New Samsung Odyssey G9 with MiniLED announced

frisbfreek

Weaksauce
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
96
Samsung announced a bunch of stuff today (MicroLED/MiniLED TVs, soundbars, etc.), but a new G9 with MiniLED was included. Maybe they fixed the issues with the 2020 G9?

Text:
https://news.samsung.com/us/samsung-unboxes-2021-tv-audio-lineup/

Video:
https://news.samsung.com/us/invitation-unbox-discover-2021/

"In 2020, the Odyssey G9 gaming monitor generated a lot of buzz—this year, Samsung is leveling up the experience with a Quantum MiniLED display and premium gaming features. The 1000R screen curvature, combined with Quantum MiniLED display technology, gives gamers an experience unlike any other. The new G9 joins Samsung’s full lineup of curved and flat Odyssey gaming monitors."
 
I wonder if this one will have more local dimming zones than the original? Might finally make it worth a purchase.
 
I wonder if this one will have more local dimming zones than the original? Might finally make it worth a purchase.
That's the whole point of the Mini-LED backlight. You can expect 1000+ zones which would make it a pretty good HDR display. It was the one major shortcoming of the display.

I would love to see some improvements in other areas. Toggling PbP mode is a chore, there is no good DDC support for programmatic control of its features and the display startup and resolution switching is extremely slow.

I do expect it to be prohibitively expensive.

I also wish they jumped in on the 38" 3840x1600 game as I feel that is a bit better form factor for gaming with less FOV distortion issues. You can of course run the G9 at 3840x1440 with black bars, with mini-LED that probably also looks better as the black bar areas can be properly dim so they blend in with the bezel.

Another interesting bit about their new TVs: "In addition, Samsung Neo QLED and QLED let you see virtually every detail with incredible 4k clarity, a silky-smooth 120 frames per second, and a low 5.8ms response time." 5.8ms response time seems like it would be a little bit worse than their G7 monitors are capable of. It's no OLED tho but glad to see them improve.
 
Last edited:
So its still a primitive backlit display? What a joke if so. Oled or true microled or no led..
 
So its still a primitive backlit display? What a joke if so. Oled or true microled or no led..
OLED or MicroLED is not coming to something like this in a long time. Mini-LED will work just fine for HDR and is a good improvement.

I get it, OLED is great which is why I swapped my Samsung CRG9 for the LG CX 48" but it has its own issues as well. G9 response times paired with solid HDR sounds like a really good compromise to me and I dig the super ultrawide format.
 
OLED or MicroLED is not coming to something like this in a long time. Mini-LED will work just fine for HDR and is a good improvement.

I get it, OLED is great which is why I swapped my Samsung CRG9 for the LG CX 48" but it has its own issues as well. G9 response times paired with solid HDR sounds like a really good compromise to me and I dig the super ultrawide format.
Agreed it'll reduce halos immensely but I still think it'll lose out in some content, e.g. star fields.
Are you referring to black crush? Thought they'd mostly fixed that now. Or the (IIRC) weird strobe/refresh behavior? Or less HDR brightness? That one I don't see OLED fixing in a while, is it that important though? HDR2k sounds like some serious torching..
Will it touch the real-world response of oled? From what I have seen even at lower hz (120, nothing to sneeze at) it can often outdo even some of the best backlit panels at higher refresh. Horses for courses and I don't play twitch fps because 200+ ping international is a waste of time. But I get why a screen like this is appealing, happy to wait for further oled improvement though.

I'd say the only way we will get microled is vr headsets for the foreseeable future. They already demonstrated 1khz refresh rates!! HP did make a reference mini led monitor a while back though if my memory serves me well.
 
Last edited:
Agreed it'll reduce halos immensely but I still think it'll lose out in some content, e.g. star fields.
Are you referring to black crush? Thought they'd mostly fixed that now. Or the (IIRC) weird strobe/refresh behavior? Or less HDR brightness? That one I don't see OLED fixing in a while, is it that important though? HDR2k sounds like some serious torching..
Will it touch the real-world response of oled? From what I have seen even at lower hz (120, nothing to sneeze at) it can often outdo even some of the best backlit panels at higher refresh. Horses for courses and I don't play twitch fps because 200+ ping international is a waste of time. But I get why a screen like this is appealing, happy to wait for further oled improvement though.

I'd say the only way we will get microled is vr headsets for the foreseeable future. They already demonstrated 1khz refresh rates!! HP did make a reference mini led monitor a while back though if my memory serves me well.
No, with OLED I meant things like burn-in possibility and the sheer size of the LG CX. I felt the CRG9 was a nicer monitor for desktop use but its response times were not quite there. The G9 seems to do much better in this regard but that model seems to have had a lot of quality control and Freesync flicker issues. Even the G9 can't touch OLED for response times but I would expect it is more than good enough for most. My friend's Samsung G7 at 240 Hz looked really good to me but I don't know how it would handle 120 Hz which is frankly a more realistic target for non-multiplayer shooters.

OLED is top tier for most categories right now and I thoroughly enjoy using mine. I want to see how their 42" model ends up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Samsung are supposed to release a 32" high refresh 4K version of the G series. That's what I'm interested in. None of this ultra wide-screen puny 1440p junk.
 
A major concern is how much will local dimming be gimped in game mode. For LCD, the number of dimming zones is only as good as its dimming algorithm (which is traditionally weak in game mode).
 
Sadly the 32:9 aspect ratio and the 1000r curvature are non-starters for me. Will have to hope and wait for the 42" LG OLED panel.
 
A major concern is how much will local dimming be gimped in game mode. For LCD, the number of dimming zones is only as good as its dimming algorithm (which is traditionally weak in game mode).

The Samsung G9 does not have any separate "game mode" afaik.
 
Agreed it'll reduce halos immensely but I still think it'll lose out in some content, e.g. star fields.
Are you referring to black crush? Thought they'd mostly fixed that now. Or the (IIRC) weird strobe/refresh behavior? Or less HDR brightness? That one I don't see OLED fixing in a while, is it that important though? HDR2k sounds like some serious torching..
Will it touch the real-world response of oled? From what I have seen even at lower hz (120, nothing to sneeze at) it can often outdo even some of the best backlit panels at higher refresh. Horses for courses and I don't play twitch fps because 200+ ping international is a waste of time. But I get why a screen like this is appealing, happy to wait for further oled improvement though.

I'd say the only way we will get microled is vr headsets for the foreseeable future. They already demonstrated 1khz refresh rates!! HP did make a reference mini led monitor a while back though if my memory serves me well.

My Samsung Q9FN TV has HDR2000.
Its not torchlike, its fantastic.
Only very bright objects get full HDR.
Change the contrast/backlight/brightness/contrast enhancer and gamma to suit, you arent condemned to anything, I have it very bright because it works so well.
My next TV will be HDR4000+.

ps some movies are mastered much higher than HDR 1000, there are 2000, 4000 and higher I believe.
If you want to see how good it can look ...

Avengers Endgame, Batman v Superman Dawn of Justice, Dunkirk, Tenet, The Mountain Between Us, Blade Runner 2049, to name a few, are HDR 4000.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Sadly the 32:9 aspect ratio and the 1000r curvature are non-starters for me. Will have to hope and wait for the 42" LG OLED panel.

Same here, would be very attractive especially if the main issue with the G9 would be fixed with these minileds but sadly I don't like curved monitors (or ultra-wide for that matter), it's especially bad when you use 2 screens next to each other with a limited desk space the curved screen will take up more space from the sides (the 2nd monitor/TV has to be placed further apart or more in front giving you less useable desk space either way)
 
No, with OLED I meant things like burn-in possibility and the sheer size of the LG CX. I felt the CRG9 was a nicer monitor for desktop use but its response times were not quite there. The G9 seems to do much better in this regard but that model seems to have had a lot of quality control and Freesync flicker issues. Even the G9 can't touch OLED for response times but I would expect it is more than good enough for most. My friend's Samsung G7 at 240 Hz looked really good to me but I don't know how it would handle 120 Hz which is frankly a more realistic target for non-multiplayer shooters.

OLED is top tier for most categories right now and I thoroughly enjoy using mine. I want to see how their 42" model ends up.
OLED looks great, I just wouldn't expect much longevity out of it. I would go in expecting to replace it after a year or two, and be pleasantly surprised if it lasts longer than that.
 
Samsung are supposed to release a 32" high refresh 4K version of the G series. That's what I'm interested in. None of this ultra wide-screen puny 1440p junk.
This is what I am waiting on. Gaming monitors that match the resolution that consoles play at. There is no reason for high end PC monitors to have lower resolutions than consoles.
 
This is what I am waiting on. Gaming monitors that match the resolution that consoles play at. There is no reason for high end PC monitors to have lower resolutions than consoles.
Most console games run at 1440p if you want more than 30 fps, even on PS5/Xbox Series X. The ones that claim 4K are often 4K checkerboard instead. The latest gen is probably the first that does actual native 4K res.

If I run my 48" LG CX OLED at 1:1 scaling the end result at the lower screen size (~32" at 1440p for example) does not really look all that different from the full screen spanning native 4K. I feel like the 1440p vs 4K is somewhat diminishing returns on small screens and 1440p is a pretty appropriate res for 27" and their ultrawide and super ultrawide variants.

With super ultrawides like the Samsung the bigger issue is that the 32:9 is perhaps a bit diminishing returns for many games due to FOV distortion or games being designed with 16:9 in mind. For example Nioh 2 doesn't benefit much from the uw aspect ratios because most of its player traversable paths are narrow so most things happen in the center of the screen. Like many games UI also gets more unwieldy the wider the aspect ratio. For first person shooters 32:9 is a bit uncomfortably wide for my tastes. On the flipside it makes for example Control feel less claustrophobic and is great for racing games.

Ultimately it would be a nice improvement if they could let you enable VRR and HDR for a portion of the screen when running in PbP mode if you wanted to use narrower aspect ratios. Now it means running a narrower res with black bars on the sides so the extra display area is mostly useful on desktop or windowed apps.
 
This is great - for a small minority of users. I wish Samsung would focus on releasing such a mini led display at 27”, even if “just” with 1000 zones. If I can’t have a 27” oled, that’s hold me over for a few years - until Microled I guess.
 
This is great - for a small minority of users. I wish Samsung would focus on releasing such a mini led display at 27”, even if “just” with 1000 zones. If I can’t have a 27” oled, that’s hold me over for a few years - until Microled I guess.

I think we will see such displays in the not so distant future. Im looking at LG's 160hz 4k IPS 27" it ticks nearly all the boxes but it is local dimming, once the model gets refreshed with mini-led it should be a good benchmark for others to follow.
Although i think id prefer a slightly larger 28" or 32" model.
 
I think we will see such displays in the not so distant future. Im looking at LG's 160hz 4k IPS 27" it ticks nearly all the boxes but it is local dimming, once the model gets refreshed with mini-led it should be a good benchmark for others to follow.
Although i think id prefer a slightly larger 28" or 32" model.
TFTcentral, seeing the latest panel updates, seems to think we'll get 27 and 32" minileds this year. Of course, availability doesn't mean they'll be worth it. Meaning: Dell and LG's OLED monitors are $3000 at the cheapest, which is utterly ridiculous when you can buy a 55" OLED for $1500. If a 27" miniled is $1500, well, forget it. Asus gave us their PA32UCX at the idiotic price of $4500, because it was the only one in the market. That won't fly, not anymore, when TCL is selling 55" miniled TVs for $650, and BOE/LG/AU Optronics are making several 27 and 32" miniled panels expected to release in 2021.

I'd pay $500 for a 27" QHD (not even 4K) with 1000 zones - preferably QLED, doesn't have to be 144hz. Anything more than that... might as well just buy a TV. Hopefully we get minileds in 2021 that are sanely priced products.

Edit: the TFTcentral updates are well worth a read, if you're interested:
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/au-optronics-latest-panel-development-plans-oct-2020/
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/boe-latest-panel-development-plans-oct-2020/
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/lg-display-latest-panel-development-plans-oct-2020/
 
I'd pay $500 for a 27" QHD (not even 4K) with 1000 zones - preferably QLED, doesn't have to be 144hz. Anything more than that... might as well just buy a TV. Hopefully we get minileds in 2021 that are sanely priced products.

Im in the same boat with regards to pricing but i want a 28". I would require as fast a refresh rate as was possible for future proofing & mainly because if the technology can do it then i seems a waste of cable to not to have it activated (DSC on DP1.4 is visually lossless 160hz@4k). Even the desktop experience is a lot nicer as motion resolution increases on LCD with faster refresh rates that can't be achieved with 60hz no matter how well a panel is tuned.
 
Last edited:
Everyone seems to miss Samsung's announcement of a flat Odyssey G7; if we'll get a VA panel without dark smearing AND it's free of BLB caused by the extreme panel bending, that's groundbreaking.
 
Everyone seems to miss Samsung's announcement of a flat Odyssey G7; if we'll get a VA panel without dark smearing AND it's free of BLB caused by the extreme panel bending, that's groundbreaking.
I hate curved screens, but won’t a 32” flat VA have aweful color shifting?
 
I hate curved screens, but won’t a 32” flat VA have aweful color shifting?
Nope, you'll have to get to ultrawides to see a meaningful difference.

Besides, Samsung possesses some of the best viewing angle technology for VA that they use in TV panels. They could make even flat ultrawides look good if they wanted.
 
If anything, the curve probably slightly ameliorates the black crush in the center of the screen inherent to VA - in some ways more noticeable on "flat" content (including Hardforum with the dark theme) than other types of color shifting. I have not seen the previous G9 in person, but I understand from reviews that it is less apparent in this model.
 
Oh man this new g9 specs look mouth watering, HDR2000, 240Hz, MiniLED.

But why do they not bring these exact specs to a flat screen 16:9 monitor at 32" or greater :(
 
If anything, the curve probably slightly ameliorates the black crush in the center of the screen inherent to VA - in some ways more noticeable on "flat" content (including Hardforum with the dark theme) than other types of color shifting. I have not seen the previous G9 in person, but I understand from reviews that it is less apparent in this model.
I have never been bothered by viewing angles on my CRG9 either which has a more modest curvature. Only time I actually notice color shift is if I have a photo editor open and use a red tinted color in full screen. Then you can see a difference so it's not maybe ideal for those who need accurate color reproduction for work but for everyone else it's perfectly fine.

I have had a VA in the past that had very bad black crush and just don't see that on the current Samsungs. Did not notice any such issues with the G7 my friend has. Samsung right now has by far the best VA implementation in these monitors where response times are much less of an issue than they were in the past.

The mini-LED version if it's not priced completely ridiculously will be a pretty good product as far as LCDs go. Sure it won't be no OLED but if you don't want to deal with the drawbacks of that (size, burn in at some point) then you should be pretty happy with the G9.

Samsung could really hit it out of the park if they made a 32" 4K 16:9 version of this.
 
Having bought the first one recently, I'd care more about stand quality and no more cheap plastic bits than the screen itself. Shitty build quality on these except for the screen. All the plastic protectors on mine (on the stand) popped off within the first hour of having it together, and they're impossible to put back on without totally dismantling it.
 
If I run my 48" LG CX OLED at 1:1 scaling the end result at the lower screen size (~32" at 1440p for example) does not really look all that different from the full screen spanning native 4K. I feel like the 1440p vs 4K is somewhat diminishing returns on small screens and 1440p is a pretty appropriate res for 27" and their ultrawide and super ultrawide variants.
can you tell me more about this? I have the 48” CX. Do you set a custom res. in the nVidia control panel?
 
The 48” 4k monitors / TVs are exactly the same DPI as 24” 1080 panels and look right at 100% scaling so there’s nothing special to do IMHO. In fact I can see it being better at 42” but you can only scale up from there.
I have used a 32” 4k work monitor for years with some scaling and IMHO a 37-42” would be close to perfect for 100% scaling depending on your preference and distance.
 
can you tell me more about this? I have the 48” CX. Do you set a custom res. in the nVidia control panel?
You need to set display scaling to be done on the GPU in the NVCP desktop size and position settings. Then set No scaling option. Now if you select 2560x1440 resolution it will just be scaled smaller at the center of the screen.
 
Most console games run at 1440p if you want more than 30 fps, even on PS5/Xbox Series X. The ones that claim 4K are often 4K checkerboard instead. The latest gen is probably the first that does actual native 4K res.

If I run my 48" LG CX OLED at 1:1 scaling the end result at the lower screen size (~32" at 1440p for example) does not really look all that different from the full screen spanning native 4K. I feel like the 1440p vs 4K is somewhat diminishing returns on small screens and 1440p is a pretty appropriate res for 27" and their ultrawide and super ultrawide variants.

With super ultrawides like the Samsung the bigger issue is that the 32:9 is perhaps a bit diminishing returns for many games due to FOV distortion or games being designed with 16:9 in mind. For example Nioh 2 doesn't benefit much from the uw aspect ratios because most of its player traversable paths are narrow so most things happen in the center of the screen. Like many games UI also gets more unwieldy the wider the aspect ratio. For first person shooters 32:9 is a bit uncomfortably wide for my tastes. On the flipside it makes for example Control feel less claustrophobic and is great for racing games.

Ultimately it would be a nice improvement if they could let you enable VRR and HDR for a portion of the screen when running in PbP mode if you wanted to use narrower aspect ratios. Now it means running a narrower res with black bars on the sides so the extra display area is mostly useful on desktop or windowed apps.

Just checking my understanding here.... With the 48 inch, when you choose 1440p in NVCP with no scaling, that reduces the screen size to 32 inches? If so that is actually kind of perfect. How big would 1440P with no scaling be on the 42inch version coming "soon"? I'm very tempted to buy a 48 inch but I'd rather 42 inches for easier mounting on a monitor arm and easier repositioning.

Edit - If I did the math right, 1440p on a 48 inch is 36 inches. On a 42 inch 1440p is 31.5 inches. I actually really like 31.5 inch 1440p. I wish the LG OLEDs did 240hz.
 
Last edited:
Just checking my understanding here.... With the 48 inch, when you choose 1440p in NVCP with no scaling, that reduces the screen size to 32 inches? If so that is actually kind of perfect. How big would 1440P with no scaling be on the 42inch version coming "soon"? I'm very tempted to buy a 48 inch but I'd rather 42 inches for easier mounting on a monitor arm and easier repositioning.

Edit - If I did the math right, 1440p on a 48 inch is 36 inches. On a 42 inch 1440p is 31.5 inches. I actually really like 31.5 inch 1440p. I wish the LG OLEDs did 240hz.
I actually measured with a tape measure that it was ~31.5 inches at 1440p with no scaling on the 48". It's been a while since I did this so I would have to double check.
 
Just checking my understanding here.... With the 48 inch, when you choose 1440p in NVCP with no scaling, that reduces the screen size to 32 inches? If so that is actually kind of perfect. How big would 1440P with no scaling be on the 42inch version coming "soon"? I'm very tempted to buy a 48 inch but I'd rather 42 inches for easier mounting on a monitor arm and easier repositioning.

Edit - If I did the math right, 1440p on a 48 inch is 36 inches. On a 42 inch 1440p is 31.5 inches. I actually really like 31.5 inch 1440p. I wish the LG OLEDs did 240hz.

is there a reason why you don't buy a 31.5 1440p monitor for that instead of having a huge black bezel around a 42" screen ? is it just the fact it's OLED. Because there is the samsung G7 at 240hz 1440p 31.5 and it has good enough response times and is a VA panel with a decent black level down at 0.10cdm and the peak brightness is no different from an OLED. The advantage of running the 42" at 1440p 31.5" would be an increase of pixel density to more like a 27" 1440p display and of course much better HDR.
 
is there a reason why you don't buy a 31.5 1440p monitor for that instead of having a huge black bezel around a 42" screen ? is it just the fact it's OLED. Because there is the samsung G7 at 240hz 1440p 31.5 and it has good enough response times and is a VA panel with a decent black level down at 0.10cdm and the peak brightness is no different from an OLED. The advantage of running the 42" at 1440p 31.5" would be an increase of pixel density to more like a 27" 1440p display and of course much better HDR.
Yeah that's the one I would go for if you are not looking for good HDR. A friend has the G7 and at 240 Hz it performs very well, especially for multiplayer shooters.
 
Just checking my understanding here.... With the 48 inch, when you choose 1440p in NVCP with no scaling, that reduces the screen size to 32 inches? If so that is actually kind of perfect. How big would 1440P with no scaling be on the 42inch version coming "soon"? I'm very tempted to buy a 48 inch but I'd rather 42 inches for easier mounting on a monitor arm and easier repositioning.

Edit - If I did the math right, 1440p on a 48 inch is 36 inches. On a 42 inch 1440p is 31.5 inches. I actually really like 31.5 inch 1440p. I wish the LG OLEDs did 240hz.

Dear Mother of God Think of the PIXELS.....1440peee @ 32"
640x960%2Fc643b7f31b550445f030727dfdf2af3a3a29db0d.gif
 
1440 pee is gross.....I mean shit I just sent the X38 packin as 1600pee is too dated. If your gonna spend $2500 may as well save up and get a real monitor...PG32UQX

Wake me up when we got a curved 38" 5120 x 2160 2000+ MiniLed Fald Zone, HDR 2000+, 175+hz display

You're sounding like a broken record here. So it's 1440. It's 1440 in 13.2" vertical. Which is the a slightly higher pixel density than a 43" 4K's 2160 in 20.85". Considering that this thing is 46" wide I doubt anyone will be sitting less than 40" away and at that distance, You won't notice the pixel. I don't notice the pixel on either one of my 43" sets.
 
Back
Top