Odyssey Neo G8 - 4K 240 Hz 32" Quantum Mini LED

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
7,107
This is a 32-inch display with the world's first 4K 240Hz panel. It also features a 1000R curvature and Quantum Mini LED backlighting.

The mini LED backlighting system uses units that are 1/40th the size of conventional LED units. With Samsung's Quantum Matrix and Quantum HDR 2000 technologies, the display can achieve up to 2000 nits of peak brightness in HDR content with 4096 step backlight adjustment.

The monitor also supports dual HDMI 2.1 ports and a single DisplayPort 1.4 connection. The Auto Source Switch+ feature will automatically change sources when a connected device is powered on. The CoreSync feature adjusts the RGB lighting on the back of the monitor to match the contents of the screen.

gsmarena_001.jpg


https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_an..._worlds_first_4k_240hz_monitor-news-52506.php
 
I'm staying far away from any Samsung monitors until at least 6 months after release. They have a terrible track record.
Yup! No one should buy this till the reviews are in and confirm they have fixed all the issues present with what sounds like the same system used on the G9 neo. Which is honestly a monitor that shouldn't have been released in it's current buggy state.
 
Can't wait for it to max out at 800nits in real content.

EDIT: I'm guessing $1999?
 
I dont know why people dislike curved screens so much, Ive been using curved samsungs for almost 5 years and hasnt even been an issue. It took all of a day to get used to it after using a flat IPS, and havent had any issues since. Unless I actually pay attention to the edges of it, it looks like a normal flat monitor.
 
I dont know why people dislike curved screens so much, Ive been using curved samsungs for almost 5 years and hasnt even been an issue. It took all of a day to get used to it after using a flat IPS, and havent had any issues since. Unless I actually pay attention to the edges of it, it looks like a normal flat monitor.
Is it curved that hard though? Some curved screens are pretty gentle, but the Samsungs are STEEP. It is way more than you normally see.
 
Yeah this curve blows. Hopefully there will be some other flat alternative.

I would be cautious with this. You don't know how good a Gsync module is until you use a display without one. The Neo isn't smooth in motion when using the setting that prevents VRR flicker and has overshoot galore with that setting disabled.

Pretty crazy progress. One year we have a 4K/144hz FALD monitor with an ancient slow panel and the next a 240hz option with what I assume will be a very fast CSOT panel like the G7/G9.
 
Is it curved that hard though? Some curved screens are pretty gentle, but the Samsungs are STEEP. It is way more than you normally see.

I have a 32 inch G7 I got last year, and it is quite a bit more curved than my last samsung. It didnt even bother me when I switched it over.
 
It's probably going to take multiple firmware updates over months to get this thing where it needs to be, but once it's all dialed in it will be the king of monitors.
 
This is a beautiful monitor, but 4K isn't enough at 32 inches for me if I use the monitor for anything other than gaming. I think this would've been better for more people at 27" instead. Personally, I'd want 4K 120Hz+ at 24", but they won't give it to me. :cry:
 
Good progress. I want a 27-32" (curve is meh either way) 4k @ 144hz with true FALD and IPS or OLED at about 2k - that works out of the box for everything (which yeah, I know is also Windows / etc too). We're getting REAL close. Can't wait to see pricing on this, and how well it works (even if I'm not 100% sold on VA yet).
 
This is a beautiful monitor, but 4K isn't enough at 32 inches for me if I use the monitor for anything other than gaming. I think this would've been better for more people at 27" instead. Personally, I'd want 4K 120Hz+ at 24", but they won't give it to me. :cry:
I loved the ppi if my Dell up2414q way back when, but I just felt it was too small. 27-28" is my ideal size for 4k, having also tried 32" panels. I have yet to try an oled, but I'll probably grab the LG 42" C2 to try this year... unsure I'll like it unless I set it way back due to the ppi.
 
Curve does not bother me in the least. I don't understand how it is a issue on a small display. Yea it made no sense on big TV and glad they did away with it and 3D TVs. I currently have a G7 32" and it still kinda buggy after all this time.
 
Having tried the 32" G7, the curve is not too bad in person. I think it could do without it but it's not an issue in real use.

Otherwise looks like very nice specs, hopefully pricing is right.
 
Having tried the 32" G7, the curve is not too bad in person. I think it could do without it but it's not an issue in real use.

Otherwise looks like very nice specs, hopefully pricing is right.
Price will be ridiculous. I am calling at least $1500.
 
This is a beautiful monitor, but 4K isn't enough at 32 inches for me if I use the monitor for anything other than gaming. I think this would've been better for more people at 27" instead. Personally, I'd want 4K 120Hz+ at 24", but they won't give it to me. :cry:
32" is borderline too small for 4K as far as I am concerned.
 
If this has the same "curve" as the G7 its going to be DOA. Its frustrating that Samsung markets their monitors as 1000R because they are not that. They have a 1000R curve in the middle third of the monitor and then straight sides. This makes everything look terrible on the monitor because things look distorted when they move from a flat side to the curved portion. The worst part is, there's seemingly no reason to design the display like this other than the fact that a true 1000R curve would be way too severe for most users and the insane viewing angles you'd get on the sides would look horrific.
 
If this has the same "curve" as the G7 its going to be DOA. Its frustrating that Samsung markets their monitors as 1000R because they are not that. They have a 1000R curve in the middle third of the monitor and then straight sides. This makes everything look terrible on the monitor because things look distorted when they move from a flat side to the curved portion. The worst part is, there's seemingly no reason to design the display like this other than the fact that a true 1000R curve would be way too severe for most users and the insane viewing angles you'd get on the sides would look horrific.
That's even worse. I don't only game on monitors, same for most I'm sure. My work is reliant on straight lines and trying to get it done on that or even use it as a second screen for the reference drawings would be beyond annoying.
 
If this has the same "curve" as the G7 its going to be DOA. Its frustrating that Samsung markets their monitors as 1000R because they are not that. They have a 1000R curve in the middle third of the monitor and then straight sides. This makes everything look terrible on the monitor because things look distorted when they move from a flat side to the curved portion. The worst part is, there's seemingly no reason to design the display like this other than the fact that a true 1000R curve would be way too severe for most users and the insane viewing angles you'd get on the sides would look horrific.

You mean "DOA" like the incredibly popular G7 that is Hardware Unboxed top 1440p gaming monitor? That kinda "DOA" lol?
 
That's even worse. I don't only game on monitors, same for most I'm sure. My work is reliant on straight lines and trying to get it done on that or even use it as a second screen for the reference drawings would be beyond annoying.
Oh yeah. With a G9 here, you CANNOT use it for things like cad/graphics design/etc; No way, no how. I use it for 3 side-by-side 1440P windows, but I'm doing a lot of other weird things (and it's fine for video editing).
 
32" is borderline too small for 4K as far as I am concerned.
Fair enough. For video content (games included), I can't argue. But for text, I really need a pixel density most people would consider way too high. I don't know why.
 
This is a beautiful monitor, but 4K isn't enough at 32 inches for me if I use the monitor for anything other than gaming. I think this would've been better for more people at 27" instead. Personally, I'd want 4K 120Hz+ at 24", but they won't give it to me. :cry:
I've seen a lot of people say this and I genuinely don't understand. I had a 55 inch 4k OLED less than 4 feet from my eyes and I still needed to increase windows scaling to make everything readable. I have 20/20 vision too and get it tested annually. I guess some of us just like bigger fonts, icons, etc. I can't imagine how tiny everything would look at 4k on a 32 inch screen.

I'm happy with 35 PPI for gaming, using a 27 inch 1080p display for Warzone. Secondary is a 27 inch 1440p display.
 
Fair enough. For video content (games included), I can't argue. But for text, I really need a pixel density most people would consider way too high. I don't know why.
I can't stand Windows font scaling. A lot of times it defeats the purpose of having more desktop real estate by distorting the size of the application windows. How bad this is varies by application. At 40" or larger, I do not require any font scaling to read text on a 4K display. At 32" I do. I feel text is too small at that size and font scaling is a must. Mind you, I do actually have a 28" 4K monitor that I sometimes use for one thing or another. In contrast, my main rig has a 43" Acer Predator 4K and my test bench has a 40" 4K Samsung TV on it right now.
 
I’d only want that size for games. If you’re doing work on a 4K, you either have to scale, or get a big big monitor. Which as Dan points out, defeats the purpose. I use 1440P for work stuff for a reason. At 27-32, that’s perfect for text for me.
 
I’d only want that size for games. If you’re doing work on a 4K, you either have to scale, or get a big big monitor. Which as Dan points out, defeats the purpose. I use 1440P for work stuff for a reason. At 27-32, that’s perfect for text for me.
I use 125% scaling on my 48" OLED TV at 1m viewing distance and still end up with more desktop space and sharper text than 1440p. If you needed to scale a 32" to 150% then you would end up with the same desktop space as a 1440p monitor, but with sharper text and UI.
 
I use 125% scaling on my 48" OLED TV at 1m viewing distance and still end up with more desktop space and sharper text than 1440p. If you needed to scale a 32" to 150% then you would end up with the same desktop space as a 1440p monitor, but with sharper text and UI.
I leave it at 100, but I’m using it for console style gaming and HTPC work
 
I've seen a lot of people say this and I genuinely don't understand. … I can't imagine how tiny everything would look at 4k on a 32 inch screen.
It's because I use 2x integer scaling instead of running at the native resolution of the display. It makes things a nice and sharp at a big enough size.
I can't stand Windows font scaling. A lot of times it defeats the purpose of having more desktop real estate by distorting the size of the application windows. …
I use virtual desktops pretty extensively which makes me actually prefer a smaller screen; that way, I can see whatever I'm doing right in front of me. So for me, having more real estate isn't the purpose. It's having more pixels in the same space so I can scale them and make text sharper. For reference, I run a 27" 5K at 2x scaling. But like I said earlier, 24" 4K at 2x attracts me too, if I could just get 120Hz in exchange for the pixel density. :p
 
Last edited:
I’d only want that size for games. If you’re doing work on a 4K, you either have to scale, or get a big big monitor. Which as Dan points out, defeats the purpose. I use 1440P for work stuff for a reason. At 27-32, that’s perfect for text for me.
Well, getting a big monitor is fine. That's what I prefer. I get a more immersive gaming experience and I get both the extra pixels of 3840x2160 compared to 2560x1440 and I can read the text comfortably without scaling at a distance of around 2.5-3 feet away.
 
Back
Top