LG 48CX

Lateralus said:
Meh. Hard to see, but it does possibly look a bit better?

I'm in the same boat as you. I have a pretty high hour count on my CX and have been using it without ASBL for probably a couple of years now with OLED light set to 30 unless in HDR. There are certain portions of the screen that probably get more use overall, but I haven't been able to discern any burn-in when doing full screen fill tests after what, over 4 years of daily usage as a full-time monitor. LOL, no fricks given at this point as it has exceeded not only my expectations but the doomsday prophecies of numerous folks who insisted that such a use case wasn't possible. Most of those folks are long absent from this thread now. :)

I do have several dead pixels near the edges as noted by MistaSparkul, but only saw them after they were mentioned as a common thing (and then only after setting background to white and looking for them up close). They are completely unnoticeable during normal use, although it'll be interesting to see how many develop.

The great thing for newer buyers is that, as has been pointed out, the CX should be the worst case scenario in terms of burn-in, durability, and brightness as LG has continued improving the panel tech since those were released. So folks with C1s, C2s, etc. should see even better long-term performance than the already (to me) impressive CX.
Click to expand...

Even then the dead pixels aren't actually noticeable from proper viewing distance. I can easily tell I have over 100 of them just by eyeballing around close to my screen, yet it doesn't bother me one bit since from my viewing distance since I can't actually see the individual pixels, plus they are only scattered along the outer edges and none of them are near the center. I see no reason to upgrade from my CX until PHOLED comes out so I'm just hanging onto it still.
 
I do wonder if a non-blank screen saver such as "Mystify" would be better than one that's a black screen. As it would mix up content versus my Windows desktop for example...
 
SH1 said:
I do wonder if a non-blank screen saver such as "Mystify" would be better than one that's a black screen. As it would mix up content versus my Windows desktop for example...
Click to expand...

Don't think so. Black screen = pixels completely off and I see no better way to preserve it's lifespan than that.
 
Might be right. I'm just wondering if a screen saver that's mostly black like mystify, plus turning if off completely for longer times not in use, might mix things up in a useful way.

Pixel Refresher just ran for the 4K hours mark. Looks the same before and after. None of the dead pixels along the edges came back to life or such, alas...

Still glad I was still able to get a CX/C1 though. The BFI.
 
SH1 said:
Might be right. I'm just wondering if a screen saver that's mostly black like mystify, plus turning if off completely for longer times not in use, might mix things up in a useful way.

Pixel Refresher just ran for the 4K hours mark. Looks the same before and after. None of the dead pixels along the edges came back to life or such, alas...

Still glad I was still able to get a CX/C1 though. The BFI.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering how the BFI will function on the Asus PG32UCDP. I doubt it will be able to do 240Hz BFI at 4K but since it can run 1080p 480Hz, doesn't that make 1080p 240Hz BFI possible? If so then that makes it pretty interesting as you would be able to achieve crazy levels of motion clarity while only needing to push 240fps at 1080p.
 
MistaSparkul said:
I'm wondering how the BFI will function on the Asus PG32UCDP. I doubt it will be able to do 240Hz BFI at 4K but since it can run 1080p 480Hz, doesn't that make 1080p 240Hz BFI possible? If so then that makes it pretty interesting as you would be able to achieve crazy levels of motion clarity while only needing to push 240fps at 1080p.
Click to expand...
Seems like it would be technically feasible. Or even just still allowing 120Hz in the 480Hz mode to get equal clarity, but probably rather dim. I hope they still offer BFI in at least some form. They are not allowing HDR to be engaged during BFI in what's released so far apparently. Hope they reconsider that. (And LG seems hell bent on those matte finishes for their monitors. Crazy they don't give the option given how beautiful their C series glossy coatings are...)
 
SH1 said:
Seems like it would be technically feasible. Or even just still allowing 120Hz in the 480Hz mode to get equal clarity, but probably rather dim. I hope they still offer BFI in at least some form. They are not allowing HDR to be engaged during BFI in what's released so far apparently. Hope they reconsider that. (And LG seems hell bent on those matte finishes for their monitors. Crazy they don't give the option given how beautiful their C series glossy coatings are...)
Click to expand...

LG will have a glossy option of the 1440p 240Hz panel soon. It wouldn't surprise me if they start off by only going matte on their panels initially and then follow it up with glossy versions later to get people to buy the monitors again.

1714157117875.png
 
Oh yes the glossy coating of the CX is another thing I've grown to love haha, coming from mostly matte LCDs. I never cared as much about this as I do now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
kalston said:
My understanding is that it scans the pixels, and boosts the voltage of those that have aged the most, to level them with the rest of the panel. At some point of course raising the voltage is not possible anymore, so "burn-in" becomes visible - aka pixels much dimmer than the others. Both the manual pixel refresh and the automatic one every 2000h do the same thing.

There is a very quick scan that runs every time you power off the display as well, as long as it's plugged in, if it has been powered on for some hours. I think that one does the same thing in essence, but it's not thorough, it's a very fast process.

1000h is some months yeah, but this is not actually impacting my enjoyment of the display since I don't see it in regular usage. I can run it if people really want me to, but I don't expect miracles. OLED burns in eventually.
Click to expand...

That might be it, but this is how I understood it:

It reserves that energize amount / reserved brightness amount. The wear-evening buffer.

It actually does that bright line during the wear-evening process and burns all of the emitters DOWN to the lowest emitters on the screen's "depth below sea level".

Then it boost them all back up again to "normal level".

There is no way to know how much of that reserve is left as far as I know, not even in the service menu.
It's sort-of like having a phone battery backup but never knowing how much charge is left in it. You can use more static things on screen, use higher brightness when not necessary, use the screen in bright rooms where you then need it brighter in sdr, leave the screen on when stuff is paused or you go afk, etc.. . but you'll be burning through that reserve "battery" faster.

At least that's how I understood it.

Once you are out of that buffer, you are probably wide open to permanent, "un-even-able/un-boost-able" burn in. If it does level them out again, perhaps it would be lowering your screen brightness capability (maybe more immediately in regard to HDR levels), as it wouldn't be able to boost the range high enough again.

That's just how I thought it worked, from what I can remember from different articles I read.
 
elvn said:
That might be it, but this is how I understood it:

It reserves that energize amount / reserved brightness amount. The wear-evening buffer.

It actually does that bright line during the wear-evening process and burns all of the emitters DOWN to the lowest emitters on the screen's "depth below sea level".

Then it boost them all back up again to "normal level".

There is no way to know how much of that reserve is left as far as I know, not even in the service menu.
It's sort-of like having a phone battery backup but never knowing how much charge is left in it. You can use more static things on screen, use higher brightness when not necessary, use the screen in bright rooms where you then need it brighter in sdr, leave the screen on when stuff is paused or you go afk, etc.. . but you'll be burning through that reserve "battery" faster.

At least that's how I understood it.

Once you are out of that buffer, you are probably wide open to permanent, "un-even-able/un-boost-able" burn in. If it does level them out again, perhaps it would be lowering your screen brightness capability (maybe more immediately in regard to HDR levels), as it wouldn't be able to boost the range high enough again.

That's just how I thought it worked, from what I can remember from different articles I read.
Click to expand...
My CX is connected to my laptop for work. And to a desktop for my own stuff.

For the laptop, I just had to double check the screen settings as it looked particularly bright. However, still OLED Light 0 + Contrast 75 + 120 Hz BFI High. Just the CRT friendly dim lighting I've got here I guess.
 
Pretty sure mine arrived with some dead pixels along the edges. Throw in Kalston's recent report of what appears to be actual burn-in and the mortality of these displays is becoming that much more apparent.

(If I had a time machine, I would have bought two, one as a spare, at the point of deepest discounting.)
 
I wonder why LG has decided to start cutting brightness in game mode on the newest OLEDs.

1714676676152.png


The C4 has a pretty sizeable lead over the C1, until you turn game optimizer on the C4 then the brightness gets massively cut down.

1714676697053.png


From 590 nits down to 415 nits, and from 265 nits down to 165 nits. That is a massive nerf to brightness just for running the TV in game mode and now the lead over the C1 is hardly anything to write home about except for the tiniest window size. I was originally considering a C4 for the 144Hz and brightness upgrades, but once it's in game mode the brightness upgrade over a C1/CX is barely anything.
 
MistaSparkul said:
I wonder why LG has decided to start cutting brightness in game mode on the newest OLEDs.

View attachment 651471

The C4 has a pretty sizeable lead over the C1, until you turn game optimizer on the C4 then the brightness gets massively cut down.

View attachment 651472

From 590 nits down to 415 nits, and from 265 nits down to 165 nits. That is a massive nerf to brightness just for running the TV in game mode and now the lead over the C1 is hardly anything to write home about except for the tiniest window size. I was originally considering a C4 for the 144Hz and brightness upgrades, but once it's in game mode the brightness upgrade over a C1/CX is barely anything.
Click to expand...
Reducing chance for burn-in sounds like the plausible explanation. People using these as desktop monitors or playing the same game a lot are likely to cause burn-in so limiting brightness can increase lifespan, which means cost savings during the warranty period. Still sucks that they are doing this.
 
kasakka said:
Reducing chance for burn-in sounds like the plausible explanation. People using these as desktop monitors or playing the same game a lot are likely to cause burn-in so limiting brightness can increase lifespan, which means cost savings during the warranty period. Still sucks that they are doing this.
Click to expand...

It's quite annoying because this basically a case of 1 step forward and 1 step back for the C series. The G series has gotten a heatsink, MLA+, and the G4 now has no brightness drop when running in game mode while the C series gets none of that. The C series has always been the best bang for the buck option once it goes on sale. If LG just refuses to do anything about the C series then at least make a 42/48 inch G series.
 
So Asus just released an "OLED Anti-flicker" feature that can be added to their existing monitors via firmware update: https://rog.asus.com/monitors/27-to-31-5-inches/rog-swift-oled-pg27aqdm/helpdesk_bios/

I'm not sure how well it works yet, gonna have to wait and get users feedback on it. But if Asus can solve OLED flickering then surely LG can do it too. Real question is, would they even bother to give an anti-flicker update to the CX at this point given that it's now 4 years old?
 
Reddit user says this is how it functions:

1716239977209.png


I disagree with him saying that it's pointless because while it is true that if you have a mostly stable fps within the upper VRR range, sometimes you can have huge frametime spikes as a result of shader compilation or traversal stuttering which is still a very common occurance today. Such huge frametime spikes/framerate dips will no longer cause the refresh rate to tank from 200+ Hz all the way down to 40Hz if you are limiting the VRR range to never drop below 200Hz. If this is how it functions then technically this means we can add anti-flicker to any monitor simply by modifying the VRR range using CRU. I'll wait for more info before I try anything though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
MistaSparkul said:
Reddit user says this is how it functions:

View attachment 654887

I disagree with him saying that it's pointless because while it is true that if you have a mostly stable fps within the upper VRR range, sometimes you can have huge frametime spikes as a result of shader compilation or traversal stuttering which is still a very common occurance today. Such huge frametime spikes/framerate dips will no longer cause the refresh rate to tank from 200+ Hz all the way down to 40Hz if you are limiting the VRR range to never drop below 200Hz. If this is how it functions then technically this means we can add anti-flicker to any monitor simply by modifying the VRR range using CRU. I'll wait for more info before I try anything though.
Click to expand...

Yes I like to call them frame rate "potholes" being from the northeast usa where seasonal freezing and thawing causes an ongoing problem, breaking up roads into deep potholes in places.

I think what he was saying was not that your frame rate would never drop below 200fpsHz, rather that VRR will be turned off for certain ranges, which would mean either you are open to judder from mismatched fps vs hz rate, or you would have to resort back to v-sync in the non-VRR ranges which introduces lag. If that's what it means, it's not desirable to me.

Running higher frame rate ranges in the first place results in better, less problematic performance in DLSS/upscaling, frame gen,

and it probably would keep the flicker less extreme since the gamma is set to 120Hz on the screens. The more irregular your frame rate graph, the more it would flicker, but the higher your graph is toward 120fpsHz (or having part of your graph exceeding it) , the less far from 120hz gamma you would be dropping in the lower part of your graph.

As some people have 4090s, and we are moving into a 5000 series eventually, having a 4k frame rate average over 100fpsHz isn't going to be as hard to achieve on games, or exceeding 120fpsHz in some cases.

For example, you could run something like:

(70) 85fpsHz <<< 100fpsHz ave. >>> 115fpsHz (130fpsHz ~> capped at 117fpsHz)

OR , go higher pushing more of the graph into being cut off by the cap

The higher your frame rate and base screen resolution you are upscaling and frame generating from are to start with, the better the results would be.

The higher your frame rate is vs the pegged Hz gamma on oleds, the better off you will probably be vs VRR flicker. A few potholes don't happen as often as a low frame rate graph's dips do throughout. They could cause *a* flicker but probably wouldn't cause *flicker-ing*, if you get my meaning.
 
Last edited:
Astral Abyss said:
So it doesn't actually fix VRR flickering, just disables it. Not that exciting.
Click to expand...

It doesn't disable VRR, it just changes the effective range. I wouldn't rule it out as useless just yet. Sure the use case might be limited but I can see scenarios where it actually works. It just needs some proper testing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
MistaSparkul said:
It doesn't disable VRR, it just changes the effective range. I wouldn't rule it out as useless just yet. Sure the use case might be limited but I can see scenarios where it actually works. It just needs some proper testing.
Click to expand...

More options are good. How useful it is to individuals or particular games/settings vs rates could "vary" . ;)
 
Those new panels do seem drastically better.

I have to admit I am starting to notice the burn-in on mine in real world usage now. When a portion of white/very light grey passes by the lower part of the screen that has burn-in, it feels like the screen is "dirty", even when not overly focusing on it. It honestly feels the same to me as the vertical banding on 5% grey that most OLED panels have from the factory (except it's not straight lines and it's located in a small but central area). But I experience it much the same way, the subtle sensation that something is off.

Static picture? All looks fine unless I focus hard on the imperfections (which I won't do in normal usage, I'm not using this screen for work nor do I work on photos/videos anyway). But motion with white/light grey shades? Screen definitely feels a touch dirty, except you can't wipe that off.
 
Last edited:
I saw a "used - very good" LG 48" C1 pop up on Amazon and I put in the order. Maybe foolish on my part, but those dead pixels along the edges of my CX freak me out a bit. And thought it might be fun to get a look at that particular newer model...
 
SH1 said:
I saw a "used - very good" LG 48" C1 pop up on Amazon and I put in the order. Maybe foolish on my part, but those dead pixels along the edges of my CX freak me out a bit. And thought it might be fun to get a look at that particular newer model...
Click to expand...
Came early. 0 hour unit. One dead pixel on top right edge. (Unless by some miracle it's a perfectly pixel shaped spot of dust under the protective film.) Still I'm quite happy though. Will swap out the CX for now and see if the new unit follows the same edge pixel shedding path...

(I know this is giving up the 60Hz advanced BFI mode effectively, but the 120Hz mode is what I mainly go for...)
 
Later I noticed 3 other pixels out on the extreme edges. Ran pixel refresher just to see if that would make things better or worse. If the latter, I had decided I would return it to Amazon, but it actually cleared up that original pixel, which was the worst offender. So I'm keeping what turned out to be, surprisingly, a fresh panel.

I know it's an older display now, but if you still have a thing for this display's particular mix of a rather amazing gloss coating, and still, best I can tell, finest motion solution to ever grace an OLED, LG's rolling scan, then some are apparently still out there. (I'd been toying around with the idea and checking listings for weeks and then this mystery just kind of popped up there. And I rolled the dice.)

The pixels on this one being on the extreme edge don't bother me. The CX had gotten a bit worse than that already, which was bothering me. Maybe this C1 goes the same way, but anyway, it's kind of a dream display. So I was willing to have another go at it.
 
SH1 said:
Later I noticed 3 other pixels out on the extreme edges. Ran pixel refresher just to see if that would make things better or worse. If the latter, I had decided I would return it to Amazon, but it actually cleared up that original pixel, which was the worst offender. So I'm keeping what turned out to be, surprisingly, a fresh panel.

I know it's an older display now, but if you still have a thing for this display's particular mix of a rather amazing gloss coating, and still, best I can tell, finest motion solution to ever grace an OLED, LG's rolling scan, then some are apparently still out there. (I'd been toying around with the idea and checking listings for weeks and then this mystery just kind of popped up there. And I rolled the dice.)

The pixels on this one being on the extreme edge don't bother me. The CX had gotten a bit worse than that already, which was bothering me. Maybe this C1 goes the same way, but anyway, it's kind of a dream display. So I was willing to have another go at it.
Click to expand...

Is it dead black? Or is it "dead" on certain colors/subpixel arrangements? Just curious.
 
elvn said:
Is it dead black? Or is it "dead" on certain colors/subpixel arrangements? Just curious.
Click to expand...
Looking at it again today, there is what appears to be a full pixel out, black against white, red, blue, green, on the top right edge. There also appears to be slight black areas in the corners and a couple more on the left side. However, these are straddling the edge in a way that I'm not sure what they are I guess. Pixels sacrificed in the mounting process? Not sure how it works...

The initial pixel I noticed, almost at the extreme of the top right edge, but not straddling it, that came back to life following Pixel Refresh, might have actually been a cluster of 4 pixels. (I'm wondering if this is why this unit had been returned. When the C1 was on clearance in 2022, I think folks would have had their pick of panels...)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
Might seem like a silly suggestion considering what you outlined, but I'd try connecting to a different port just to see if it's the same. Maybe change resolution and refresh rate too. It's prob more hardware based panel-wise like you suspect though.

Maybe shake it up like an etch a sketch.

I can remember some laptops where you could massage the area of the screen to get the pixel back, but with a hard shell screen that's probably impossible. You could try loosening a few screws and flexing the panel housing a little though maybe.

I take no responsibility for implementing any of my last resort ideas. 😎

You could also try to reach out to LG and jump through support hoops to see what they say. Most likely a dead end due to the warranty window, but might be worth a shot. I wouldn't tell them you bought it used, I'd just provide the model and serial number (and no receipt available if asked).

Different people have different priorities, but if you went into it knowing the risk and you got a pretty decent usage out of it otherwise, I'd be ok with it as you described it (depending how much I paid), especially for media/gaming scenes rather than desktop use. As long as it didn't get worse/more numerous/more widespread.
 
elvn said:
Might seem like a silly suggestion considering what you outlined, but I'd try connecting to a different port just to see if it's the same. Maybe change resolution and refresh rate too. It's prob more hardware based panel-wise like you suspect though.

Maybe shake it up like an etch a sketch.

I can remember some laptops where you could massage the area of the screen to get the pixel back, but with a hard shell screen that's probably impossible. You could try loosening a few screws and flexing the panel housing a little though maybe.

I take no responsibility for implementing any of my last resort ideas. 😎

You could also try to reach out to LG and jump through support hoops to see what they say. Most likely a dead end due to the warranty window, but might be worth a shot. I wouldn't tell them you bought it used, I'd just provide the model and serial number (and no receipt available if asked).

Different people have different priorities, but if you went into it knowing the risk and you got a pretty decent usage out of it otherwise, I'd be ok with it as you described it (depending how much I paid), especially for media/gaming scenes rather than desktop use. As long as it didn't get worse/more numerous/more widespread.
Click to expand...
I actually tried to massage a pixel on the CX when yet another bad pixel showed up. No effect. Alas. My initial check of this unit was on a different port and at a distance from my PC before I had removed the films. (To get hours count and check the pixels. To see if this would be best a return to Amazon.) Used one of those long optical fiber cables. (No picture until I remembered the cable was directional.)

When I got the CX I had no idea about the dying pixels along edge problem. Bad seal or whatever is causing additional pixels to fail post manufacture. I'll be watching this one though.

It's really a test pattern issue only right now, but with a zero hours unit I wanted this baseline. Thank you for drawing this detail from me. I might be referring back to this in the future, if I seem to see more dead pixels popping up...
 
Everyone I know with a CX has the dead pixels problem, yet my old B7 that I gave to my parents doesn't have a single one to this day and that thing is 7 years old now.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Everyone I know with a CX has the dead pixels problem, yet my old B7 that I gave to my parents doesn't have a single one to this day and that thing is 7 years old now.
Click to expand...
Not a single one on my CX48. 8704 hours. Used since January 2021 as my primary desktop.
 
It's so frustrating, because I really do think these are dream displays. Will see how this second try goes...
 
FrgMstr said:
Not a single one on my CX48. 8704 hours. Used since January 2021 as my primary desktop.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. Most of the complaints I've seen online regarding the CX and dead pixels are people who bought 2020 models while those who waited for sales and bought it in 2021 don't seem to have this issue. Guess that's what we get for being the early adopters :D
 
MistaSparkul said:
Sounds about right. Most of the complaints I've seen online regarding the CX and dead pixels are people who bought 2020 models while those who waited for sales and bought it in 2021 don't seem to have this issue. Guess that's what we get for being the early adopters :D
Click to expand...
My CX is a December 2020. Though that's still 2020...
 
And I've heard at least one report of a C1 with the same advancing pixel decrepitude. Oh well, the rolling scan + OLED combination is so awesome it's worth the risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top