LG 48CX

In my case, unchecking that box makes the Hz value stable with G-SYNC at any locked frame rate below 120 Hz, and the stuttering stops.
Do you constantly hit that locked framerate? Because then it's not G-Sync working, but just no stuttering/tearing due to a stable framerate..
 
I also see the 5.5Hz bug on the VRR hidden osd, spontaniously jumping up and down when I get into the mentioned situations on my 2070S..

I'm starting to get a bit scared that this either isn't fixable or won't get fixed by MS/nvidia/LG (whoever is the culprit).

I've got about a week to return the TV, but I'm almost certain I won't fet another deal for the 55CX for 1200EUR where I live and there aren't any alternatives on the horizon.. :/ I also don't see the 48CX dropping ever in my region, that's about 1600 EUR here - if you can even grab one.. even the B9s are going for 1500+.. hmmm
Some people have it working with certain settings combos, as well as with certain games. If it was straight up broken and never seen working, I'd be hesitant. But we know it's possible and we know it's close. I'm not worried
 
Some people have it working with certain settings combos, as well as with certain games. If it was straight up broken and never seen working, I'd be hesitant. But we know it's possible and we know it's close. I'm not worried
That's what worries me. If it was straight up broken LG/nvidia/MS would have to react.

But that half broken state could easily be dismissed as "good enough, not our problem anymore".
 
So there is some (slightly) good news.

Apparently GSYNC works fine on the RTX 3000 cards if you use 8-bit color. If you go above that, that's when you start running into the 100-120 FPS stuttering bug.

LG is making progress. Now we just need them to get 10-bit GSYNC 4:4:4 to work.
This seems correct.

So I have 3 options currently on the .26 firmware:

1. 4k 4:4:4 120 8Bit g-sync on amd freesync off. Seems more or less flawless in functionality.
2. 4k 4:4:4 120 10bit g-sync on amd freesync on. Needs framecap around 105-106, stutters at higher fps and the functional range isn't full, but works very well around perhaps 80 or 90-105 range, even in HDR.
3. 4k 4:4:4 120 10Bit g-sync on amd freesync off. full functionality but black flashes and needs enabling/disabling until it works, then glitches out randomly, so pretty bad.
 
Last edited:
Don't own any of the hardware, but just out of curiosity; what are people's sharpness settings with Cleartype?
Sharpness settings add additional contrast to edges; I always turn sharpness to 0 on my current tV.
 
LG has acknowledged the high refresh gsync stutter and has pledged to fix it for CX owners!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...st-oled-tv-nvidia-rtx-30-glitch/#116be428314b
"This update will not, it seems, be available for roll out quite as quickly as the update that fixed the previous RTX 30 issues; LG’s response suggests that it hopes to have the ‘stutter’ firmware in circulation before the end of the year. "

Anyway, since 4k 120 8bit 4:4:4 g-sync works I'm not too stressed anymore.
 
"This update will not, it seems, be available for roll out quite as quickly as the update that fixed the previous RTX 30 issues; LG’s response suggests that it hopes to have the ‘stutter’ firmware in circulation before the end of the year. "

Anyway, since 4k 120 8bit 4:4:4 g-sync works I'm not too stressed anymore.
I'm just glad they think they can fix it. If they can make 4k120 4:4:4 10-bit HDR and GSYNC all work at the same time without stutter, it will restore my confidence in them for future TVs.
 
Yeah confirming here that going down to 8bit completely fixes Gsync stutter. Such a huge difference.
 
Yeah confirming here that going down to 8bit completely fixes Gsync stutter. Such a huge difference.
8-bit didn't make any difference. G-SYNC still stutters unless I uncheck Display Specific settings. It runs the same as 10-bit.
 
"This update will not, it seems, be available for roll out quite as quickly as the update that fixed the previous RTX 30 issues; LG’s response suggests that it hopes to have the ‘stutter’ firmware in circulation before the end of the year. "

Anyway, since 4k 120 8bit 4:4:4 g-sync works I'm not too stressed anymore.
This might kick a hornets nest but... can someone explain the downside of 8bit 4:4:4? Is it just some banding and limited HDR? Or is HDR completely disabled
 
This might kick a hornets nest but... can someone explain the downside of 8bit 4:4:4? Is it just some banding and limited HDR? Or is HDR completely disabled
You can definitely still run HDR, because you've been able to do 4k 60hz RGB 8bit HDR Gsync on Turing since the TV came out.
 
Last edited:
Assuming this issue is fixed with the GSYNC stuttering, is that really the last "major" issue with this display? Since they say they will get it fixed maybe I should finally make the plunge and purchase the 48in.
 
Assuming this issue is fixed with the GSYNC stuttering, is that really the last "major" issue with this display? Since they say they will get it fixed maybe I should finally make the plunge and purchase the 48in.
As far as I know, yes. I haven't seen anything else on this TV that's a deal breaker (is the raised-blacks for VRR still a thing?)
 
8-bit didn't make any difference. G-SYNC still stutters unless I uncheck Display Specific settings. It runs the same as 10-bit.
Yes it did because I can switch back to 10bit with that check box off and it's a mess. I tried the check box thing and enabling VRR via Windows 10 over a week ago with no success.

I have it set to 8bit with the display specific settings checked and now the cyclic stutter in Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Hades is gone.
 
Yes it did because I can switch back to 10bit with that check box off and it's a mess. I tried the check box thing and enabling VRR via Windows 10 over a week ago with no success.

I have it set to 8bit with the display specific settings checked and now the cyclic stutter in Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Hades is gone.
I get extreme stuttering at 8-bit with Display Specific settings checked. Just need to wait for a fix. With the box unchecked, i need to toggle G-SYNC off & on each time my display switches off.
 
Linus finally made a video about our screen :)


I like the part where he compares the pixel transitions between the CX and the 360hz IPS using a 3000 fps camera. On the CX the pixels are essentially fully transitioned in under 1 ms whereas the 360hz IPS takes 6 ms to mostly transition and never really fully transitions to a completely clean background, it looks more like what the OLED does in 0.33 ms.
Basically a slow motion view of all the garbage you see during LCD transitions.
 
I get extreme stuttering at 8-bit with Display Specific settings checked. Just need to wait for a fix. With the box unchecked, i need to toggle G-SYNC off & on each time my display switches off.
And I get no Gsync if I uncheck it regardless if the display switches on/off

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Everyone seems to be having different results. I locked my framerate at 40 and toggled that box on/off while running the same benchmark, and compared videos afterwards to remove my subjective eye-test. When it's unchecked on my PC, there is no VRR, and there is significant stutter at 40fps. With it checked, both the monitor/PC report VRR is active and the stutter is reduced (exactly what Gsync should do)

At this point I'm just glad LG confirms they know about it, because I don't think the rest of the internet is going to reach a collective agreement before they eventually push out a patch
 
I like the part where he compares the pixel transitions between the CX and the 360hz IPS using a 3000 fps camera. On the CX the pixels are essentially fully transitioned in under 1 ms whereas the 360hz IPS takes 6 ms to mostly transition and never really fully transitions to a completely clean background, it looks more like what the OLED does in 0.33 ms.
Basically a slow motion view of all the garbage you see during LCD transitions.

Wish we had 360Hz OLEDs lol. But honestly 120Hz + BFI is really really good already.
 
I like the part where he compares the pixel transitions between the CX and the 360hz IPS using a 3000 fps camera. On the CX the pixels are essentially fully transitioned in under 1 ms whereas the 360hz IPS takes 6 ms to mostly transition and never really fully transitions to a completely clean background, it looks more like what the OLED does in 0.33 ms.
Basically a slow motion view of all the garbage you see during LCD transitions.
Yeah this is why LCD screens above 120hz are dumb. They can't actually transition that fast, it's all just marketing bullshit that leads to a blurry mess of overshoot.
 
Yeah this is why LCD screens above 120hz are dumb. They can't actually transition that fast, it's all just marketing bullshit that leads to a blurry mess of overshoot.
Well that’s not true at all. There are plenty of LCD panels that have fast enough response times to keep up with higher refresh rates than 120Hz. 240Hz is pretty common nowadays and even VA panels, traditionally the slowest, can keep up with that now on the new Samsung G7 screens. Pixels response times won’t be as fast as OLED certainly but those screens have a higher refresh rate than the OLED screens
 
Well that’s not true at all. There are plenty of LCD panels that have fast enough response times to keep up with higher refresh rates than 120Hz. 240Hz is pretty common nowadays and even VA panels, traditionally the slowest, can keep up with that now on the new Samsung G7 screens. Pixels response times won’t be as fast as OLED certainly but those screens have a higher refresh rate than the OLED screens
Yea, but at what cost? The Linus video shows the 360hz panel is a smeary mess in full motion, while the 120hz OLED is crisp and clear. I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns on LCD tech. Sure you can layer image over image over image, but you lose detail.
 
Yea, but at what cost? The Linus video shows the 360hz panel is a smeary mess in full motion, while the 120hz OLED is crisp and clear. I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns on LCD tech. Sure you can layer image over image over image, but you lose detail.

"crisp and clear" doesn't help that much when you're limited to a refresh every 1/120th of a second. If you listen to the commentary and pay attention, what is actually being depicted here is that the motion on the 360hz display is smoother and better even if each individual frame on the OLED is clearer. Displaying the footage this way hides the motion blur inherent to the refresh rate.

That said, 120hz BFI on the OLED produces possibly the best motion resolution on any sample-and-hold display out there, based on the TFTCentral review(which isn't public yet I don't think so can't link). And I do think OLED is overall better in most ways, being restricted to a small 1080p display with poor contrast is a high price to pay for 360hz, not one I'd be interested in that's for sure.
 
Yeah this is why LCD screens above 120hz are dumb. They can't actually transition that fast, it's all just marketing bullshit that leads to a blurry mess of overshoot.
My 240 Hz PG258Q with G-SYNC was clearly smoother and more responsive than my CX (and my multitude of other 120 Hz / 144 Hz / 165 Hz monitors). There's no comparison whatsoever in smoothness of mouse movement on the desktop and in FPS games where the angular velocity multiplies the speed of objects on-screen.
 
Yea, but at what cost? The Linus video shows the 360hz panel is a smeary mess in full motion, while the 120hz OLED is crisp and clear. I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns on LCD tech. Sure you can layer image over image over image, but you lose detail.
Without BFI, the CX looks just as bad to the eye as LCD monitors, if not worse due to the complete lack of smearing.
 
Without BFI, the CX looks just as bad to the eye as LCD monitors, if not worse due to the complete lack of smearing.

At 30 or maybe even 60fps, sure the OLED will probably look worst since there's no extra blurring to sort of blend the frames together. But I would argue a 120Hz OLED vs 120Hz LCD the OLED looks better. This is comparing my CX to my X27 both at 120Hz.
 
Well that’s not true at all. There are plenty of LCD panels that have fast enough response times to keep up with higher refresh rates than 120Hz. 240Hz is pretty common nowadays and even VA panels, traditionally the slowest, can keep up with that now on the new Samsung G7 screens. Pixels response times won’t be as fast as OLED certainly but those screens have a higher refresh rate than the OLED screens
That's the whole point. pixels on LCD monitors aren't transitioning fully in 4.17ms (unless you want a TN screen maybe...), so a 240hz, let alone 360hz refresh rate is all marketing. Sure the screen is trying, but all it's doing is blurring.
 
That's the whole point. pixels on LCD monitors aren't transitioning fully in 4.17ms (unless you want a TN screen maybe...), so a 240hz, let alone 360hz refresh rate is all marketing. Sure the screen is trying, but all it's doing is blurring.
This is just not true. The 360hz panel is 2.6ms g2g average which is plenty for 240hz, though some transitions are too slow for 360hz, but you still get some benefit.. The Samsung G7 is ~2.9ms, which is plenty for 240. There ARE some slow transitions that exceed the full transition time but that's not the same thing as "refresh rate is all marketing".
 
Last edited:
This is just not true. The 360hz panel is 2.6ms g2g average which is plenty for 240hz, though some transitions are too slow for 360hz, but you still get some benefit.. The Samsung G7 is ~2.9ms, which is plenty for 240. There ARE some slow transitions that exceed the full transition time but that's not the same thing as "refresh rate is all marketing".
Totally agree. Higher refresh rate definitely makes a difference even if not all the pixels fully transition.

It should be noted when they measure response times they typically measure until a percentage complete, like 90%. If they measued 100% complete transitions the numbers would be much, much higher. But 90%, or even if the pixel is only 10% transitioned it's better than 0% you would be at with a slower refresh rate.


But at equal refresh rates oled motion looks much cleaner, you're actually seeing the pixels you're supposed to each frame instead of half transitioned garbage.

It's also another reason people bragging about how color accurate their slow LCDs are is stupid for anything but still picture editing. If you throw in motion the color accuracy is laughable.
 
The video from Linus really demonstrates just how crazy fast OLED pixels are. I honestly think the only thing stopping LG from making 240 or 360hz 4K OLEDs is the fact that we don't have a display standard that can even come close to supporting the kind of speed required to do such a thing. It's fairly obvious, though, that OLED tech could handle faster pixel refreshes.

If LG can perfect inkjet printed OLEDs, we could see some really nice gaming monitors in the near future. If you think about it, a 48" 4K OLED could be a 24" 1080P OLED and still have the same pixel density.
 
The video from Linus really demonstrates just how crazy fast OLED pixels are. I honestly think the only thing stopping LG from making 240 or 360hz 4K OLEDs is the fact that we don't have a display standard that can even come close to supporting the kind of speed required to do such a thing. It's fairly obvious, though, that OLED tech could handle faster pixel refreshes.

If LG can perfect inkjet printed OLEDs, we could see some really nice gaming monitors in the near future. If you think about it, a 48" 4K OLED could be a 24" 1080P OLED and still have the same pixel density.

Wouldn't DSC allow us to hit 240Hz at 4k though? I believe DSC allows for 8k60 so in theory it should be able to do 4k240.
 
So I just disabled GSYNC and played a round of Overwatch on Ultra settings @ 4K120 4:4:4 10-bit using my 3080, and if I may just say.... OH. MY. GOD. The clarity in motion alone is stunning, but the fact that I'm averaging 160-180 FPS at Ultra settings is just... wow.

The CX baby. It doesn't get much better than this.
 
Wouldn't DSC allow us to hit 240Hz at 4k though? I believe DSC allows for 8k60 so in theory it should be able to do 4k240.

There is enough bandwidth to do 1080p@480hz. It isn't the pixel transitions holding them back. There might not be any real technological challenges to do even higher refresh rates. It might just be lack of motivation since only LG makes the panels and has no real competition.
 
At 30 or maybe even 60fps, sure the OLED will probably look worst since there's no extra blurring to sort of blend the frames together. But I would argue a 120Hz OLED vs 120Hz LCD the OLED looks better. This is comparing my CX to my X27 both at 120Hz.
I can compare my current OLED @1920x1080 120hz no VRR vs the Predator X38 3840x1600 with hardware GSync - the image motion on the predator is 3x times smoother and clearer than on the OLED. Maybe the VRR (Gsync) would shorten the gap. But with no VRR the difference is huge and not in favor of the OLED.
 
I can compare my current OLED @1920x1080 120hz no VRR vs the Predator X38 3840x1600 with hardware GSync - the image motion on the predator is 3x times smoother and clearer than on the OLED. Maybe the VRR (Gsync) would shorten the gap. But with no VRR the difference is huge and not in favor of the OLED.

LOL wut?? I mean the LG can run up to 175Hz or nearly a 50% increase in refresh rate over the CX so sure I can believe it delivers better sample and hold motion clarity in that case. My Omen X27 which is a 240Hz fast TN also beats my CX at 120Hz sample and hold. But 3x more clear? Yeah sounds like BS to me even my Omen isn't 3x more clear. Not a surprising claim from someone who has an obvious hard on for the Nano IPS panels I guess 🤣
 
Back
Top