LG 48C6 OLED48C6PUA evo AI C6 4K Smart TV 2026

zehoo · May 26, 2026

What I want to see is if Sony offer a 42/48” panel with the new RGB backlighting they’re showing off in a couple of days.

elvn · May 26, 2026

There is also phosphorescent blue OLED due out at some point. Samsung's glasses free 3d tech, if it ends up being quality and worthwhile, might end up available in a large format screen or large ultrawide screen by then too. Maybe those + HDMI 2.2 (and higher hz 4k, 4k+) by 2028.

. . . .

Google result:

Phosphorescent blue OLED (Blue PHOLED) technology is expected to arrive in gaming TVs between 2027 and 2029. While mass production and commercialization for small/medium devices (like tablets and monitors) are actively rolling out, expanding this to full-sized living room gaming displays requires overcoming massive manufacturing hurdles. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Why the Wait?

The "Dream" Upgrade: Current OLEDs use a fluorescent blue layer that wastes about 75% of its energy as heat, limiting peak brightness and increasing burn-in risk. Blue PHOLED converts nearly 100% of electrical energy into light, massively improving energy efficiency and brightness while slashing burn-in risks.
**Lifespan Hurdles:**Historically, blue phosphorescent materials have degraded much faster than red or green. Engineers have only recently perfected the hybrid tandem structures needed to make it viable for commercial manufacturing. [1, 2, 3, 4]

What to Expect

Initial Rollout (2025–2026): The technology is debuting in smaller form factors first. Companies like LG Display and Universal Display Corporation (UDC) are primarily focusing on high-end mobile and IT screens before scaling up to massive TV panels.
Premium Gaming TVs (2027+): When Blue PHOLED does hit large screens, it will likely launch in flagship, premium-tier sets first—such as LG's "G-Series" (or higher) or Samsung’s top-end QD-OLED lines. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

. .

kasakka · May 26, 2026

elvn said:
Idk if the timeline this Google result is claiming is accurate or not, but it could show up in the next few years supposedly (or by 2028?) - and that might make 240hz and higher gaming tvs easier to accomplish.

I think TV manufacturers are in no hurry to bring in HDMI 2.2 when there's zero devices supporting it.

HDMI 2.1 was released in late 2017, and it took until 2020's Nvidia RTX 30 series to come out with HDMI 2.1 support.
DP 2.1 came out in late 2022 and it took Nvidia until 2025 RTX 50 series to put it on their GPU lineup.

With Nvidia's current AI push, I'd wager they have even less interest in adding these newer standards.

Realistically we might have to wait until next gen consoles for HDMI 2.2 to become a thing, unless those have been locked in already which means HDMI 2.1.

elvn · May 26, 2026

kasakka said:
I think TV manufacturers are in no hurry to bring in HDMI 2.2 when there's zero devices supporting it.

HDMI 2.1 was released in late 2017, and it took until 2020's Nvidia RTX 30 series to come out with HDMI 2.1 support.
DP 2.1 came out in late 2022 and it took Nvidia until 2025 RTX 50 series to put it on their GPU lineup.

With Nvidia's current AI push, I'd wager they have even less interest in adding these newer standards.

Realistically we might have to wait until next gen consoles for HDMI 2.2 to become a thing, unless those have been locked in already which means HDMI 2.1.

Will have to see. Good point about Nvidia GPU end of the equation, but perhaps 80gbps/ubhr20 to HDMI 2.2 adapter for 80 out of 96 might work since both standards would have high bandwidth.

If it does show up on tvs, it might only be on expensive top tier sets whenever that is, too.

. . .

Samsung's glasses free 3d tech might also benefit (tracking wise and vs blur) from higher hz, though it's geared for direct viewing monitor style scenarios not side viewing multi viewer living room scenarios, so not a big market for that in tvs either I guess, unless it (glasses free 3d) becomes a must have for console players if the 3d comes to tvs at some point. Probably not going to due to viewing distance requirements though.

"
Samsung's glasses-free 3D (found on monitors like the Odyssey 3D) works by using built-in eye-tracking cameras and a special lenticular lens overlay. The cameras map your eyes and head in real time, allowing the lens to bend and direct light rays separately to your left and right eyes to create depth. [1, 2]

Does it need high Hz?
Yes, high refresh rates are highly recommended for this technology, though not required for the basic effect. [1]

Why it needs high Hz: Because the lenticular 3D effect creates a tiny "sweet spot" for your eyes, the monitor must continually re-calculate depth and perspective as you move your head. A high refresh rate (such as 165Hz to 330Hz) ensures that the tracking, AI processing, and depth adjustments happen instantly without lag or motion blur.
No penalty to refresh rate: Unlike older 3D televisions that cut your frame rate in half to display 3D, next-generation monitors like the Samsung Odyssey 3D let you enjoy the full 165Hz+ refresh rate in 3D mode. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
"

elvn · May 26, 2026

Still holding some hope for a modern tandem OLED ark style display and/or other flagship large format Samsung ultrawide OLED at some point in the next 3 years, with 80gbps display port, and 3d would be even better. Phosphorescent blue would be great, too, if possible.

Seems a few years out yet:

"

Samsung has officially developed glasses-free 3D OLED display technology. [1, 2]
Samsung Research, in collaboration with POSTECH university, published their breakthrough in the journal Nature, showcasing a highly advanced 2D/3D switchable OLED panel that fixes the structural issues of current LCD versions. [1, 2]

How the New OLED 3D Technology Works
The current Odyssey 3D monitors rely on bulky, fixed plastic lenticular lenses that struggle with viewing angles and OLED pixel layouts. Samsung's new OLED solution completely changes this approach: [1, 2, 3]

The "Metalens" Layer: Instead of glass or plastic, it uses an ultra-thin (1.2mm) metasurface lenticular lens made of nanoscale structures.

Voltage-Controlled Switching: By applying a small electrical voltage, the lens instantly changes shape. It goes concave for a flawless, pixel-perfect standard 2D image, or shifts to convex to split the light for a glasses-free 3D effect.

Massive 100° Viewing Angle: Unlike the Odyssey 3D, which uses eye-tracking cameras and only works for one person sitting directly in front of it, this light-field OLED system extends the viewing angle to 100 degrees. This allows multiple people to view the 3D effect at the same time without needing cameras to track their eyes. [1]

Where and When Will We See It?
Samsung has successfully built and demonstrated smaller functional prototypes, including a 50x50mm metalens integrated into a smartphone-sized OLED panel. []
While a commercial release date for consumer monitors or televisions has not been announced yet, Samsung has stated that this technology is actively being developed for future smartphones, tablets, augmented reality devices, and premium commercial displays. Because the metalens film is so thin, it is much easier to scale into high-end OLED production lines than previous 3D tech. [, 3]
Would you like to know more about how this meta-lens technology compares to the eye-tracking system in the current Odyssey 3D, or are you interested in its potential use in phones?

. .

No curved possible apparently (??), but they will likely make large format glasses-free 3d OLED screens at some point.. If the oled 3d is great, it's immersion or overall experience may exceed that of a curved screen. curious what the hdr output of their oled 3d screens will be. A larger screen should work as long as you sit the same relative distance from it that you would a smaller screen , viewing angle wise.

Samsung’s current glasses-free 3D OLEDs and monitors cannot be curved like the Odyssey Ark or ultra-wide G9 models. The lenticular lenses and eye-tracking cameras required to produce the spatial 3D effect rely on precise focal distances; bending the screen distorts the image and breaks the 3D illusion. [1, 2, 3]
Why 3D Screens Are Currently Flat:

Optics & Viewing Angles: Glasses-free 3D uses a microscopic optical lens layer (a lenticular lens) that sits over the display to direct separate images to your left and right eyes. A curved screen changes the angle of these lenses, making it nearly impossible to calculate the eye-tracking required for a consistent 3D depth effect.

Fixed Distance: The 3D tech (found on units like the Samsung Odyssey 3D Monitor) requires the viewer to remain at an optimal focal distance (typically 70 to 100 cm) in order to lock onto their head and eye movements. A curved setup at this distance introduces distortion.

Hardware Limitations: The 3D components and camera systems are manufactured and calibrated for flat panels. [1, 2, 3, 4]

While Samsung Display has showcased groundbreaking switchable 2D/3D metasurface "metalenses" that can be used on thinner, flexible OLED tech in the future, commercial consumer monitors—such as the 27" and 32" Odyssey 3D models—are currently strictly flat.

. .

I'm definitely interested in checking that glasses-free 3d out on a larger oled screen in the years ahead, even if the Hz is 240Hz or less and the price is premium (if the 3d ends up worth it).

Until then I'll prob get a c6 or similar by year end 2026.

MistaSparkul · May 26, 2026

elvn said:
Some of the newest LG OLED gaming tvs (G6 at least) are dropping color when running 165hz, with visible picture downgrade.. Idk if it will be fixable in firmware fixes later or not. Could be a bandwidth/DSC snag, where HDMI 2.2 wouldn't be as restrictive for 165Hz, and 240Hz in the future.

Idk if the timeline this Google result is claiming is accurate or not, but it could show up in the next few years supposedly (or by 2028?) - and that might make 240hz and higher gaming tvs easier to accomplish.

. . . .

" HDMI 2.2 TVs are expected to begin rolling out in late 2026 or 2027. Because the specification was officially released in mid-2025, it typically takes manufacturers time to integrate the new chips and hardware, meaning widespread mainstream adoption will likely take a few more years.

What to Expect from HDMI 2.2:

Massive Bandwidth: Upgrades the maximum bandwidth from 48 Gbps to 96 Gbps.

Extreme Resolutions: Supports uncompressed formats up to 4K at 480Hz, 8K at 240Hz, and potentially up to 16K.

New Cables: You will need to purchase newly certified "Ultra 96" cables to take advantage of the upgraded speeds."

It should be fixable because this is not a bandwidth problem. My 4K 240Hz monitor is pushing even more bandwidth off DP 1.4 vs the G6 pushing 4K 165Hz off HDMI 2.1 and my monitor does not have fudged colors as a result. My S95F also does not have fudged colors due to running DSC at 165Hz (although it does have other annoying issues that could be DSC related). I also wouldn't count on HDMI 2.2 TV's in 2027 for sure, and possibly even 2028. I think 2029 is the EARLIEST when we can expect HDMI 2.2 TVs which means 2029 will also be the earliest we can expect 240Hz TVs.

elvn · May 27, 2026

I guess curved glasses-free 3d OLED is theoretically possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I'd think it would be easier if sitting at the center of curvature where all of the pixels point directly at you.

Samsung has already begun developing glasses-free 3D OLED technology. While flat glasses-free 3D monitors exist, curved glasses-free 3D is theoretically possible but highly complex. Curved screens require highly precise eye-tracking and specialized lenses to correctly cast independent views to each eye across a warped surface. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

Current Technology & Samsung's Progress

The Breakthrough: Samsung, in collaboration with South Korea's POSTECH university, successfully developed groundbreaking glasses-free 3D OLED display technology.

How It Works: Instead of traditional thick lenticular lenses, these OLEDs use ultra-thin "metalenses" (metasurface lenses) that can electronically toggle between 2D and 3D imagery.

No Glasses Required: The system relies on precise eye-tracking and light-field mapping algorithms to adjust the 3D effect as you move your head. [1, 2, 3, 5]

This part is not necessarily true if sitting at the center of curvature, since at the center of curvature , all pixels could remain on-axis, pointed directly at you.
"A curve physically bends the pixels toward or away from the viewer, changing the angle of the light."

The Challenge of "Curved" Glasses-Free 3D
Could a curved version work? Yes, but with distinct challenges:

The "Sweet Spot": Glasses-free 3D works by splitting light so your left and right eyes see different pixels. A curve physically bends the pixels toward or away from the viewer, changing the angle of the light.

The Solution: To make a curved 3D display work without glasses, the built-in cameras have to dynamically track where your pupils are and computationally adjust the light-bending metalenses in real-time. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Why OLED is Perfect for This
If Samsung commercializes a curved 3D screen, OLED is the ideal panel type to use:

Pixel-Level Control: Because OLED pixels emit their own light and can be turned off entirely for true blacks, they offer infinite contrast, which drastically helps with the spatial depth and layering required for 3D.

Viewing Angles: OLEDs inherently boast much wider viewing angles than LCDs, making them more forgiving when the viewer is slightly off-center. [1, 2, 3]

While Samsung currently offers flat glasses-free 3D gaming monitors, they are actively researching ways to scale this optical technology to different form factors and larger commercial panels.

I'll stop focusing talking 3d in this thread since it's a C6 thread though.

elvn · May 27, 2026

MistaSparkul said:
It should be fixable because this is not a bandwidth problem. My 4K 240Hz monitor is pushing even more bandwidth off DP 1.4 vs the G6 pushing 4K 165Hz off HDMI 2.1 and my monitor does not have fudged colors as a result. My S95F also does not have fudged colors due to running DSC at 165Hz (although it does have other annoying issues that could be DSC related). I also wouldn't count on HDMI 2.2 TV's in 2027 for sure, and possibly even 2028. I think 2029 is the EARLIEST when we can expect HDMI 2.2 TVs which means 2029 will also be the earliest we can expect 240Hz TVs.

I wouldn't be shocked if at least one port was on a G series in 2028, or if Samsung ever made another 8k gaming TV or something, but I also wouldn't be shocked if there wasn't any HDMI 2.2 in 2028, either.

A dp80 to HDMI 2.2 (96) adapter could work. All of that stuff is a long way off still, either way.

. . . .

Hopefully they can iron out most of the wrinkles in the current gaming tvs before Black Friday ~ Xmas or other sales/price drops this year.

zehoo · May 27, 2026

Who fabs LG’s silicon they use in their TVs?

*edit

TSMC it seems. So if they wanted to save money it would make sense to not add hdmi 2.2 until the AI bubble pops and/or more capacity comes online. So 2028/2029 for hdmi 2.2 would seem a reasonable guess.

joeh_1974 · Jun 5, 2026

Looks like the latest firmware released fixes the PC issues with HGiG when using a connection over 60hz.

MistaSparkul · Jun 6, 2026

Seems like there are still some lingering minor issues that need to be ironed out:

Does look like it's a big step up over the CX/C1 though. And another firmware update is coming soon apparently.

zehoo · Jun 6, 2026

MistaSparkul said:
Seems like there are still some lingering minor issues that need to be ironed out:

View attachment 807613

Does look like it's a big step up over the CX/C1 though. And another firmware update is coming soon apparently.

So by the time it starts getting good discounts it’ll finally have a finished firmware.

elvn · Jun 6, 2026

Apparently there was a firmware update on the newer tvs (at least the G6) - that fixed the HGiG "orange" on reds issues and maybe some other things, so it's hopeful that they will iron most of wrinkles out on all of them.

edit: re-read your image text and found it on avsforum, so ymmv depending on the fw version. Still I think they'll work that and the near blacks out eventually.

. . . . .

Here is some other info I had google source from tech sites:

. . . . .

============================

From a google search that references "the Displayguy" 's results :

48" LG C6 OLED features a 4-stack tandem (Primary RGB Tandem) panel. It utilizes the RWGB (Red, White, Green, Blue) pixel structure. [1, 2]
Here are the specific details regarding the 2026 LG C6 OLED series: [1, 2]

Tandem Panel Integration: The 48" C6 uses LG’s 4-layer Primary RGB Tandem panel technology. For 2026, LG brought the tandem G-series panel technology down into this smaller 48" size, making it significantly brighter than older non-tandem models. [1, 2]

Pixel Structure: While older LG panels typically used a WRGB layout, the 2026 tandem C-series features an RWGB subpixel arrangement to improve text clarity, reduce fringing, and deliver outstanding brightness for both desktop work and HDR gaming

==============================

How does the full featured model size G6, the non-heatsink C6H model, and the smaller apeture size + no heatink of the 48" C6 compare in 25%, 50%, and 100% screen brightness .... and especially sustained not momentary.

I don't sub to RTings but this is what google search genie tells me:

HDR Brightness: Peak vs. Sustained (Nits) [1]

LG G6 OLED (Flagship Tandem)	LG C6H OLED (Large Tandem)	LG 48" C6 OLED (Compact Tandem)
10% Peak 3,000+ nits	10% Peak 2,200–2,400 nits	10% Peak 1,438 nits [1, 2]
10% Sustained 2,481 nits [1]	10% Sustained 1,950 nits	10% Sustained 1,150 nits
25% Peak 1,200 nits	25% Peak 900 nits	25% Peak 600 nits
25% Sustained 880 nits	25% Sustained 720 nits	25% Sustained 480 nits
50% Peak 750 nits	50% Peak 550 nits	50% Peak 400 nits
50% Sustained 610 nits	50% Sustained 440 nits	50% Sustained 310 nits
75% Peak 520 nits	75% Peak 380 nits	75% Peak 300 nits
75% Sustained 460 nits	75% Sustained 340 nits	75% Sustained 265 nits
100% Full-Screen Sustained 400+ nits (471 max) [1]	100% Full-Screen Sustained 300–330 nits	100% Full-Screen Sustained 245 nits

===================================

More interesting breakdowns between the 48" C6, the 45" 21:9 gx950a I had briefly before returning it, and my 48" CX.

Regardless of what the figures below say - in my experience, the gx950a had a weird lift/stretch of the hdr curve it did when in high brightness mode. That lift/stretch, which is documented, (or maybe some ABL variant?) seemed to dim the typical scene brightness making things outside of the laser bright highlights look dull and dimmer than even my LG CX , especially with the matte abraded layer on the gx950a making the blacks look flat on top of that.

google "genie" (gemini) result below.

. . .

The Brightness Landscape

The 48" LG C6 leverages a specialized 4-layer Tandem WOLED panel alongside the Alpha 11 Gen 3 processor. This pushes its temporary peak window brightness to massive heights (~1,440–1,500 nits). However, without a dedicated heavy-duty heatsink, its Aggressive Brightness Limiter (ABL) rapidly drops sustained values to protect the panel. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The 45" 45GX950A Monitor utilizes an MLA+ (Micro Lens Array) panel. It hits up to 1,300 nits at a tiny 1.5% window in High Peak Brightness mode. However, it is explicitly throttled at larger mid-window cross-sections to mitigate desktop burn-in risks. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Window Brightness Comparison (Nits)

Display	10% Window	25% Window	50% Window	75% Window	100% Window
48" LG C6 (Tandem)	Peak: ~1,438 - 1,500 Sustained: ~800	Peak: ~694 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~389 Sustained: ~300	Peak: ~287 Sustained: ~250	Peak: ~245 Sustained: ~180 - 200
45" 45GX950A Monitor	Peak: ~900 - 1,000 Sustained: ~600	Peak: ~673 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~350 Sustained: ~280	Peak: ~290 Sustained: ~260	Peak: ~270 - 275 Sustained: ~250
48" LG CX OLED	Peak: ~810 Sustained: ~680	Peak: ~460 Sustained: ~410	Peak: ~310 Sustained: ~280	Peak: ~190 Sustained: ~175	Peak: ~150 Sustained: ~140

Key Brightness Behaviors

The Small Window Paradox (10%): The LG C6 wins overwhelmingly in bursts, clearing 1,400+ nits. It forces small specular highlights (e.g., explosions, flashlights) to pop significantly more than they do on the older CX or the 45GX950A. [1, 2]
Aggressive Mid-Window Limiting: In mid-range windows (25% and 50%), testing reveals the C6 drops lower than expected (~694 nits at 25%). This is because the Alpha 11 processor aggressively preserves panel life when white subpixels are overdriven over a larger surface area. In comparison, the 45GX950A behaves more linearly around a 25% window (~673 nits) due to its specialized monitor-tuned algorithm. [1, 2, 3]
Full-Screen Canvas (100%): The 45GX950A monitor handles large full-screen white windows better than both TVs, sustaining roughly 250–270 nits. The C6 drops closer to 180–200 nits in pure sustained full-screen scenarios to prevent thermal throttling. However, the C6 still destroys the aging LG CX, which falls short at a bleak 140–150 nits full-screen. [1, 2, 3]

. . . .

elvn · Jun 6, 2026

========================================================================================

G6 and G5 added to the mix of the previous reply's Window Brightness Comparison (google sourced results)

========================================================================================

"

The Brightness Landscape

The 55" LG G6 (2026) utilizes a 2nd-generation Primary RGB Tandem 2.0 OLED panel combined with a heavy-duty heatsink design. This architecture unlocks an unprecedented burst peak of ~3,000 nits on small 10% highlight windows. However, to preserve panel longevity, its full-screen sustained brightness is intentionally tuned lower (~400 nits) than the previous generation. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The 55" LG G5 (2025) features the original 4-stack Primary RGB Tandem panel. While its 10% peak highlight windows are slightly lower than the G6 (~2,300–2,500 nits), it maintains some of the highest sustained full-screen 100% window brightness ever recorded on a consumer OLED at ~430–471 nits. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Window Brightness Comparison (Nits)

Display [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]	10% Window	25% Window	50% Window	75% Window	100% Window
55" LG G6 OLED	EDIT: Peak: 1% ~3,000 Peak 10% similar to G5 atm*	Peak: ~1,350 Sustained: ~750	Peak: ~680 Sustained: ~520	Peak: ~490 Sustained: ~430	Peak: ~420 Sustained: ~400
55" LG G5 OLED	Peak: ~2,300 - 2,500 Sustained: ~950	Peak: ~1,200 Sustained: ~820	Peak: ~710 Sustained: ~600	Peak: ~540 Sustained: ~490	Peak: ~471 Sustained: ~430
48" LG C6 (Tandem)	Peak: ~1,438 - 1,500 Sustained: ~800	Peak: ~694 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~389 Sustained: ~300	Peak: ~287 Sustained: ~250	Peak: ~245 Sustained: ~180 - 200
45" 45GX950A Monitor	Peak: ~900 - 1,000 Sustained: ~600	Peak: ~673 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~350 Sustained: ~280	Peak: ~290 Sustained: ~260	Peak: ~270 - 275 Sustained: ~250
48" LG CX OLED	Peak: ~810 Sustained: ~680	Peak: ~460 Sustained: ~410	Peak: ~310 Sustained: ~280	Peak: ~190 Sustained: ~175	Peak: ~150 Sustained: ~140

Critical Takeaways From This Comparison

The Generation Leap: Looking down the 10% column from the G6 (~3,000 nits) to the older CX (~810 nits) highlights the radical evolution of OLED over the years. The Tandem multi-stack panels push small highlights to a completely different tier of visual impact.
The G6 vs. G5 Full-Screen Switch: The G5 is an absolute monster at handling large white spaces. If you display a full-screen white image (or work heavily in web browsers and spreadsheets with bright themes), the G5 actually maintains a noticeably brighter canvas (~430–471 nits) than the newer G6. The G6 reins in its sustained whole-panel power, pulling back to ~400 nits while funneling that massive energy reserve exclusively into smaller specular elements. [1, 2, 3, 4]
C6 Placement: The mid-tier 48" C6 hits impressive burst brightness at 10% (~1,438–1,500 nits), but its performance drop-off beyond a 25% window reveals how much more heavily it relies on ABL algorithm restrictions than its premium "G-series" siblings. [1]

"

elvn · Jun 6, 2026

========================================================

More google magic results about the firmware "bugs" in modern models

=========================================================

Issues concerning near-blacks (such as black crush, chrominance overshoot, flashing) and "dirty" images (such as the Dirty Screen Effect, vertical gray banding, and pixel dithering)

"
Because LG heavily overhauls its picture-processing math to accommodate the engineering leaps of multi-stack Tandem hardware, early adopters face several processing bugs. Fortunately, since these defects stem from software implementation rather than physical pixel failure, they are prime candidates to be "ironed out" via future webOS firmware patches. [1]

The core firmware flaws affecting the LG G5, LG G6, and 48" Tandem C6 break down as follows:

1. LG G5: The "First-Gen Tandem" Legacy Issues
As the trailblazer for the Primary RGB Tandem panel architecture, the G5 suffered a tumultuous launch regarding low-light handling. While major software revisions (like the June HDR10 update and version 33.22.69) successfully crushed early memory leaks and heavy macro-blocking, ongoing unrefined elements remain: [1, 2, 3, 4]

Persistent Elevated 1%–3% Gamma Tracking: Enthusiasts monitoring the display with colorimeters note that in absolute pitch-black rooms, the G5 fails to track near-black gamma perfectly linearly. It slightly over-brightens elements just above 0% absolute black, leading to a minor reduction in perceived infinite contrast.
- The Fix: This is easily rectifiable through an updated factory lookup table (LUT) color profile patch. [1, 2]
Near-Black Shadow Dithering: When processing compressed, low-bitrate shadow detail (such as streaming dark scenes on Netflix), the G5 processor still exhibits visible pixel-crawling artifacting.
- The Fix: LG routinely refines its "Smooth Gradation" de-contouring algorithms throughout a TV’s secondary lifecycle phase to clean up compression artifacts. [1, 2, 3, 4]

2. LG G6: The Over-Brightening Bug
The G6 successfully introduced hardware fixes for the G5's color banding. However, its brand new Alpha 11 Gen 3 processing pipeline introduced a highly public error regarding accurate color tracking: [1, 2]

Blown-Out Midtones in Filmmaker Mode: Expert evaluations confirmed a delay in official G6 reviews due to a severe firmware tone-mapping discrepancy. Even when fed master-reference content capped at 200 nits, the G6 artificially over-brightens the midtones and dark shadows, straying far from cinematic intent.
- The Fix: This is purely a software calibration error in how webOS reads the EOTF (Electro-Optical Transfer Function) curve, making it a guaranteed target for an upcoming corrective patch. [1, 2]

3. 48" LG C6 (Tandem): The Broken PC-HDR Bug
The 48" C6 stands out for packing tandem technology into a smaller chassis, eliminating older panel issues like diagonal pixel dithering. Unfortunately, it currently features a critical, frustrating firmware bug targeted at desktop users: [1, 2, 3]

Locked Dynamic Tone Mapping & Color Shift over PC Signal: When the 48" C6 identifies a native "PC Resolution" input from a graphics card, the Game Optimizer profile triggers an aggressive, unfixable color shift. Furthermore, it locks the Dynamic Tone Mapper into an "Always On" state, bypassing HGIG standards and continually altering game brightness dynamically.
- The Current Workaround: Users are forced to manually switch the input label to "Filmmaker Mode" and use the Windows HDR Calibration app to override it.
- The Fix: Because console HDR signals do not trigger this error, it is a clear handshake bug tucked into the TV's EDID/PC identification logic that LG can address in a standard software release. [1, 2]
Low-Frame Rate Judder / Soap Opera Effect: Gamers playing titles that dip below 60Hz experience distinct micro-stuttering due to instantaneous OLED response times. Conversely, 24p movie content exhibits a faint "soap opera effect" even when all TruMotion processing sliders are toggled entirely off.
- The Fix: This indicates the motion-smoothing algorithm is failing to completely disengage in the background, a common webOS glitch that past firmware updates have resolved by fully separating film cadence detection from game frame rates. [1, 2, 3]

"

============================================

More details

============================================

"
Issues concerning near-blacks (such as black crush, chrominance overshoot, flashing) and "dirty" images (such as the Dirty Screen Effect, vertical gray banding, and pixel dithering) are heavily discussed by early adopters of these multi-stack Tandem OLED panels. [1, 2]
Because driving two-to-four stacked layers of organic material at low voltages is incredibly difficult, LG's processing algorithms have behaved wildly across different generations. Here is how these issues manifest on each model and where the firmware fixes stand. [1]

1. LG G5 (2025): Severe Launch Banding & Pixel Crawl
The pioneering generation of the Primary RGB Tandem panel was plagued by near-black artifacts at launch. [1, 2]

The Issues:
- Severe Posterization & Banding: In dark HDR10 and Dolby Vision streaming content, dark scenes suffered from harsh, blocky color steps instead of smooth gradients. Dark gray smoke or shadows looked pixelated.
- Diagonal Panel Dithering: When sitting close to the screen (desktop distance), users observed faint diagonal lines cutting through dark gray tones. This was caused by the panel’s error-diffusion math struggling with the stacked layers.
- Near-Black Flashing/Floating: Dark details randomly fluctuated in brightness rather than staying perfectly ink-black. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Has it been addressed? Yes, mostly. LG deployed massive mid-cycle beta and public firmware updates. These updates overhauled the EOTF tracking, largely eradicating the macro-blocking and color transitions. However, if you sit right against the screen as a PC monitor, the physical diagonal subpixel dithering noise is a permanent hardware trait and cannot be fully patched away. [1, 2, 3]

2. 48" LG C6 Tandem (2026): Shadow Crush & Minor Overshoot
The specialized 48" C6 bypasses the older subpixel dithering issues. However, its unique RGWB subpixel layout introduces different near-black challenges. [1, 2]

The Issues:
- Out-of-the-Box Black Crush: The 48" C6 is tuned aggressively to hide noise. By default, it "crushes" subtle dark shadow details (e.g., a dark jacket in a dimly lit room completely disappears into pure black).
- Chrominance Overshoot: To fight black crush, the pixels sometimes over-compensate when transitioning out of true black, resulting in a faint, temporary glowing "halo" or ghosting artifact behind moving objects in near-black environments. [1, 2, 3]
Has it been addressed? Partially. Expert testers note that the Alpha 11 Gen 3 processor is highly effective at cleaning up general low-quality streaming banding. The harsh black crush cannot be fixed via automatic firmware updates because LG uses it defensively to prevent panel flashing. However, users can personally resolve it by adjusting the user menu calibration settings or running a professional 3D LUT calibration to lift the compressed near-black details. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3. LG G6 (2026): Near-Perfect Cleanness but Artificially Brightened
The flagship G6 features the cleanest, least "dirty" panel of the group, but its current firmware fights accuracy. [1]

The Issues:
- Over-Brightened Shadows: Unlike the C6, which crushes dark areas, the G6's current launch firmware does the exact opposite. It unnaturally brightens near-black elements in accurate modes like Filmmaker Mode, making the shadows look slightly misted or elevated instead of perfectly dark.
- Gray Uniformity (DSE): Traditional "Dirty Screen Effect" (vertical streaks or dark cloudy spots on gray backgrounds) is exceptionally low on the G6. The 2nd-Gen Tandem manufacturing line produces incredibly clean gray canvases compared to older WOLED generations. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Has it been addressed? Pending. The clean panel uniformity is a hardware victory. The elevated shadow mapping is an ongoing, widely reported firmware bug affecting early 2026 production models. LG is expected to patch this tracking curve to correctly display darker, more accurate cinematic shadows.

The Universal "Panel Lottery" Reality
Regardless of firmware, all three of these models are subject to OLED Gray Uniformity variance out of the box. [1, 2]

The First 50 Hours: Brand new out-of-the-box panels often look "dirty," featuring harsh vertical bands in near-black content.
The Fix: This is not a firmware issue and will not be patched. Rather, it requires the TV to run its internal, automatic Pixel Cleaning (Pixel Refresher) cycles, which activate after every 4 hours of cumulative use. This process automatically evens out the voltage across the stacked tandem layers, clearing up the vast majority of initial dirty streaks. [1, 2]"

"

MistaSparkul · Jun 6, 2026

I was pretty set on the getting the C6 later on once LG fixes all the main issues, but the Computex announcement of the Alienware AW3926QW for $1099 has me aiming for that instead. Yes the HDR brightness most likely won't be as good as the 48 C6, but as long as it's better than the CX's 700 nits peak/ 150 nits fullscreen I'll be fine with it since at the end of the day neither the Alienware nor the C6 is getting close to my S95F in HDR performance anyway. But at least the Alienware will make for much better primary monitor use.

elvn · Jun 6, 2026

So, now I'm actually considering the 55" G5 again, after reading through all of that stuff, and after hearing reports that I might not see the dithering lines if I increase my viewing distance from 40" to 48" (pretty much my limit for my current setup) from my tv stand.

unverified info here, but I could always return it if I find it annoying while eye-tracking

Desktop Context Visibility Assessment at 48 Inches
Static PC Gradients (Discord/Browsers) Invisible. The faint, mesh-like diagonal streaks that plague closer users on uniform gray or dark backgrounds disappear completely. Dark-mode windows look completely uniform.
Camera Panning (Gaming) Indistinguishable. When spinning the camera in dark titles like Alan Wake 2 or Control, the "screen door effect" (where the game textures slide under a stationary pixel mesh) is no longer strong enough to catch your focus.
Media Consumption (Movies/Streaming) Flawless. At 4 feet away, standard video compression noise and film grain from 4K HDR streams will heavily mask any residual micro-dithering, making it look pristine.

3. The One Exception: Head Panning The only way a keen-eyed viewer will spot the pattern at 48 inches is through head-tracking persistence. If you keep your head perfectly still, the image is clean. However, if you rapidly move your eyes or head left-to-right across a dark gray screen, your brain briefly processes the spatial frequency of the panel's subpixels, causing the lines to faintly "shimmer" for a microsecond before disappearing again.

4. Summary for Your Setup At 40 inches, the G5 was a risky PC monitor choice. At 48 inches away, you have reached the sweet spot where the dithering artifacts resolve into a smooth image, allowing you to fully enjoy the panel's massive color volume and 165Hz gaming performance without distraction.

The G5 is expected to drop in price late summer/early fall, and by black friday probably $1300 to $1400, or cheaper on greentoe maybe if you are comfortable using that, or if you qualify for military, medical, 1st respoonder, edu discounts at LG partner store it might be equal to or cheaper than best buy at that point. (It's currently showing at $1699 w/ LG discount for the 55" G5)

The C6 being newer is higher relative price, so maybe $1399 to $1450 in 3months, and maybe down to $1100 - $1150 black friday through xmas sales. (It's currently showing at $1599 w/ discount on LG store) .

==================================================

elvn · Jun 6, 2026

Out of piqued interest in the alienware you mentioned, here is google's new breakdown for comparison's sake :

==========================================
Google's sourced results pasted:
==========================================

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

The newly announced Alienware AW3926QW introduces a major shift to the ultra-wide monitor sector. It is built around a cutting-edge 39" 5K2K LG Tandem OLED panel featuring a true RGB stripe subpixel layout, completely eliminating text fringing issues while elevating peak luminance performance. [1, 2]

The following updated breakdown integrates this display into the exact window category matrix.

Window Brightness Comparison (Nits)

Display [1, 2, 3, 4]	10% Window	25% Window	50% Window	75% Window	100% Window
55" LG G6 OLED	EDIT: Peak: 1% ~3,000 Peak 10% similar to G5 atm*	Peak: ~1,350 Sustained: ~750	Peak: ~680 Sustained: ~520	Peak: ~490 Sustained: ~430	Peak: ~420 Sustained: ~400
55" LG G5 OLED	Peak: ~2,300 - 2,500 Sustained: ~950	Peak: ~1,200 Sustained: ~820	Peak: ~710 Sustained: ~600	Peak: ~540 Sustained: ~490	Peak: ~471 Sustained: ~430
48" LG C6 (Tandem)	Peak: ~1,438 - 1,500 Sustained: ~800	Peak: ~694 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~389 Sustained: ~300	Peak: ~287 Sustained: ~250	Peak: ~245 Sustained: ~180 - 200
Alienware AW3926QW	Peak: ~1,300 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~650 Sustained: ~400	Peak: ~380 Sustained: ~320	Peak: ~340 Sustained: ~300	Peak: ~300 Sustained: ~300 (Uniform Mode)
45" 45GX950A Monitor	Peak: ~900 - 1,000 Sustained: ~600	Peak: ~673 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~350 Sustained: ~280	Peak: ~290 Sustained: ~260	Peak: ~270 - 275 Sustained: ~250
48" LG CX OLED	Peak: ~810 Sustained: ~680	Peak: ~460 Sustained: ~410	Peak: ~310 Sustained: ~280	Peak: ~190 Sustained: ~175	Peak: ~150 Sustained: ~140

Key Brightness Insights on the Alienware AW3926QW

The Small Window Paradox Solved (10%): While the AW3926QW features a multi-stack Tandem panel like the G6 and C6 televisions, its monitor-specific controller clamps small 10% bursts down to ~1,300 nits. This is lower than the C6 TV's peak but delivers a more uniform, long-lasting highlight curve that is less prone to aggressive, sudden thermal dimming. [1, 2]
Dominating the 100% Canvas: Thanks to its dedicated monitor tuning and an aggressive "Uniform Brightness" fallback option, the Alienware monitor maintains a dead-flat 300 nits across a 100% full-screen window. It easily edges out the 45" 45GX950A (~270 nits) and vastly surpasses the 48" C6 TV (~200 nits) for full-screen web browsing or spreadsheet applications. [1, 2, 3]
Linear Tracking vs. ABL Shock: In games with dynamic environments, the AW3926QW tracks between a 25% and 75% window far more linearly than the televisions. It acts as an upgrade over the 45GX950A, giving you a brighter average picture level across mid-toned outdoor gaming scenes without the harsh "brightness pumping" artifacts common to aggressive TV processing algorithms. [1, 2]

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

elvn · Jun 6, 2026

I think the resolution of the alienware is good, and it's brightness windows momentary/sustained would be fine if comparing to the C6.

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

Pros to me:

...the 5120x2160 resolution , desktop/app real estate, and uw gaming aspect.

.. OLED

--alienware is full glossy I think

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

Pros for others that make practically no gains for my usage scenario :

... for desktop/app users : pure RGB, no white subpixel

....they can slap it right onto a desk instead of mounting separately and requiring more space

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

Neutrals:

...165Hz

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

Cons:

.. ironically since most people want small desk mounted screens, the screen size is a bit small for me. I'd rather have it be 45" like the LG gx950a. The LG gx950a is 18.1" tall w/o stand, and my 48 CX is 24.3 inch tall. While nearer viewing distance makes screens effectively larger to your perspective, I really liked the 45" 21:9 screen's fit to my longer viewing distance setup I've become accostomed to .

.. along with a 45" size, the curvature should be 800R so you can sit at the center of curvature with all of the pixels pointed at you along the whole surface of the screen. I loved the format of the LG 45 gx950 even though I didn't like it's PQ, but a big part of that was the fact that I could sit at the center of curvature vs it's large size for immersion and uniformly on-axis pixels all the way to the ends of the screen.

... if it is at 39" size and mounted on a desk, imo it should be curved enough so that the center of curvature is at desk distances. Somewhere between 600 and 700R maybe. 610R would be 24" view distance, 700R would be ~ 28" view distance, (800R around ~ 32" view distance but the screen size at 39 inch diagonal is not optimal for that distance.. 45" 21:9 with 800R at 32inch away was great).

.. still in the old realm of larger window brightnesses, especially sustained. At 50% of screen and larger: ~ 300 ish sustained, sub 400 down to 300 peaks.
.. competes well with the 48" tandem C6 of this thread, but if looking to the G5 as I am currently, it's greatly outclassed in HDR. The G5 and G6 are almost like other tiered OLED screens from 2+ years in the future.

=========================================

The alienware still sounds like it could be a great screen for a lot of people though, especially with that 5120x2160 resolution, and I especially like that it is a glossy oled with that uw for gaming.

I'm still intrigued about what samsung glasses-free 3d will come out with in tandem stack qd-oled eventually, and if they will later release a flagship large format display, perhaps even a curved one, with it .. so whatever I get might just be holding me over for a few years until something like that hits (assuming/hoping the performance on such a display is great when it comes out).

..

MistaSparkul · Jun 6, 2026

I'm just not much of a brightness hog. I know how awesome bright displays can make HDR content look since I have an S95F and 27R94 which are both super bright, but I've never once felt like this over the top level of brightness is absolutely required to enjoy HDR, I just need something better than the levels of the CX and those 1st gen TB400 monitors. I'm pretty sure a DisplayHDR1000 level monitor will be plenty to satisfy me and I would just go for higher and higher Hz after that point. I'll be eyeing something with 5120x2160, 240+Hz, DisplayHDR1000 as my next upgrade from the Alienware. Until then the AW3926QW is definitely going to be a much better monitor so I'm willing to live with the less than ideal HDR performance for the time being.

elvn · Jun 7, 2026

Yes its not ~~required~~ available in my 48CX right now, either.

If the G5 pans out, in some ways I may be jumping from 4 years back levels to a few years forward (from now), hdr output wise.

Still hoping a few years from now that samsung releases a large format tandem stack qd oled with glasses-free 3d (assuming it provides a quality experience). If they could manage to make a curved one work, like the ark format in 48 to 55 inch, or the 45" 5129x2160 21:9 (800R) format even better, it would potentially be an almost quasi VR level of immersion.

elvn · Jun 7, 2026

elvn said:
Out of piqued interest in the alienware you mentioned, here is google's new breakdown for comparison's sake :

==========================================
Google's sourced results pasted:
==========================================

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

The newly announced Alienware AW3926QW introduces a major shift to the ultra-wide monitor sector. It is built around a cutting-edge 39" 5K2K LG Tandem OLED panel featuring a true RGB stripe subpixel layout, completely eliminating text fringing issues while elevating peak luminance performance. [1, 2]

The following updated breakdown integrates this display into the exact window category matrix.

Window Brightness Comparison (Nits)

Display [1, 2, 3, 4] 10% Window 25% Window 50% Window 75% Window 100% Window
55" LG G6 OLED EDIT: Peak: 1% ~3,000
Peak 10% similar to G5 atm Peak: ~1,350
Sustained: ~750 Peak: ~680
Sustained: ~520 Peak: ~490
Sustained: ~430 Peak: ~420
Sustained: ~400
55" LG G5 OLED Peak: ~2,300 - 2,500
Sustained: ~950 Peak: ~1,200
Sustained: ~820 Peak: ~710
Sustained: ~600 Peak: ~540
Sustained: ~490 Peak: ~471
Sustained: ~430
48" LG C6 (Tandem) Peak: ~1,438 - 1,500
Sustained: ~800 Peak: ~694
Sustained: ~450 Peak: ~389
Sustained: ~300 Peak: ~287
Sustained: ~250 Peak: ~245
Sustained: ~180 - 200
Alienware AW3926QW Peak:~1,300
Sustained:~450 Peak:~650
Sustained:~400 Peak:~380
Sustained:~320 Peak:~340
Sustained:~300 Peak:~300
Sustained:~300 (Uniform Mode)
45" 45GX950A Monitor Peak: ~900 - 1,000
Sustained: ~600 Peak: ~673
Sustained: ~450 Peak: ~350
Sustained: ~280 Peak: ~290
Sustained: ~260 Peak: ~270 - 275
Sustained: ~250
48" LG CX OLED Peak: ~810
Sustained: ~680 Peak: ~460
Sustained: ~410 Peak: ~310
Sustained: ~280 Peak: ~190
Sustained: ~175 Peak: ~150
Sustained: ~140

Key Brightness Insights on the Alienware AW3926QW

The Small Window Paradox Solved (10%): While the AW3926QW features a multi-stack Tandem panel like the G6 and C6 televisions, its monitor-specific controller clamps small 10% bursts down to ~1,300 nits. This is lower than the C6 TV's peak but delivers a more uniform, long-lasting highlight curve that is less prone to aggressive, sudden thermal dimming. [1, 2]

Dominating the 100% Canvas: Thanks to its dedicated monitor tuning and an aggressive "Uniform Brightness" fallback option, the Alienware monitor maintains a dead-flat 300 nits across a 100% full-screen window. It easily edges out the 45" 45GX950A (~270 nits) and vastly surpasses the 48" C6 TV (~200 nits) for full-screen web browsing or spreadsheet applications. [1, 2, 3]

Linear Tracking vs. ABL Shock: In games with dynamic environments, the AW3926QW tracks between a 25% and 75% window far more linearly than the televisions. It acts as an upgrade over the 45GX950A, giving you a brighter average picture level across mid-toned outdoor gaming scenes without the harsh "brightness pumping" artifacts common to aggressive TV processing algorithms. [1, 2]

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

Update to that google sourced list of results:

I think it sourced that from these reviews (and maybe a few other places) , where it supposedly got it in a 1% window during testing, so the 10% at 3000 nit figure is probably off for the G6. The first review says 2316 on the 10% window not 3000+.

. . .

https://www.avforums.com/reviews/lg-g6-oled65g6-oled-tv-review.23399

The LG G6's peak brightness measurements demonstrate the capabilities of the new α11 AI Gen 3 Processor. The G6 reaches 3045 nits on a 1% window, 3028 at 2%, 2850 at 5%, and 2316 on the industry-standard 10% window. Full-screen 100% brightness for the G6 measured 432 nits, compared to 332 nits for the G5. The smaller window size results are incredibly impressive as it gives HDR images superb specular highlight capabilities where required, with full screen APL now hitting above 400 nits, which adds excellent dynamic range extension and better high APL performance.

. . .

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1777546841

. .

.

I'd still expect the G series with the heatsink to have appreciably higher numbers than the C6H and the C6, (and the others in that list) as the % windows get larger, and especially sustained, like how it showed the G5 vs the C6H in those tables , though I've heard the G5 is currently a little brighter than the G6 curently, at least until later fw updates hit supposedly.

.

MistaSparkul · Jun 7, 2026

The G5 has diagonal dithering that will never be addressed since it uses the older SoC, I thought that made it completely out of the question for you? Even the C6/G6 still has some form of dithering except it's just a way less noticeable grain effect. That is another reason why I'd rather just go with the Alienware since the white subpixel is causing extra problems that I would rather not live with, at least being RGB stripe it's probably going to be free of the grey banding/uniformity problems typical with WOLED. Yeah we can talk about brightness loss, but I don't care since even WITH the white subpixel in place neither the Alienware nor the C6 is gonna match my 27R94 or S95F anyway. I already have 2 very bright displays as it is I don't need a 3rd.

kalston · Jun 7, 2026

The Alienware looks kinda cool for the price but I'm so terribly used to 48 I can't really see myself downsizing...

I have 32 and 39 inches (ultrawide too) at work and they feel small to me now

I have some big travelling plans for summer anyway so any hardware purchase will be delayed quite a bit, we will see what the monitor/TV landscape looks like by then. Maybe the C6 firmware jank will be fully sorted.

elvn · Jun 7, 2026

MistaSparkul said:
The G5 has diagonal dithering that will never be addressed since it uses the older SoC, I thought that made it completely out of the question for you? Even the C6/G6 still has some form of dithering except it's just a way less noticeable grain effect. That is another reason why I'd rather just go with the Alienware since the white subpixel is causing extra problems that I would rather not live with, at least being RGB stripe it's probably going to be free of the grey banding/uniformity problems typical with WOLED. Yeah we can talk about brightness loss, but I don't care since even WITH the white subpixel in place neither the Alienware nor the C6 is gonna match my 27R94 or S95F anyway. I already have 2 very bright displays as it is I don't need a 3rd.

I've read differing takes on whether it's as visible an annoyance from the 48" away I could manage, or whether it might be visible in your periphery only when eye tracking or whatever. If it drops to around $1350 over black friday through xmas, from a place with a good return policy, like bestbuy, the lg partner store, maybe amazon... I'd be willing to try it . Some say the dithering lines aren't noticeable at 3', some say 5', but they don't typically mention the screen size (and most reviewers and review sites lean toward living room A/V which is larger screens) - so my max view distance might be borderline or good for a 55" model. Jury is still out at this point.

The alienware sounds something like what I would have liked LG 45" gx950a to have been, for starters because it's glossy. The gx950a's format was very immersive and all of the pixels were on axis to me on the gx950a, I just found the PQ unacceptable. If someone like alienware or samsung made a better 45" 800R, it would allow me to sit at 800mm ~32" away at the center of curvature , so it would be more appealing to me.

. . . .

Since the peak Hz is limited on most of these screens to 165 Hz, and I don't really use my gaming/media screen for static desktop/app use much (and even when I do, at ~ 70 PPD oled text fringing isn't really an issue to me) - the remaining factors are things like:

.. Hz = non (considering capabilities of suitable screens to me available currently)

..HDR brightness per % screen area (window) . the fact that better capability there shows more bright colors and so more detail in colors/objects. How annoyingly dim windowed things get when run larger would not be quite as bad on something like a G5 as well, especially as compared to my 48cx
.
..screen size. Like kalston, I prefer larger screens, even if smaller screens can look somewhat larger to your perspective when you sit closer. (Also, I have large side screens and would rather not have to buy smaller ones for the sides, requiring me to completely change my setup).

..screen size vs curvature/view distance ~ ability to keep all of the pixel on axis. 1500 R is not it for me. 1500R(adius) = 1500mm = an inch short of 5 feet to the center of curvature. Barely curved at all compared to a lot of curved screens, a short arc of a 10' diameter circle, and at only 16.5 inches tall vs that 59 inches so sitting farther away wouldn't make sense. That's how I look at it, anyway.

..resolution. Alienware AW3926QW's rez is great, and the fact that it can do an uw format. Maybe some 6k 16:9's will come out at some point though, maybe 6144 × 3456 pixels at 16:9 could do an uw rez when shortended on a 16:9 well enough. As I said, to me, the Alienware AW3926QW might as well be flat.

For reference, the 48cx is around
24.1 " high
42.2 " wide
- and I sit around 40 inches away from it, which gets 70 PPD and a 55 deg viewing angle width

LG 45 gx950a was
18.1 " high
39.0 " wide
800R (800mm = ~ 32 inch to center of curvature.
- which at 32 inch view distance gets 77.7 PPD.

Alienware AW3926QW
15" high
35.5 " wide
1500R = 1500mm = ~ 59 inch to center of curvature, short arc of a huge circle, barely curved

..........................

For the time frame nearer to the end of this year , I'm really looking for something large format, near the $1350 I paid for the LG Gx950a on sale/discount before I returned it.

Hopefully some worthy large format screen comes out from a major player in a few years, potentially samsung glasses-free 3D on multi-stack tandem oled tech they are wokring on (but in a new flagship large format screen / UW at some point). If they managed to make a ark-like 1000R or a ~ 45" 800R at higher than 4k resolutions, even better. Maybe they'll have higher hz , too. Would probably be pretty expensive but for something like that it would probably be worth it.

elvn · Jun 8, 2026

I still think the C6 is a good option, and if it comes down closer to $1000 - $1100 someday in the future it would be a great deal .. but if the G5 didn't work out for me I'd rather the alienware aw3926qw was larger. Otherwise I can see where the alienware would be desirable as it is somewhat comparable output in a lot of % windows as the C6, but at 5120x2160, which is ultrawide for games even if to me it's essentially flat.

elvn · Jun 8, 2026

Google blurb between those three :
=================================

Window Brightness Comparison (Nits)

Display	10% Window	25% Window	50% Window	75% Window	100% Window
55" LG G5 OLED	Peak: ~2,300 - 2,500 Sustained: ~950	Peak: ~1,200 Sustained: ~820	Peak: ~710 Sustained: ~600	Peak: ~540 Sustained: ~490	Peak: ~471 Sustained: ~430
48" LG C6 (Tandem)	Peak: ~1,438 - 1,500 Sustained: ~800	Peak: ~694 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~389 Sustained: ~300	Peak: ~287 Sustained: ~250	Peak: ~245 Sustained: ~180 - 200
Alienware AW3926QW	Peak: ~1,300 Sustained: ~450	Peak: ~650 Sustained: ~400	Peak: ~380 Sustained: ~320	Peak: ~340 Sustained: ~300	Peak: ~300 Sustained: ~300 (Uniform)

Key Takeaways for This Specific Matchup

The G5's Full-Canvas Dominance: The G5 remains a heavy hitter for large windows. At 100% full screen, its sustained ~430 nits leaves both the C6 TV (~180–200 nits) and the Alienware monitor (~300 nits) behind. It is the most resilient against aggressive auto-dimming during bright scenes.
C6 vs. Alienware Burst Highlight War: For small 10% highlight bursts, the 48" C6 TV pushes significantly harder (~1,500 nits) than the Alienware monitor (~1,300 nits). This gives the C6 a punchier, more dynamic HDR presentation for small light sources like sparks or flashlights.
The Alienware Uniform Advantage: Despite lower peak bursts, the Alienware monitor stabilizes heavily past the 50% window mark. Thanks to its monitor firmware tuning, its 100% window sustained output matches its peak output at 300 nits, offering a flat, predictable canvas for mixed desktop use that won't fluctuate in brightness as you resize PC windows.

=======================================

(from me) :

*Can't overlook the gains of 5120x2160 desktop/app real estate and especially that rez and 21:9 aspect ratio being desirable for gaming though.

.

MistaSparkul · Jun 8, 2026

From yesterday:

So no red shift, no black crush, and HGiG works properly now. Supposedly an upcoming firmware will address some brightness issues on the G6. Looks like 2026 LG OLED owners are in good hands.

elvn · Jun 9, 2026

One of the remaining issues is the dirty blacks, noise/grain in dark scenes, reportedly still there after that last update.. Someone on avsforum speculated that it might be inherent to the tandem tech. I don't remember hearing that it's ever been a problem on tandem monitors, but a google search result claims it is, and that it's due to the way the tech works.

. . . google sourced results . . . .

=======================================
Monitors

Current Tandem OLED monitors can exhibit "dirty blacks," vertical banding (often called Dirty Screen Effect or DSE), and near-black grain in dark scenes. These issues typically only appear in very dark, near-black content (<1 nit) and are generally caused by the electrical driving currents required to power the dual-layer OLED stack.

Key Characteristics of Tandem OLED in Dark Scenes

Vertical Banding & DSE: Many users report visible vertical streaks or blotchy patches when displaying dark gray test patterns (e.g., 5% gray screens). While these patterns highlight the issue, it can occasionally be distracting in games or movies with dark, foggy, or shadowed environments.

Black Crush: Due to the steep perceptual cliff at the bottom of the display's gamma curve, very low luminance levels can cause fine shadow details to completely collapse into true black, sometimes making it difficult to see dark-scene details.

Grain & Noise: In near-dark content, some users notice a grainy or dirty texture. However, it is highly recommended to double-check the source material, as video compression and low bit-rate streaming often produce heavy artifacting in dark scenes that can easily be mistaken for monitor noise.

How to Mitigate & Test

Break-in Period: Many uniformity issues, including banding and grain, frequently improve or disappear after a "break-in" period of roughly 100 hours of continuous use.

Pixel Refreshes: Running manual pixel refresh/clean cycles (available in your monitor's OSD menu) helps the panel settle and can dramatically improve uniformity.

Refresh Rate Tuning: Artifacting in dark scenes on Tandem OLEDs is known to be refresh-rate dependent. Some users have reported that lowering the monitor's refresh rate can lessen banding artifacts during dark content.

Proper Calibration: Ensure your monitor's brightness is not set too low or your in-game gamma is not too high, as this exacerbates black crush.

===========================================

TVs

Current Tandem OLED TVs (like the LG G5, G6, and C6) can exhibit visible noise, grain, and "dirty blacks" or near-black banding in dark scenes. While OLEDs can achieve infinite contrast, they struggle slightly when resolving very low-luminance voltage steps (like dark gray to black).

Breaking Down the Dark Scene Issues

Near-Black Noise ("Dancing Pixels"): Because the white subpixel is difficult to power precisely, panels will dither to represent low RGB values. In very dark scenes, this can appear as snow-like or "mosquito" noise.

Vertical Banding ("Dirty Blacks"): The multi-layered panels used on modern Tandem and WOLED models can exhibit subtle vertical bands during dark, panning shots.

Black Crush: Due to the steep perceptual gamma cliff in very dark areas, shadow textures can occasionally blend into a crushed, undetailed black.

How They Compare

LG G6 and C6: Both models use LG's latest Tandem OLED technology and Alpha 11 processors, which feature 12-bit/13-bit color processing to dramatically smooth out banding and near-black artifacts compared to earlier generations.

LG G5: As the preceding model, the G5 exhibits more noticeable dithering (snow-like noise) and black crush, though it maintains inky, vibrant contrast.

Mitigating the Issues
If you notice near-black noise or banding, several practices can help:

Run a Pixel Refresher: These panels are prone to uniformity issues out of the box, but running a manual pixel refresh/cleaning cycle often clears up vertical banding.

Adjust Shadow Detail: Slightly raising the brightness or using gamma/black floor offsets in your TV settings can push the darkest pixels out of the critical near-black range, revealing more detail.

Source Material Matters: Much of what appears to be "TV noise" is often compressed streaming artifacts (such as from Netflix or Prime Video). Watching high-bitrate physical 4K Blu-rays minimizes this significantly

============================================

elvn · Jun 9, 2026

MistaSparkul said:
From yesterday:

View attachment 807953

So no red shift, no black crush, and HGiG works properly now. Supposedly an upcoming firmware will address some brightness issues on the G6. Looks like 2026 LG OLED owners are in good hands.

Someone in that thread is claiming that the black issues (grain in dark scenes, specifically) are still there. He didn't say this part - but maybe the latest firmware reduced how bad it is, adjusting the curve to reduce how prominent it appears?.

"Hi, unfortunately the grain is still there in dark scenes. I had the same problem on the G5, unfortunately it has never been solved."

.

MistaSparkul · Jun 9, 2026

elvn said:
Someone in that thread is claiming that the black issues (grain in dark scenes, specifically) are still there. He didn't say this part - but maybe the latest firmware reduced how bad it is, adjusting the curve to reduce how prominent it appears?.

.

I don't know what he's talking about because it's been proven multiple times by multiple people that the G6 does not use the same dithering as the G5. It's never been solved on the G5 and it can't be but the G6 is not the same. Unless he's just pointing out that in general there is still grain in dark scenes even on the G6.

EDIT: Reading some of the prior posts for context and it seems like he's just saying that yes grain effect is still there in dark scenes and obviously it's not going to go away as this is LG's solution for dealing with near black issues with the white subpixel.

Vega · Jun 10, 2026

MistaSparkul said:
As an S95F owner I'll just caution you that it's got it's own share of software issues. I didn't bother posting about them anywhere on here because there is no dedicated thread for it and there is probably only 1 or 2 other S95F owners anyway (Everyone else still seems to be on the LG CX ) . Over the AVSForums though there are two dedicated threads on the S95F and you can learn more about the issues there. This is why I am keeping an eye on the 48 C6 myself since I might replace the S95F with it since it suits PC monitor use better due to the smaller size, RGWB subpixel structure, and I prefer glossy coatings. While the only downside I would be facing is a small hit to HDR brightness from 2000 nits down to 1500 nits which isn't too bad.

Since you've been deep-diving those AVSForum threads, any new thoughts on the 55" S95H versus the 48" C6? I've been wracking my brain, as they both have pro's and con's. The 48" C6 is a better size for the desk and glossy, but the S95H has much brighter HDR/volume but matte. And I'm a color volume whore.

zehoo · Jun 10, 2026

Vega said:
And I'm a color volume whore.

50" Bravia 7 ii? Of course you'd have to lose the oled blacks and pixel response.

MistaSparkul · Jun 10, 2026

Vega said:
Since you've been deep-diving those AVSForum threads, any new thoughts on the 55" S95H versus the 48" C6? I've been wracking my brain, as they both have pro's and con's. The 48" C6 is a better size for the desk and glossy, but the S95H has much brighter HDR/volume but matte. And I'm a color volume whore.

Oh man yeah that is a tough decision. I mean in terms of sheer picture quality it's definitely not gonna be close, real question is whether or not you can tolerate Samsung's polarizing design choice with the S95H along with the matte coating. As long as you can and you're willing to have another display for desktop/monitor use then I'd probably lean towards the S95H (that along with the upcoming 4K 360Hz QD OLED seems like the perfect duo IMO). The color bug on the S95H is confirmed to be fixed and I think they also managed to address the flashing blue artifact that occurs at 165Hz as well. If you absolutely only want to have a single display then I guess the 48 C6 is the better overall choice but it's still not optimal since refresh rate is on the low side and size is slightly on the larger end too. I'm going with the Alienware AW3926QW for my primary monitor use while keeping the S95F for any games where I just really need to have the best HDR.

TLDR: I say go with the S95H if you're willing to have a multi display setup, C6 if you really want a single display for everything. But since the C6 doesn't seem like the best overall choice for a single display setup I would lean towards multi displays.

DooLocsta · Thursday at 8:02 AM

Vega said:
Since you've been deep-diving those AVSForum threads, any new thoughts on the 55" S95H versus the 48" C6? I've been wracking my brain, as they both have pro's and con's. The 48" C6 is a better size for the desk and glossy, but the S95H has much brighter HDR/volume but matte. And I'm a color volume whore.

I can't go back to matte. Glossy was a game-changer for me. I want the C6, but until the C2 I have now has any issues, I am holding off.

elvn · Thursday at 8:48 AM

MistaSparkul said:
Oh man yeah that is a tough decision. I mean in terms of sheer picture quality it's definitely not gonna be close, real question is whether or not you can tolerate Samsung's polarizing design choice with the S95H along with the matte coating. As long as you can and you're willing to have another display for desktop/monitor use then I'd probably lean towards the S95H (that along with the upcoming 4K 360Hz QD OLED seems like the perfect duo IMO). The color bug on the S95H is confirmed to be fixed and I think they also managed to address the flashing blue artifact that occurs at 165Hz as well. If you absolutely only want to have a single display then I guess the 48 C6 is the better overall choice but it's still not optimal since refresh rate is on the low side and size is slightly on the larger end too. I'm going with the Alienware AW3926QW for my primary monitor use while keeping the S95F for any games where I just really need to have the best HDR.

TLDR: I say go with the S95H if you're willing to have a multi display setup, C6 if you really want a single display for everything. But since the C6 doesn't seem like the best overall choice for a single display setup I would lean towards multi displays.

Good writeup. You are a good source to ask since you have a modern samsung matte OLED.

DooLocsta said:
I can't go back to matte. Glossy was a game-changer for me. I want the C6, but until the C2 I have now has any issues, I am holding off.

While I would love glossy forever, if samsung comes out with a glasses-free 3d tandem oled which steps up to a large format display in a few years (if that 3d works amazingly), especially if at somewhat higher Hz, (and maybe even curved if they can pull it off with the oled's wider angle capability) - I'd probably suffer the tradeoff for it, begrudgingly. However, as long as there are comparable screens that are glossy, I'll pick glossy.

MistaSparkul said:
upcoming 4K 360Hz QD OLED

on the C6

MistaSparkul said:
it's still not optimal since refresh rate is on the low side

.

I hope someday they start releasing large format (OLED, tandem stack OLED) screens that are 240 - 360 Hz instead of them being mostly 27" and 32" now. Even the 45gx950a (which is fairly large format, similar to a 36" 16:9 screen's height) was "only" 165hz, and the 39" alienware coming out (which I don't consider large format really, being similar height to a 32" screen), is 165Hz as well..

. .

elvn · Thursday at 12:10 PM

MistaSparkul said:
48 C6 is the better overall choice but it's still not optimal since refresh rate is on the low side

I agree about 165Hz but most screens higher are 32" 16:9 height or smaller. Higher would be great for blur reduction and motion definition gains, but it's not going to do much if anything for playing online games once you go past 160fpsHz.

. . .

160fpsHz average is enough to match a 128 tick server in your 10% lows where those 10% lows are then 128fpsHz. It's good to have the smallest temporal gap online in relation to seeing the newest scene state as soon as possible, and how that translates to targeting and initiating timely actions.

Higher than having 128fpsHz as your lows (or .1% lows best case, running 180fpsHz or up to 200fpsHz average) - isn't going to reduce that 72ms any more in regard to online gaming, so you aren't going to be gaining in regard to gaming on an online server by going a lot farther than ~ 163 fpsHz cap for example, to playing at 240fpsHz+ on a higher hz screen. LAN competition would be different. Online gaming, on a 128 tick server, when you are at very high fpsHz on a very high HZ monitor, your local game will just predict frames and show you manufactured/interpolated frames in the meantime until the next server tick resets reality as needed. Servers do "rewind time" to check for aiming, but it's done at tick-clock granularity.

Lag Compensation & Visual Errors Matrix (Adjusted for Server Latency Floor) playing on a 128 tick server

Note: Even at 128 FPS, 140 FPS, or 160 FPS, your local client cannot bypass the laws of physics over the internet. You will still experience the base ~72ms temporal gap (caused by your network ping, server tick processing, and engine translation delays). Higher framerates only minimize your local hardware slice of that delay.

Client / Network Profile
(native/post-DLSS) Peeker's Advantage Vulnerability "Super Bullets" Compression Rubberbanding & Prediction Snapping Local Client Simulation & Frame Prediction Cons of the "Visual Lie" (Prediction Errors)
60 FPS Client (~100ms Total Window) Severe. Attackers see you instantly. You remain blind until their data clears your massive 100ms pipeline. High. Multiple fast server updates compress into a single slow monitor frame, causing instant-death illusions. Violent Snaps. Massive temporal gaps cause heavy divergence between local client prediction and server truth. Extrapolating in the Dark. Client must predict movement across ~16.67ms chunks between ticks. High likelihood of predicting completely wrong trajectories. Phantom Targets. Enemies appear to continue running in a straight line for multiple frames when they actually stopped or changed direction, causing you to aim at a "ghost."
80 FPS Client (~87ms Total Window) Moderate. Slightly reduced blind window, but still easily abused by high-framerate opponents. Medium. Less severe packet grouping, but rapid-fire bursts can still merge into single-frame deaths. Noticeable Skips. Jarring position corrections occur when your local engine syncs back up with the host server. Chunky Prediction. Client interpolates and predicts in 12.5ms intervals. Visuals feel smoother than 60 FPS, but prediction errors are still highly visible. Mismatched Hitboxes. The visual model of the enemy desyncs from their actual server hitbox during rapid strafing, making perfectly aimed shots miss entirely.
128 FPS Client (~72ms Total Window) Baseline Online Delay. Still suffers from the core ~72ms network/server gap. Attackers still hold a standard online advantage. Non-Existent. Frame loop matches server ticks, ensuring each distinct shot registers and displays independently. Micro-Stutters. Minor, tight position adjustments due to high-frequency, real-time data streaming. 1:1 Server Sync. The client simulation loop perfectly matches the 128-tick server interval (~7.81ms). The engine rarely has to predict "blindly." Standard Online Desync. Visual errors are minimized locally, but enemies will still micro-warp over the ~72ms network void during sudden, erratic direction changes.
140 FPS Client (~71ms Total Window) Server-Capped. Still bound by the ~72ms network/server floor. Network alignment is identical to 128 FPS; local rendering shaves off an extra ~0.7ms of visual delay. Zero Compression. Local loop outpaces the server tickrate, guaranteeing zero frame-level damage stacking. Instantaneous. Near-invisible micro-shifts since your local prediction state stays tightly locked to real-time. Micro-Prediction. Client outputs frames slightly faster (~7.14ms) than the server ticks. The engine predicts the sub-millisecond gap smoothly. Persistent ~72ms Void. You render smoothly between server ticks, but because you are still playing ~72ms in the past, rapid jiggle-peeking still causes enemies to minutely "shiver" when server data catches up.
160 FPS Client (~69ms Total Window) Local Edge Only. Still trapped behind the ~72ms network/server bottleneck. Network advantage equals 128 FPS; local rendering shaves off ~1.5ms of visual lag for faster muscle reactions. Ultra-Fluid. Local frames exceed server updates, ensuring absolute visual separation of distinct damage events. Flawless Recovery. Positional corrections are virtually seamless because your local state minimizes frame-time variance. Oversampling Optimization. Client predicts and renders at a rapid ~6.25ms interval. Local camera panning and player movement feel incredibly fluid. Fluid Disconnect. Your screen updates with extreme fluidity, but the underlying world data is still ~72ms old. Fast-moving items like thrown utility or ragdolls will look jittery when they snap back to the actual 72ms-delayed server timeline.
LAN / Local Player (<10ms Total Window) Non-Existent. Zero network delay. Defending is perfectly fair, and holding angles is entirely viable. Pure Reality. Sub-millisecond local server transit completely prevents network damage grouping or packet stacking. Eliminated. The client and server remain in permanent lockstep, meaning the engine never needs to force a correction. Absolute Sync. Prediction systems are entirely redundant. The client receives raw physics data from the local host instantly. None. What you see is exactly what the server calculates. There is no "visual lie" because there are no missing network gaps to fill.

. . . .

What higher fpsHz will do, on a higher Hz screen, is reduce the FoV movement blur more . .. (240fpsHz has half that of 120fpsHz, 480fpsHz has half that of 240fpsHz) ... .and it will also increase the motion definition/pathing articulation/smoothness/animation states - of your local simulation - , making it look and feel aesthetically better. However, frames shown ahead of the tick rate are interpolated/predicted, so it's not a 1:1 relationship to the server, and the server is the ultimate authority each time it's tick arrives.

140fpsHz or 160fpsHz (post dlss quality upscale to get to those 140 or 160 fpsHz rates at 4k, for example) - is also only 7.14ms or 6.25ms of rendering latency, so is pretty great for responsiveness in single player games locally.

Adding framegen will add a lot of latency, so those rates are at least more reasonable post x2 or 4x framegen, too. (The Hand-toEye Responsiveness column below's descriptions may be more of a personal take to each person, though, I'd think). With a 165Hz limit screen, and considering the impact of framegen, I'd rather just run 120fpsHz or 140fpsHz native (post DLSS) personally. I'd use framegen more if I ever got a 240Hz or higher screen.

Real-World Latency Chart (Input-Lag Sensitive Perspective)

Visual Output Rate Underlying Engine Base Avg Latency (No Reflex) Avg Latency (Reflex ON) Hand-to-Eye Responsiveness (Sensitive Player)
80 FPS (Native) 80 FPS ~38.00 ms 12.50 ms Acceptable baseline (Borderline noticeable delay)
120 FPS (Native) 120 FPS ~26.00 ms 8.33 ms Ultra-snappy ("True raw input")
140 FPS (Native) 140 FPS ~21.00 ms 7.14 ms "Flawless" and "instantaneous"
160 FPS (Native) 160 FPS ~18.00 ms 6.25 ms Elite tier ("Perfect" direct response)
160 FPS (via x2 FG) 80 FPS Base ~48.50 ms 28.50 ms Noticeable Lag (Heavy mouse, unplayable for FPS)
240 FPS (via x2 FG) 120 FPS Base ~35.66 ms 19.66 ms ⚠ Passable (Fluid visuals, but feels "soft" or filtered)
280 FPS (via x2 FG) 140 FPS Base ~29.78 ms 16.78 ms Good (Minor input smoothing detected, but usable)
320 FPS (via x2 FG) 160 FPS Base ~25.00 ms 15.00 ms Great (Very hard to distinguish from raw input)
320 FPS (via x4 FG) 80 FPS Base ~56.00 ms 32.00 ms Severe Disconnect (Massive desync between eyes and hands)
480 FPS (via x4 FG) 120 FPS Base ~42.66 ms 22.66 ms Deceptive Sluggishness (Looks like 480Hz, feels like 45 FPS)
560 FPS (via x4 FG) 140 FPS Base ~36.78 ms 19.78 ms ⚠ Passable (On the absolute edge of feeling "mushy")
640 FPS (via x4 FG) 160 FPS Base ~32.00 ms 18.00 ms Good (Extreme visual fluidity masks the minor lag filter)

. . .

The reason I'd seek screens with Hz way beyond 165fpsHz (post dlss quality, native) is the motion blur reduction and motion definition aesthetics rather than how it relates to an online gaming server. That is a good reason to seek it though, and it's very desirable, especially for local games where you could apply multi frame gen to reach that higher fpsHz. However, the HDR PQ on gaming TVs is typically way better than gaming monitors, and I prefer larger format screens than 27" to 32" ... so to me, I feel that something like a modern LG OLED gaming TV's HDR capabilities across all % windows while providing 165Hz would be a better trade-off than 240hz+ on a less HDR capable, smaller gaming "monitor", at least for what's available now. Maybe some flagship large format higher Hz OLED from samsung or others will come out in a few years with comparable HDR output/PQ though.

That said, I'd want the 144hz and 165hz modes to work properly if dropping money on any of these LG OLEDs, so I'm trying to follow along to see if/when they do since there have been issues to iron out at 165Hz apparently, like color issues. They may have fixed that but I've only seen one or two short replies about it from random people since the last fw update.

==========================================

Vega said:
<....> I'm a color volume whore.

That's why I'm looking at the G5 and G6, though I'd have to go up to 55", and sit at my max 48 inches away that my current setup could allow. The G5 has dithering lines, but the jury is out whether they are visible from 48" (4 feet) away vs. a 55" screen size. People online have said that they are not noticeable once you are either 3' or 5' away (reports vary) - but they are usually talking about larger living room tvs in media rooms. I don't know that there has been any testing of it to nail it down. Hopefully it won't be overtly visible from 4' away (but eye tracking/darting your eyes around the screen might make it appear a bit in your periphery when at a borderline distance?). Will have to see if I end up scoring a G5 on sale later on in the months ahead - from somewhere with a good return policy.

MistaSparkul · Thursday at 12:56 PM

elvn said:
I agree about 165Hz but most screens higher are 32" 16:9 height or smaller. Higher would be great for blur reduction and motion definition gains, but it's not going to do much if anything for playing online games once you go past 160fpsHz.

I'm not talking about online gaming though, 165hz in general is on the low side compared to the refresh rates we are now seeing today with monitors breaking into the 1000Hz territory. Heck I even consider 240Hz to be on the low side nowadays, and again this has nothing to do with getting some sort of competitive advantage for online gaming. I do none of that anymore and I still want higher refresh rates because they are simply better to play on, MFG will one day be good enough to comfortably use the 3x and 4x modes and target 360Hz+, for now I'm ok with 165Hz using 2x FG. I would not upgrade from 165Hz to 240Hz though, I already have both in my set up and the jump isn't worth it at all. I will be looking to upgrade from 165Hz to 360Hz at the minimum.

elvn · Thursday at 1:07 PM

Yeah I hear that. I was just showing both sides of it since it's often thrown into arguments about it. I know vega played a lot of battelfield online, too.

I play mostly single player games but that includes, among other things, souls-likes (which may have some online play invasions or co-op,depending), and occasionally I get really into a good co-op game title playing online... but co-op games in general have really low (poor) tick rates anyway, not 128 tick. Most co-op games are 30tick other than a few like helldivers' or warhammer:darktide's dedicated servers being 60 tick.

. . .

The frame render latency at 140 or 160fpsHz (post dlss quality, but no frame gen) is pretty decent though imo, for single player games.

I'd love to be able to run these on a 240hz or 360hz, 500hz screen (large format, high hdr PQ one someyear I hope) - for the blur reduction and motion definition increases:

native, post dlss quality :......140 (7.14ms) ...or ...160 (6.25ms)
post frame gen x2 :..............280 (16.78ms)..or ...320 (15.00ms)
post frame gen x4 :..............560 (19.78ms)..or ...640 (18.00ms)

.

edit.. added more with a framegen x3 category:

native, post dlss quality :......120 (8.33ms) ...or ...140 (7.14ms) ...or ...160 (6.25ms)
post frame gen x2 :..............240 (18.56ms)..or ...280 (16.78ms)..or ...320 (15.00ms)
post frame gen x3 :..............360 (20.06ms)..or ...420 (18.28ms)..or ...480 (16.50ms)
post frame gen x4 :..............480 (21.56ms)..or ...560 (19.78ms)..or ...640 (18.00ms)

.

MistaSparkul · Thursday at 1:18 PM

360Hz is probably going to be good enough for me as an endgame even though it's nowhere near the magic 1000Hz figure since I'm mostly playing games where I'm not panning the camera around super fast.

Playing games recently like RE: Requiem and Death Stranding 2, the speed at which I'm looking around makes even 240Hz look good enough.

LG 48C6 OLED48C6PUA evo AI C6 4K Smart TV 2026

Gawd

Supreme [H]ardness

2[H]4U

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Gawd

Weaksauce

Supreme [H]ardness

Gawd

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

[H]ard|Gawd

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Gawd

Supreme [H]ardness

[H]ard|Gawd

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness

Supreme [H]ardness