MSi 49" Ultrawide 240Hz QD-OLED

[MistaSparkul]

Looks like this confirms the 49" QD-OLED will not be a 4K TV. Also good to see another 240Hz OLED option.

 

[Zepher]

They need to make a 40" 21:9 OLED. Superwide is just too wide.

 

[realworld]

This scares me. This scares me a lot.

 

[kasakka]

The person who made those graphics really dropped the ball. That doesn't even look curved.

This seems like a 5120x1440 version of the 3440x1440 QD-OLEDs we had this year. With the announcement of Samsung making a 7680x2160 version of this form factor, I have little interest in the MSI.

QD-OLED is not for me until they are at 4K+ resolution because that weird pixel structure is there unless Samsung re-engineers their stuff for standard RGB. It means lower text clarity in Windows unless MS improves ClearType to support more pixel structure formats. With the LG OLEDs I did not find this as much of an issue.

Even if the Samsung 7680x2160 is LCD, I'd still take that if it's going to perform similarly to Neo G8 overall (e.g. 240 Hz, decent HDR...hopefully no scanlines tho) as most of the time I will be using it on the desktop and the higher res matters there. I sold my CRG9 eventually because I wanted higher res despite liking the form factor a good bit.

I totally agree we need more 40" 5120x2160 options though. That's a real sweet spot form factor.

 

[kasakka]

For sake of discussion, here's a little chart of HDR peak brightness between different panel tech using numbers from TFT Central reviews. I expect MSI will have similar performance to Dell AW3423DW.

Window size %	Dell AW3423DW (Samsung QD-OLED)	ASUS PG42UQ (LG OLED)	Samsung Neo G8 (Samsung VA)
1	1013	887	821
2	943	885	942
5	718	884	1074
10	451	880	1079
25	361	417	884
50	303	208	583
75	273	148	420
100	258	123	330

Like with everything display related it's a "pick your poison" situation.

LCD offers better brightness at bigger window sizes, better sustained brightness, no burn in or pixel structure issues but lower motion clarity and more haloing in HDR.

QD-OLED does a bit better than LG OLED at large window sizes but then the probably more frequent 10-25% sizes favor LG. Sustained brightness behavior is fairly similar at larger window sizes though QD-OLED has an edge at large window sizes while LG is better around the 10% size. Remains to be seen how these fare when shrunk down to the 27" 1440p size.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

They need to make a 40" 21:9 OLED. Superwide is just too wide.

Guys, stop it with these these fucking comments every time a new monitor is announced

Not every monitor made by every manufacturer is for you.

Sometimes LG or Samsung will make a monitor you want, most of the time they won't

Some people like super duper ultra wide monitors. So they might like this.

 

[MistaSparkul]

The person who made those graphics really dropped the ball. That doesn't even look curved.

This seems like a 5120x1440 version of the 3440x1440 QD-OLEDs we had this year. With the announcement of Samsung making a 7680x2160 version of this form factor, I have little interest in the MSI.

QD-OLED is not for me until they are at 4K+ resolution because that weird pixel structure is there unless Samsung re-engineers their stuff for standard RGB. It means lower text clarity in Windows unless MS improves ClearType to support more pixel structure formats. With the LG OLEDs I did not find this as much of an issue.

Even if the Samsung 7680x2160 is LCD, I'd still take that if it's going to perform similarly to Neo G8 overall (e.g. 240 Hz, decent HDR...hopefully no scanlines tho) as most of the time I will be using it on the desktop and the higher res matters there. I sold my CRG9 eventually because I wanted higher res despite liking the form factor a good bit.

I totally agree we need more 40" 5120x2160 options though. That's a real sweet spot form factor.

Not sure what the refresh rate is on that monitor but if it's too high then you might need DP 2.1 to drive it and the 4090 unfortunately lacks that.

 

[kasakka]

Not sure what the refresh rate is on that monitor but if it's too high then you might need DP 2.1 to drive it and the 4090 unfortunately lacks that.

HDMI 2.1 should be fine when paired with DSC. Even a 2x ratio compression could deliver 7680x2160 10-bit 144 Hz with a 48 Gbps port. At 3x compression 40 GBps port would still do probably like 180 Hz.

Still a bit pissed off about the lack of DP 2.1 support though. With the ridiculous speeds of the 4090 I could easily use this for years and years but most likely am going to swap for something in a few years just to get DP 2.1 ports.

 

[undertaker2k8]

Was hoping Samsung wouldn't continue their SUW obsession and release this instead of a 38-40" 3840*1600 or dream 5k2k, what a waste.

 

[kasakka]

Was hoping Samsung wouldn't continue their SUW obsession and release this instead of a 38-40" 3840*1600 or dream 5k2k, what a waste.

So far Samsung has not been interested in making either of those form factors. Honestly 3840x1600 seems pretty much dead at this point and manufacturers will just eventually make better 5120x2160 40" displays. Well, at least I hope they do.

Samsung factory setup probably allows making essentially a dual panel display with the same process as a single panel model so we get these super ultrawides. IMO it's a very good form factor for productivity uses but I don't love it for gaming except for racing/flight sim type games.