LG 48CX

I think BestBuy tends to price match LG store whenever there is a discount so there's that as well. I would have definitely picked up a 48 C6 if I was looking to upgrade from my CX but the number of dead pixels on my CX was getting too annoying to live with so I ended up getting an S95F last year. If only the C5 ended up being what the C6 is, oh well still nice to see improvements regardless.

If you qualify for discount on the LG store (military, medical, first responder, student) it is cheaper than best buy at times. BB might drop to match that eventually though or with a sale price but typically when checking both sites I find the samsung discount and LG discount is cheaper if you qualify. That is, after I log in which applies the discount vs. the partner store list price. Currently there isn't a discount on the 48 C6 though. It usually takes a number of months before they post a discount. The discount amount in dollars is less as compared to how low the regular list price of product is, though, of course.

I think the gx950a had dropped to $1440 on sale at the time and I got another $145 off for around $1300, which compared to what vendors were asking at the time ( $~1550) wasn't bad, but the tax here is almost 9% in the total after that out of pocket, too.

The 55" S90F is consistently lower price on samsung's qualifying discounts ($945 at samsung vs $1200 at BB). I bought a fridge and freezer from samsung over the years, and a stove from LG. The more expensive the item, the more the discount might be in dollars. You also get some points for future purchases there, too, and at times you get double points on a purchase, which still aren't much but every little bit helps.

.

yeah c6 is 500 more than the c5 is it really worth it?

p3sty said:

yeah c6 is 500 more than the c5 is it really worth it?

Click to expand...

Nope, but eventually the C6 will be the same price that the C5 is now.

"The LG 48CX (48-inch CX Series 4K OLED TV) was released in the United States in late June 2020 with an initial retail price of $1,499 "

.
I thought it dropped in price quicker but a search says it didn't drop much at first.

Release (June 2020): $1,499.99.
6 Months Later (Nov/Dec 2020 - Jan 2021): The price generally dropped to around $1,395 - $1,399, with some special sales briefly lowering it slightly more.
Deepest Discount (May 2021 - ~11 months later): By May 2021, shortly before the new model (C1) became widely available, the 48CX hit record-low prices around $1,249.99.

Click to expand...

.
Here is another variant :



I guess you'd save $100 after 7 mo, and $500 if you waited almost a whole year , at least on that model back then (not considering any other special discount or some brief flash sale, or any open box deals).

I paid $1450 for mine end of november 2020, practically december., which tracks near to that graph.

. .

Edit: Another thing to think about . . .

"Based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data through April 2026, $1,450 from 2020 has the same purchasing power as approximately $1,850.03 today.
This reflects a cumulative price increase of 27.59% over the last six years. "

. ..

The gx950a was released in march 2025 for $2000 , but "Following its release, prices dropped in later 2025, with reports of the monitor being listed for under $1,500 on Amazon and via LG Partner websites for around $1,300–$1,358 after discounts" - which is how I got it in early october 2025. If something similar happens with the 48 C6 I'll nab one.

LG GX950a

• Launch (Feb 2025): $1,999.99.
• Early Discount (May 2025): Dropped to $1,599.99 during Memorial Day sales.
• Holiday Season (Nov 2025): Reached a standard sale price of $1,496.99, with some partner store deals going as low as $1,350.00.
• Record Lows (Jan 2026): Hit its historical lowest Amazon price of $1,311.51 on New Year's Day.

Click to expand...

Made a new thread for the 48 C6 here:

https://hardforum.com/threads/lg-48c6-oled48c6pua-evo-ai-c6-4k-smart-tv-2026.2047418/

.

.

Well guys, there they are. 9611 hours later I've got some dead pixels forming along the top edge of the screen. I'm going to check how long my extended warranty is good for, but it's probably just barely out by now. It may go another year, but I suspect the problem will be extreme by then.

Advil said:

Well guys, there they are. 9611 hours later I've got some dead pixels forming along the top edge of the screen. I'm going to check how long my extended warranty is good for, but it's probably just barely out by now. It may go another year, but I suspect the problem will be extreme by then.

Click to expand...

Old sugar candy can get brittle along the edges over time.



Someone posted this of their screen on avsforum, not mine. Mine does have a sprinkling dots on the very edge of the top right corner and a couple on the upper left corner, but nothing as bad and as wide as this (so far anyway).

If it makes it to the end of the year that will be 6 years. That's kinda unfortunate but I went in eyes open. I've enjoyed the hell out of thus thing and currently it's minor and I can't see the pixels from sitting distance yet but next screen I will be doing some deeper research into what tech will have best longevity. $200-$250 a year for the screen amortized is ok for a luxury item but is nothing compared to LCDs I have that are 15+ years old and still work fine.

Advil said:

If it makes it to the end of the year that will be 6 years. That's kinda unfortunate but I went in eyes open. I've enjoyed the hell out of thus thing and currently it's minor and I can't see the pixels from sitting distance yet but next screen I will be doing some deeper research into what tech will have best longevity. $200-$250 a year for the screen amortized is ok for a luxury item but is nothing compared to LCDs I have that are 15+ years old and still work fine.

Click to expand...

Yes it's nice to have a screen you can still use or hand-me-down for other purpose, but in modern times we've had some big advancements like HDR capability, OLED itself, VRR, and higher refresh rates. Personally, once their is a big enough advancement within a certain cost threshold, I'm upgrading my main gaming screen anyway. Unfortunately the 45" 21:9 I bought didn't deliver on PQ so I returned it. That would have been a really cool advancement in immersion with it's 5120x2160 rez 800R format. Gaming tvs are slow to adopt higher Hz like 240hz so far, but higher HDR capability and more resilitient oleds (MLA, tandem stack, better brightness tech, etc) is still a good step. If a 48 c6 was 240hz there'd be no question for me, but I'll probably still end up getting one once the price drops a bit from the release price considering it's HDR output and that it's tandem stack tech. That's because there really isn't any large format (and 240hz+) screen in the news or they are keeping tight lipped about 2027 - 2028. I'll prob end up with C6 and hang on to it until something big step up happens in a large format, for 2 - 3 years or more after I get one (after already waiting on a sale price) depending how long it takes manufacturers to release something a big enough step up from that.

Yeah I'm with you there. I think next time around I'll still end up OLED because it's hard to go back. But OLED tech was light years ahead of everything else 6 years ago. Now it's mature and I think I can happily pick a model well under $1000 and be totally satisfied which makes the cost of ownership a lot better over time. What still makes or breaks it for me is getting 4k, 444, VRR and HDR all at the same time with no fuss. The LG does deliver on that. 240hz would be nice but if I could get 144 or 160 at the end of this year for $800 or less that's more than good enough for me.

Advil said:

If it makes it to the end of the year that will be 6 years. That's kinda unfortunate but I went in eyes open. I've enjoyed the hell out of thus thing and currently it's minor and I can't see the pixels from sitting distance yet but next screen I will be doing some deeper research into what tech will have best longevity. $200-$250 a year for the screen amortized is ok for a luxury item but is nothing compared to LCDs I have that are 15+ years old and still work fine.

Click to expand...

We may get inorganic self emmisive tech at the end of the decade if everything goes well. There is QDEL from Nanosys and Samsung's QNED. Of course both of these could be pushed back beyond 2030 or just cancelled altogether but if one of them makes it to mass production then that would be the next big step up from OLED. All of the benefits without the fear of burn in which has led to heavily nerfed brightness on monitors.

MistaSparkul said:

We may get inorganic self emmisive tech at the end of the decade if everything goes well. There is QDEL from Nanosys and Samsung's QNED. Of course both of these could be pushed back beyond 2030 or just cancelled altogether but if one of them makes it to mass production then that would be the next big step up from OLED. All of the benefits without the fear of burn in which has led to heavily nerfed brightness on monitors.

Click to expand...

Self emissive tech that doesn't burn in is a myth. They all wear out and get dimmer over time. It will always be a trade off between brightness and longevity.

Mayber some new led tech could be durable enoough it's to the point it doesn't matter. Depending on the use case OLED is already there.

I think micro LED is supposed to be something 2-3X more durable than OLED. If you drove it 5X as bright you would get burn-in worse than an equivalent OLED.

sharknice said:

Self emissive tech that doesn't burn in is a myth. They all wear out and get dimmer over time. It will always be a trade off between brightness and longevity.

Mayber some new led tech could be durable enoough it's to the point it doesn't matter. Depending on the use case OLED is already there.

I think micro LED is supposed to be something 2-3X more durable than OLED. If you drove it 5X as bright you would get burn-in worse than an equivalent OLED.

Click to expand...

Maybe in the case of QDEL where they are trying to make the Quantum Dots themselves emit light. But in Samsung's case, it is basically QD OLED without the OLED, the light source would instead come from an inorganic blue LED vs organic blue OLED.

https://www.cepro.com/news/samsung-display-reportedly-revives-qned-development/625819/

There are other articles floating around, but I wouldn't completely write off both technologies just yet. I mean do you really want to be stuck on OLED forever without anything better? And no, OLED is not already there when it comes to durability or we wouldn't have monitors with such gimped brightness levels.

I'm not even asking for much when it comes to brightness either, I'm not saying monitors should be hitting a million nits or something. 1000 nits on a 10% window is a pretty reasonable target to hit for HDR, and to this day even in 2026 there is no monitor that can do that. The latest Tandem panels from LG are getting close, but it's still falling short. QD OLED monitors are even worst at around 550 nits for the latest and greatest generation so just barely above HALF the target.

MistaSparkul said:

Maybe in the case of QDEL where they are trying to make the Quantum Dots themselves emit light. But in Samsung's case, it is basically QD OLED without the OLED, the light source would instead come from an inorganic blue LED vs organic blue OLED.

https://www.cepro.com/news/samsung-display-reportedly-revives-qned-development/625819/

There are other articles floating around, but I wouldn't completely write off both technologies just yet. I mean do you really want to be stuck on OLED forever without anything better? And no, OLED is not already there when it comes to durability or we wouldn't have monitors with such gimped brightness levels.

I'm not even asking for much when it comes to brightness either, I'm not saying monitors should be hitting a million nits or something. 1000 nits on a 10% window is a pretty reasonable target to hit for HDR, and to this day even in 2026 there is no monitor that can do that. The latest Tandem panels from LG are getting close, but it's still falling short. QD OLED monitors are even worst at around 550 nits for the latest and greatest generation so just barely above HALF the target.

Click to expand...

It well never be bright enough for me personally until I can play an eclipse of the sun and have to wear a welding helmet IRL to avoid going blind.

I think at some point, perhaps farther ahead in years than I'd like, XR + MR glasses will be a thing, at very high resolution instead of the 1080p rudimentary sunglass format ones they have now (or the higher fucntioning VR style MR ones available now, that are like large ski goggles).

Screens (in glasses) nearer to your eyes could be perceived brighter for HDR than more "external"/distanced screens. True pass-through with overlaid screens would allow high rez virtual screen(s) of different formats and curvatures pinned in real space, or "in orbit" pinned to you as if they were on an invisible selfie stick. Could also do virtual animated and deformable objects (and creatures) instead of just screens, and game fields like holograms floating in space or on tables, "ripped portals" in space viewing game worlds instead of just screen formats, and full VR, etc.

For mixed reality stuff, you'd especially want everything capable of being as bright and with as bright of colors, as close as possible, to reality so that it would be more seamless. Really that's kind of the goal of HDR, to make things look more realistic and true to real-life color, (or as close as possible) - not to take a sdr picture and crank that whole range up 50x brighter. (Still a long way to go to get to hdr 10,000 though).

. .