42" OLED MASTER THREAD

Frameless said:
Way to ruin a monitor making it have anti-glare filter Asus. All top of the line TVs are glossy. There is a reason for that, the matte filter traps light, making the picture dull and perceived contrast bad.

Click to expand...

Hard disagree with this video. He even raves about glossy laptop displays and I LOATHE them with every fiber of my being.
 
There are good “glossy” AR coatings that are not matte and like another poster mentioned are used on high end Samsung TVs, that let you have your cake and eat it too. Never seen it used on a monitor though..
 
ORFJackal said:
So many promising displays, finally. 🥰 The time to upgrade from my trusty old Philips BDM4065UC (whose top-row backlight LEDs are occasionally flickering but not yet burned out) is approaching. Maybe Q4 this year.

I'm especially curious about the upcoming QD-OLED panels, since they should be better than RGBW for PC productivity use. Hopefully someone will use it on a 40"-42" 16:9 4K display instead of ultrawide. The limited vertical resolution of ultrawides is a disadvantage when looking at code or big spreadsheets.
Click to expand...
I'm still rocking a 3007WFP. One of my best purchases ever, even though the price seemed crazy at the time. Having 2560x1600 30" when everybody else was still on single 19" 1920x1080 monitors was a massive productivity win. It's crazy that a computer component has lasted me over 15 years. I've been wanting to upgrade for a while to get 4K and enable video cards without DVI, but it's been tough finding something acceptable. Many monitors have been close, but when your baseline is it being able to stay acceptable for 15 years, it's got to be pretty much compromise free. I'm really hoping that a 42" OLED is that for me. Although 15 years out of an OLED might be pushing things, it does seem to be hit that "compromise-free" marker for me.
 
res said:
LG C2 and still no display port...
Click to expand...
DP is a standard from a different governing body, and is never going to gain significant traction in the TV space as a result. Also consider there's more to supporting DP then just the connector; there's a ton of SW work that needs to be implemented that LG and other TV manufactures don't want to bother with.
 
Pastuch said:
Hard disagree with this video. He even raves about glossy laptop displays and I LOATHE them with every fiber of my being.
Click to expand...
Glossy versus matte is a never ending debate, it's all preference.

I love glossy, as in the right environment it makes the colours and contrast so much nicer. But that's me.
 
KazeoHin said:
Glossy versus matte is a never ending debate, it's all preference.
Click to expand...

It is not preference, it is objective. Glossy is superior in every way, except when a lot of light is involved, than it is inferior in every way. It is just that black and white.

The best compromise is an antireflective coating, good for everything, excellent in none. It is just all gray then.
 
res said:
It is not preference, it is objective. Glossy is superior in every way, except when a lot of light is involved, than it is inferior in every way. It is just that black and white.

The best compromise is an antireflective coating, good for everything, excellent in none. It is just all gray then.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this statement because even in a mostly dark room I can see reflections in a glossy display. Laptops on airplanes for example, even on overnight flights the reflections are irritating.
 
bryanlasren said:
I'm still rocking a 3007WFP. One of my best purchases ever, even though the price seemed crazy at the time. Having 2560x1600 30" when everybody else was still on single 19" 1920x1080 monitors was a massive productivity win. It's crazy that a computer component has lasted me over 15 years. I've been wanting to upgrade for a while to get 4K and enable video cards without DVI, but it's been tough finding something acceptable. Many monitors have been close, but when your baseline is it being able to stay acceptable for 15 years, it's got to be pretty much compromise free. I'm really hoping that a 42" OLED is that for me. Although 15 years out of an OLED might be pushing things, it does seem to be hit that "compromise-free" marker for me.
Click to expand...

You will be amazed going from the 3007WFP to 4K let alone a 42. I upgraded a long time ago to 1440P but my dual 2405’s 1600x1200 are still working. I tried the 40” 4K Samsung but could not handle 60Hz. I can’t wait for these.
 
Pastuch said:
I don't agree with this statement because even in a mostly dark room I can see reflections in a glossy display. Laptops on airplanes for example, even on overnight flights the reflections are irritating.
Click to expand...

Yea, I like glossy but even in my dark room I've still had to cover a lot of LEDs from various devices (including surround speakers) because the reflections on my CX were pissing me off in dark scenes.
 
Glossy provides best image quality, but I'd prefer matte. The less reflections the better.
 
Even in a completely dark room you're still going to see yourself in the reflection of a glossy screen because it's emitting light onto your body.

This is why if you're truly an [H] gamer you paint your face in Black 3.0, the blackest paint in the world. You can enjoy the best image quality possible with no reflections at all.

Make sure you take photos with you at your battle station and post them to social media.
 
sharknice said:
Even in a completely dark room you're still going to see yourself in the reflection of a glossy screen because it's emitting light onto your body.

This is why if you're truly an [H] gamer you paint your face in Black 3.0, the blackest paint in the world. You can enjoy the best image quality possible with no reflections at all.

Make sure you take photos with you at your battle station and post them to social media.
Click to expand...
Also, post pics on your work chat as well. Your manager will be very impressed with your dedication and drive.
 
kasakka said:
I'd say no. OLEDs do have some shift in tint going from the center to the sides. This is not noticeable 99% of the time but it's there and for color critical work could be an issue. I think IPS is still a better bet for color critical stuff.
Click to expand...
Was going to say… I’m no pro but I’d think the WRGB sub pixels could throw off the color balance a little?
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Was going to say… I’m no pro but I’d think the WRGB sub pixels could throw off the color balance a little?
Click to expand...
Maybe. I think OLED looks perfectly fine in terms of colors and I cannot tell a difference to my Samsung CRG9 in SDR content.
 
kasakka said:
Maybe. I think OLED looks perfectly fine in terms of colors and I cannot tell a difference to my Samsung CRG9 in SDR content.
Click to expand...
I’m sure it looks fine. I’m just wondering if there’s some algorithmic processing going on under the hood for color compensation.

Because if you’re calibrating it, and most of its brightness comes from white sub pixels, then you could conceivably hit a scenario where you reach your luminance target but are lacking in color volume. Very similar to DLP projectors with a white section of the color wheel.
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Was going to say… I’m no pro but I’d think the WRGB sub pixels could throw off the color balance a little?
Click to expand...

No. The color logic is built with that in mind. Colors only become less saturated at very high brightness when the RGB can't get bright enough and the W has to kick in disproportionately.

As far as color accuracy goes these are better than any lcd including IPS, especially in regards to viewing angles.

However, I would not use them for something like image editing where you're leaving static images and risking burn in. However, compared to the cost of some of the high end LCDs you could afford to rebuy this TV a few times and maybe it's worth it
 
sharknice said:
No. The color logic is built with that in mind. Colors only become less saturated at very high brightness when the RGB can't get bright enough and the W has to kick in disproportionately.

As far as color accuracy goes these are better than any lcd including IPS, especially in regards to viewing angles.

However, I would not use them for something like image editing where you're leaving static images and risking burn in. However, compared to the cost of some of the high end LCDs you could afford to rebuy this TV a few times and maybe it's worth it
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying.
 
sharknice said:
No. The color logic is built with that in mind. Colors only become less saturated at very high brightness when the RGB can't get bright enough and the W has to kick in disproportionately.

As far as color accuracy goes these are better than any lcd including IPS, especially in regards to viewing angles.

However, I would not use them for something like image editing where you're leaving static images and risking burn in. However, compared to the cost of some of the high end LCDs you could afford to rebuy this TV a few times and maybe it's worth it
Click to expand...
Just buy the GeekSquad protection and there’s no need to babysit it anymore. Hiding taskbar in 2022 should be a crime 😂
 
Yeah, I was figuring on using dark modes and other precautions along with the geek squad warranty just in case... My usage is game dev and gaming, so I have a lot of static windows. Sounds like I may be better suited for a regular monitor since I don't have space for the oled + a second panel.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Yeah, I was figuring on using dark modes and other precautions along with the geek squad warranty just in case... My usage is game dev and gaming, so I have a lot of static windows. Sounds like I may be better suited for a regular monitor since I don't have space for the oled + a second panel.
Click to expand...
I mean is it really that bad? I never had burn in on any of my CRT monitors. They were calibrated to about full white = 90 nits. Surely in a light controlled room these panels wouldn’t burn at those drive levels?
 
jbltecnicspro said:
I mean is it really that bad? I never had burn in on any of my CRT monitors. They were calibrated to about full white = 90 nits. Surely in a light controlled room these panels wouldn’t burn at those drive levels?
Click to expand...
Probably just very slowly if I take care. I may just go for it. My real concern is pixel structure as I have heard of fringing on text and such.
 
realworld said:
Just buy the GeekSquad protection and there’s no need to babysit it anymore. Hiding taskbar in 2022 should be a crime 😂
Click to expand...
I can only speak to my (aged) B6P, but the Windows Taskbar was absolutely the first thing to burn in. Granted, I was still running the OLED backlight at 100, but it's still something of note. Likewise, most of the other damage on my B6 are static elements like the Chrome top-bar, and where I generally put my windows while WFH.

Granted, my B6P is old tech by now and lacks a lot of the protections new sets have, but that's still one area where I'd advise caution.
 
Pastuch said:
I bet at least 50% of the people in this forum want an AG coating, I certainly do. I hate glossy displays.
Click to expand...

I'm running through this thread for the first time, hence the reach back in post date. Not sure about the "over 50% vote" on the forum (maybe a poll has been done), but I switched from matte to glossy from a 4K IPS monitor to the LG CX 48" . I would never go back to matte. Colors are freakishly more vibrant on the OLED. I've also learned to ignore reflections, I literally don't even see them now. I liked the OLED so much I bought a near 4k res Dell XPS 15 with the OLED screen.

So obviously it's personal preference, but the matte coated 4k monitor sitting next to this TV looks completely dull in comparison.

On another note, I can't wait for this 42" to release. I'll move this 48" to another room. It's been working well for me on a deep desk, but I think 42" will be perfect.
 
Pastuch said:
Many of the best FPS titles can do 240hz at 4k native and the ones that can't you just lower the render resolution. Counter Strike, Overwatch, Valorant and R6 Siege can all do it. Warzone, Apex and Fortnite can too by lowering render resolution in the game to 1440p (or lower). Every single game I just listed most people play on low graphics settings any way. Potato graphics are how competitive FPS is played.
Click to expand...
Those games practically have potato mode graphics to begin with. The competitive FPS crowd doesn't generally overlap with the 4K @ maximum settings crowd. I'm not saying there never is overlap, I'm sure there is but by and large a 4K display and the goal of getting 240Hz/240FPS in competitive games work against each other.
Pastuch said:
Check out the new 27inch 1440p mini leds with 300hz.... pretty slick.
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/new-g-sync-monitors-announced-2022/

I'll almost definitely buy a C2 42 inch but if it lowers my Warzone stats I'll be returning it and getting a 27 inch 1440p 300hz MiniLED. Then I'll probably need to upgrade my 5600x to a 13th gen Intel or Ryzen 7000. Warzone is CPU limited like crazy, I only get around 170 to 260 FPS in Warzone right now which is less than ideal.
Click to expand...
Well, if you aren't playing at 3840x2160 you are going to be at least partially CPU limited. 1920x1080 sure as hell is. People don't like to hear it, but that's a low resolution display these days. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is. 2560x1440 straddles the realm between 1920x1080 and 3840x2160 as far as CPU limitations go. CPU matters a lot more in this realm than it does at 4K, but not as much as it does at 1080P. It doesn't mean that Warzone is especialyl CPU limited. Virtually anything is aside from a couple of outliers here and there.
 
Dan_D said:
Those games practically have potato mode graphics to begin with. The competitive FPS crowd doesn't generally overlap with the 4K @ maximum settings crowd. I'm not saying there never is overlap, I'm sure there is but by and large a 4K display and the goal of getting 240Hz/240FPS in competitive games work against each other.

Well, if you aren't playing at 3840x2160 you are going to be at least partially CPU limited. 1920x1080 sure as hell is. People don't like to hear it, but that's a low resolution display these days. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is. 2560x1440 straddles the realm between 1920x1080 and 3840x2160 as far as CPU limitations go. CPU matters a lot more in this realm than it does at 4K, but not as much as it does at 1080P. It doesn't mean that Warzone is especialyl CPU limited. Virtually anything is aside from a couple of outliers here and there.
Click to expand...
1080p is more than enough for gaming IMHO. I would set the render resolution in Warzone to about 1440p which is very easy to maintain 120fps+. Actually, 4k 120hz should be possible in warzone at 120fps minimum with a moderate gpu overclock. I want oled colors, the resolution is meaningless to me.
 
OLED colors? WRGB LG OLED is actually mediocre at best when it comes to color. Example: 48CX that I had did 80.7% DCI-P3. My PG32UQX FALD IPS does 98% and wrecked the 48CX side-by-side in color volume.

Samsung QD-OLED has been developed to help the color deficiencies of LG WRGB, among other things.
 
sharknice said:
Even in a completely dark room you're still going to see yourself in the reflection of a glossy screen because it's emitting light onto your body.

This is why if you're truly an [H] gamer you paint your face in Black 3.0, the blackest paint in the world. You can enjoy the best image quality possible with no reflections at all.

Make sure you take photos with you at your battle station and post them to social media.
Click to expand...
And then immediately get hate bombed and SWATed for appearing in black face.
 
Vega said:
OLED colors? WRGB LG OLED is actually mediocre at best when it comes to color. Example: 48CX that I had did 80.7% DCI-P3. My PG32UQX FALD IPS does 98% and wrecked the 48CX side-by-side in color volume.

Samsung QD-OLED has been developed to help the color deficiencies of LG WRGB, among other things.
Click to expand...
Hopefully there’s a good sRGB mode. As much as I like color, nothings more off-putting than running sRGB material through a wide-gamut screen with it all looking over saturated.
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Hopefully there’s a good sRGB mode. As much as I like color, nothings more off-putting than running sRGB material through a wide-gamut screen with it all looking over saturated.
Click to expand...

So my 48CX has an "sRGB mode" ... I don't use it i leave it on "Auto" but even my 48CX, which is now almost 2 years old, already has an sRGB mode.

( the Tool is : "Color Control" from Github .. with this Tool you can change grayed out settings and much much more )

DSC_0085.JPG
 
Last edited:
Stagefire82 said:
So my 48CX has an "sRGB mode" ... I don't use it i leave it on "Auto" but even my 48CX, which is now almost 2 years old, already has an sRGB mode.
Click to expand...
I’m more interested in whether or not the sRGB mode is good.

I know the LG one is good. :). I was actually talking of the Samsung. Not all sRGB modes are accurate. Some are straight dumb, like they lock all controls - even basic ones (brightness, contrast) when in use. Go figure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top