Samsung Odyssey: 49" 5120x1440, 240 Hz, HDR1000

XoR_ said:
Then you more or less know what to expect. Good :)

I would not expect major improvements in LCD technology as progress in it seems to have stopped as much as ten years ago. There was progress in backlight and control circuitry but generally LCD matrices are exactly the same as they were say 10 years ago.

On VA from one of nice tricks that was used before and is not anymore is pre-tilting. It works by buffering one frame and rotating sub-pixel opposite to it's desired location first and then to desired location. This especially accelerated transitions from black to darker shades. It was used on most S-PVA panels and probably some S-MVA but here I am not sure. I had Dell 2407wfp with this technology and it almost completely lacked any dark streaks I had on latter VA panels without pre-tilting. With ability to refresh whole screen at 4ms I could see it being kinda feasible to implement it assuming limit of 120fps. In best case scenario it could only add 6ms of input lag by starting pre-tilting exactly at the same time GPU sends middle line. It would finish drawing actual frame just before GPU (if it operated at 120fps) was about to drawing middle line of next frame so the whole process could just repeat. I would however not hold my breath over such feature and especially on the idea that they would implement it correctly :)
Click to expand...

I agree that LCD seems like it's coming to an end, with larger Korean manufacturers leaving LCDs to cheap Chinese factories and focusing on OLED and Micro-LED tech. For the next few years I would expect we will see cheaper Mini-LED backlights on LCDs which should help at least give us better HDR monitors.

That pre-tilting sounds like a pretty novel solution to the problem. Samsung does have probably the most advanced VA panels on the market so you would think they know all the tricks, but most likely have just kept improving the response times of their panels over time to the point where they feel they don't need more advanced tricks like this.

I expect the G9 will be a very iterative version of the CRG9. The CRG9 has a pretty conservative response time with no overshoot in any of its modes so they can just rework those to improve the situation. I am not expecting it to perform miracles and that 240 Hz refresh rate very likely won't work so well when the panel can't keep up. But I would reasonably expect this to be say a good 144 Hz panel and there aren't exactly any other options in this form factor. You're going to need that 3080 Ti to push high framerates anyway, probably the reason why I don't run into response time issues much is my 2080 Ti can't push much more than 100 fps on most games I play.
 
Am looking to possibly buy the G9 but may go with CRG9 if I can find one for the price I want. (Was looking at a used one on Ebay that was nice, but the last bidder took the price past the cost of a new one. :( )
Currently using a Samsung 55" atm as a monitor but would much rather have a dedicated monitor in the 49" range. Have to wait and see though.
 
Looks like it is up for Pre-Order on B+H Photo/Video. ( Saw on /Reddit that the Samsung 49" C49TG90 IS the G9 Gaming Monitor and I also called B+H and they also said it was the G9 ) Says Expected Availability is June 16 and is listed for $1699. Considering getting it as the 49" CRG9 is only $300 cheaper and still going for full price (Or more) at most sites i've looked at. Best CRG9 price I've have found so far online is $1299 and that's on B+H Back-Order till May 18 or so.
Was trying to get one new or used off Amazon or E-Bay but they are almost as expensive as the G9 is and i lost out on the one they sold on here last week. :hungry:
 
Last edited:
Looks really nice. I would have considered it but the desk I have is not big enough, I would have to redo my whole setup for that.
 
Armenius said:
It's only 11% fewer pixels compared to UHD 4K, so hardware needs to push it are going to be similar. The monitor will be a smearing mess at 240 Hz, anyway.
Click to expand...
no smearing reported by people who actually own it, stop trolling.
 
Lastan010 said:
no smearing reported by people who actually own it, stop trolling.
Click to expand...
Not trolling. It uses an updated version of the same VA panel in the CRG9. That monitor had a real pixel response time of 9.5ms in the best-case scenario, meaning you will start seeing artifacts above 100 Hz.

This is what the pursuit camera looked like for the CRG9 at 120 Hz:
1594391354452.png
 
Armenius said:
Not trolling. It uses an updated version of the same VA panel in the CRG9. That monitor had a real pixel response time of 9.5ms in the best-case scenario, meaning you will start seeing artifacts above 100 Hz.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. I am more interested in the spikes, not average. That is where the problems with VA lie, the dark transitions. Some people are not bothered by it, but for who actually picks it up it's really a deal breaker. This is coming from someone who is rooting for them to sort this out since 4k IPS screens cost a fortune even at 60hz, but those are the only option without smearing. I would love a 32" 4k VA screen at 75-120hz with FreeSync that at least keeps the smearing to a minimum so I can use it as a do it all monitor. Can live with the other cons of VA (black crush and color shift) but the smearing always bothered me (had 3 VAs, all had noticeable smearing that no reviewer mentioned back then).
 
I think VA has improved. My Samsung Q7F is pretty acceptable but not perfect (in 4K 60Hz)

My newest monitor is an IPS though, not sure I want to roll the dice with VA again unless I get confirmation it's fixed (especially at high refresh).
 
After 9 years of NV Surround, I was pretty convinced that the 32:9 format was ideal.

After using the LG 38 for five months, pixel response issues aside, I think these are too wide and not tall enough.

These are basically 2x 27" 1440P monitors - not bad at all.

The 38" monitors are like this-

Take two 1920x1080P monitors,

Fuse them side by side...

Now stretch them from 1080P to 1600P

Perfection.
 
Armenius said:
Not trolling. It uses an updated version of the same VA panel in the CRG9. That monitor had a real pixel response time of 9.5ms in the best-case scenario, meaning you will start seeing artifacts above 100 Hz.

This is what the pursuit camera looked like for the CRG9 at 120 Hz:
View attachment 260450
Click to expand...
there is no such thing updated version of the same VA panel.

Is LG's new $1600 IPS display with just 820:1 contrast ratio update over my 6 years old IPS LG with 1250 contrast ratio.

we talking about going from 100hz to 240hz, just an updated version of the same panel? ahhaha, i can say that for every panel that exists since LCD's came out.
 
Last edited:
These are the results from latest G7 Odyssey.
1594422871670.png


Older one:

1594425190952.png



just an updated version of the same panel? dont kid yourself.
 

Attachments

  • 1594422861748.png
    1594422861748.png
    719.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 1594423081475.png
    1594423081475.png
    41.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Vega said:
Vertical is important for immersion too. Measly 12" tall 1440 lines of resolution isn't going to be immersive for me, even if the screen wraps 360 degrees around me.
Click to expand...
The part I disagree with you was the 1440p being so 2010. 1440p is getting more and more common now. 1080p is slowly giving way to 1440p. I do agree with you higher (taller) certainly helps with immersion.
 
kasakka said:
Can you translate these though? Which graph is which? If those are response times, the thing not accounted for is how much overshoot occurs to reach these numbers. Inverse ghosting can look just as bad as black smearing.
Click to expand...
i have the 32 inch G7, gaming at 240hz has like no ghosting at all, its like CRT, no black smearing at all, or inverse ghosting. When i fired VRR with my older games to run 240fps with 240hz it was even more incredible, got motion sickness.

top chart is from the latest panel used in the Odyssey line up, and yes, they are response times across the panel.

bottom one is the older panel used in samsung C49RG90 and G50.
 
Last edited:
Here we go again with the whole "I have this new model VA display and there is no black smearing or ghosting at all! Trust me!" :rolleyes:

I'll wait to see what the actual response times and overshoot are measured to be by a professional (not employed by Samsung) ;)
 
mehguy5 said:
Here we go again with the whole "I have this new model VA display and there is no black smearing or ghosting at all! Trust me!" :rolleyes:

I'll wait to see what the actual response times and overshoot are measured to be by a professional (not employed by Samsung) ;)
Click to expand...
Indeed. Part number points to an SVA panel, and these typically have a response time of 8-9ms. They would have had to employ some nasty overdrive to cut that in half to be acceptable for 240 Hz.
 
Armenius said:
Indeed. Part number points to an SVA panel, and these typically have a response time of 8-9ms. They would have had to employ some nasty overdrive to cut that in half to be acceptable for 240 Hz.
Click to expand...

so 8ms is bad now? wtf... i have this monitor is hand, perfectly fine at 240hz. You sound like as if DP1.4 is not enough for 1440p and 240hz.
 
Well at 240Hz, each frame is only about 4ms, so 8ms would not be fast enough to provide a blur free image at those frame rates.
 
$1700 for a modern 4k gaming display with no HDMI 2.1? What are they thinking?

Yes, DSC, but no HDMI 2.1 alone puts it out of the running for me.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
But on the PC, DisplayPort is a focus; HDMI is usually an afterthought for monitors.
Click to expand...
It neither supports HDMI 2.1 (which is out now) or DP2.0 (which isn't) both which don't require compression to display such high resolution/refresh rates with higher bit-depth. You would think they would at least add HDMI 2.1 (they did bother to add HDMI 2.0). Without either of these for such a large expense it doesn't seem worth it to me.

I think once the new generation of GPUs arrive we'll start to see these issues sorted out.

Anyone know when the first DP2.0 displays are supposed to arrive?
 
Wag said:
You would think they would at least add HDMI 2.1 (they did bother to add HDMI 2.0). Without either of these for such a large expense it doesn't seem worth it to me.
Click to expand...
Is HDMI 2.0 or DP2.0 needed for the display to function properly?
 
Yeah, I mean, it works. I only use HDMI for secondary systems, or for hooking up to a TV.

HDMI has been far behind on PC for a long time, and I don't see that changing.
 
Wag said:
It neither supports HDMI 2.1 (which is out now) or DP2.0 (which isn't) both which don't require compression to display such high resolution/refresh rates with higher bit-depth. You would think they would at least add HDMI 2.1 (they did bother to add HDMI 2.0). Without either of these for such a large expense it doesn't seem worth it to me.

I think once the new generation of GPUs arrive we'll start to see these issues sorted out.

Anyone know when the first DP2.0 displays are supposed to arrive?
Click to expand...

There is nothing announced for DP 2.0.

With no GPUs out display manufacturers probably have little interest to implement the new ports until next gen consoles and GPUs are out. This year a lot of manufacturers released TVs with 1-2 HDMI 2.1 ports if even that. LG is the only one with HDMI 2.1 on all ports afaik. HDMI 2.1 AV receivers are also a no show, with only Denon and Yamaha supposed to have models this year. I was really expecting this to be the year of HDMI 2.1 at least but nope, looks like next year might see more options.
 
cybereality said:
Well at 240Hz, each frame is only about 4ms, so 8ms would not be fast enough to provide a blur free image at those frame rates.
Click to expand...

Correct; in motion at 240 Hz there will be a constant blur as the pixels aren't fast enough to keep up with the refresh rate in most color transitions. VA cannot handle 240 Hz without serious motion quality degradation. Will be interesting to see what a good review site like TFTCentral says about it.

Here you can see the recently released 240 Hz VA Samsung 27RG50 versus competing panel technologies at 240 Hz:

1594805076906.png



Or one could simply get a 48CX OLED and run it in 120 Hz BFI, which has the motion clarity of 240 Hz but with ZERO ghosting/trailing or strobe cross-talk.
 
Vega said:
Correct; in motion at 240 Hz there will be a constant blur as the pixels aren't fast enough to keep up with the refresh rate in most color transitions. VA cannot handle 240 Hz without serious motion quality degradation. Will be interesting to see what a good review site like TFTCentral says about it.

Here you can see the recently released 240 Hz VA Samsung 27RG50 versus competing panel technologies at 240 Hz:

View attachment 261776


Or one could simply get a 48CX OLED and run it in 120 Hz BFI, which has the motion clarity of 240 Hz but with ZERO ghosting/trailing or strobe cross-talk.
Click to expand...

The C27RG50 is last year's model. Reports indicate that 32" G7 and the 49" G9 are a marked improvement over last year's models in black smearing and response time.
 
Lastan010 said:
That is a total different panel from last year, that one is advertised with 4ms, this years G7 and G9 from the Odyssey lineup is 1ms, stop trolling.

Have you even done some reading on G7 and G9, plenty of videos on youtube and articles, at 240hz it is incredibly fast, no trailing, smearing or perceivable ghosting.

you even went as far to compare a 1080p panel from last year to just released G9 with like 5000x1440p resolution, what is the matter with you?
Click to expand...

You sure are getting aggressive over what I assume is a display you own.

I still have not seen overshoot measurements of the G7 or G9 so jury is still out on that. It would be great if Samsung has finally managed to figure out response time issues on a VA panel so that black smearing is minimal/nonexistent and response time is great without ghosting. It's worth remembering that most games won't run anywhere near 240 fps so at lower framerates there could be more issues.
 
Last edited:
Vega said:
Correct; in motion at 240 Hz there will be a constant blur as the pixels aren't fast enough to keep up with the refresh rate in most color transitions. VA cannot handle 240 Hz without serious motion quality degradation. Will be interesting to see what a good review site like TFTCentral says about it.

Here you can see the recently released 240 Hz VA Samsung 27RG50 versus competing panel technologies at 240 Hz:

View attachment 261776


Or one could simply get a 48CX OLED and run it in 120 Hz BFI, which has the motion clarity of 240 Hz but with ZERO ghosting/trailing or strobe cross-talk.
Click to expand...

That is a total different panel from last year, that one is advertised with 4ms, this years G7 and G9 from the Odyssey lineup is 1ms, complete different panel, stop trolling.

Have you even done some reading on G7 and G9, plenty of videos on youtube and articles, at 240hz it is incredibly fast, no trailing, smearing or perceivable ghosting.

you even went as far to compare a 1080p panel from last year to just released G9 with like 5000x1440p resolution, what is the matter with you?

that is like someone taking the recent 3840x1600 LG 38GL950G monitor and compare it to some low end LG from last year and claim that is what the latest is going to be like, what is wrong with you?
 
kasakka said:
261784[/ATTACH]"]
You sure did a great job quoting the wrong person and getting aggressive over what I assume is a display you own.

I still have not seen overshoot measurements of the G7 or G9 so jury is still out on that. It would be great if Samsung has finally managed to figure out response time issues on a VA panel so that black smearing is minimal/nonexistent and response time is great without ghosting. It's worth remembering that most games won't run anywhere near 240 fps so at lower framerates there could be more issues.
Click to expand...

i have the G7 32inch, best gaming monitor out today IMO.

Just turn the Gsync off and let the monitor always stay at 240hz, i play the new COD game without gsync, a crappy port, getting avg around 125fps and yet the game feels extremely smooth and fast, no ghosting, smearing, and other known VA issues. So you dont need to use gsync all the time, i personaly like to use gsync when the fps are high and not low, why drop monitors refresh rate with gsync when the fps is low? right?

My other 9 monitors i have are not good at all with gsync turned off at lower frame rates than the refresh rate, too much stutter and input lag.

I was able to sync BF4, Project Cars, NFS and many other titles that have been out but still play to run at 240fps and 240hz with Gsync at all times, insane, pure bliss.
1594813269885.png
 

Attachments

  • 1594813271841.png
    1594813271841.png
    4.1 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Lastan010 said:
That is a total different panel from last year, that one is advertised with 4ms, this years G7 and G9 from the Odyssey lineup is 1ms, complete different panel, stop trolling.
Click to expand...
Nobody is trolling. Most are just cautious with manufacturer claims, because most were burned before by those. Those comparisons come from TFTCentral, a reputable review site that mostly gets things right. I've been burned by VAs that got good reviews there as well, with no mention of visible ghosting which ended up ghosting badly in person. Display tech is very rarely jumping big steps in 1 year. Hell, VA haven't managed to solve ghosting in the last 20 years, so excuse us for being skeptic until reputable sites actually report on there being an actual break through...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top