24" 1920x1200 screens for either below or abovethe 48" CX. If below, I'd set them directly on top of the desk surface so the 48" won't have to be too high up (24" screens are 13" to 15" tall).
 
Last edited:
PHeeNIxx said:
Apparently the CX models aren't supporting FULL hdmi 2.1 bandwidth (see https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...d-tvs-dont-support-full-hdmi-21/#4cbbae466276). Is this something to be concerned about for any current or near future use-cases?
Click to expand...

Not an issue. They've pledged to support 4k @120hz 10-bit 4:4:4. That's the most color depth you'll be able to get from future consumer video cards. Nvidia will be the first out-the-gate with HDMI 2.1, and they will likely lock-down more than 10-bit to Quadro.


For Dolby HDR possibly requiring more bandwidth, you will still be able to run at 12-bit at 4:2:0. That is the same chroma they master Bluray 4k at.

So, for PC games, and mainstream streaming video/Youtube 10-bit HDR at 4:4:4 will be fine!
 
Last edited:
AngryLobster said:
The problem with custom resolutions is that it breaks stuff. Whether it's HDR support or refresh rate (I could never get HDR working at 21:9 aspect when experimenting).
Click to expand...

Assuming that you're using Custom Resolution Utility (CRU), did you add the "HDR static metadata" data block?

PHeeNIxx said:
Apparently the CX models aren't supporting FULL hdmi 2.1 bandwidth (see https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...d-tvs-dont-support-full-hdmi-21/#4cbbae466276). Is this something to be concerned about for any current or near future use-cases?
Click to expand...
Considering these OLED TVs use 10bit panels and the precision of 10bit is already pretty darned high, I question the benefit of 12bit...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top