OLED 4K 30" 60 Hz - Dell UP3017Q

Baasha

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
111
Is everyone's panel Oct. 2016 or have they made any 2017 versions yet?

I'm starting to wonder if the 120Hz 4K OLED might actually see the light of day sooner rather than later. hmm....
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
2,913
Is everyone's panel Oct. 2016 or have they made any 2017 versions yet?

I'm starting to wonder if the 120Hz 4K OLED might actually see the light of day sooner rather than later. hmm....

I don't think there will be a 2017 version of the OLED. If Dell knew what they were doing, they would have either done dual Mini-DP for MST 4k 120hz or they would have made an announcement that they were waiting for proper displayport 1.4 tcons.

Instead they made this horrid contraption that poorly serves content creators or gamers and I think their sales are gonna be so dismal, returns will be so very high....that it will scare them away form pursuing OLED any further. If they were smart, they would realize that strobing 120hz + Gsync would make this thing "THE ONE," but its pretty clear that their leadership has no idea about the potential gold mine they are sitting on.
 

JR1980

n00b
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
7
Crisis somewhat averted.

I took a look through a handheld 30x microscope.

Snowdog is correct - the red stripes are staggered between columns. I think this is the cause of the unusual pattern along the diagonals that I can see.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Crisis somewhat averted.

I took a look through a handheld 30x microscope.

Snowdog is correct - the red stripes are staggered between columns. I think this is the cause of the unusual pattern along the diagonals that I can see.

I was pretty sure you guys had the same screen, getting two suppliers for an identically spec'ed but different OLED at this point seems very unlikely.

Could you have a look at a checkerboard like I mention here:
https://hardforum.com/threads/oled-4k-30-60-hz-dell-up3017q.1929730/page-4#post-1042972527

It should reveal a bit more info.

It might be that the base pattern is BGR (rare) instead of RGB, or if those red pairs are acting as one pixel.
 

JR1980

n00b
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
7
I was pretty sure you guys had the same screen, getting two suppliers for an identically spec'ed but different OLED at this point seems very unlikely.

Could you have a look at a checkerboard like I mention here:
https://hardforum.com/threads/oled-4k-30-60-hz-dell-up3017q.1929730/page-4#post-1042972527

It should reveal a bit more info.

It might be that the base pattern is BGR (rare) instead of RGB, or if those red pairs are acting as one pixel.

Through the 30x microscope:

Each pixel is lit up as BGR. The R appears slightly higher than the corresponding B and G.
 

Attachments

  • BGR.JPG
    BGR.JPG
    165 KB · Views: 103

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Through the 30x microscope:

Each pixel is lit up as BGR. The R appears slightly higher than the corresponding B and G.

Good stuff.

If your microscope isn't reversing the image, and this is a BGR screen, that could cause fringing in default cleartype which IIRC is setup for RGB, but I think there is a setting for BGR.

Go into cleartype tuner, I don't think it exposes the BGR setting but you just get it by picking the example which works best on your monitor.
 
Last edited:

JR1980

n00b
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
7
Good stuff.

If your microscope isn't reversing the image, and this is a BGR screen, that could cause fringing in default cleartype which IIRC is setup for RGB, but I think there is a setting for BGR.

Go into cleartype tuner, I don't think it exposes the BGR setting but you just get it by picking the example which works best on your monitor.

You're right again. It is reversed.

Ordering aside, my ClearType tuner has 5 pages worth of samples, and I have no idea what adjustments each page is making. I don't think all of them are for pixel ordering.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
You're right again. It is reversed.

Ordering aside, my ClearType tuner has 5 pages worth of samples, and I have no idea what adjustments each page is making. I don't think all of them are for pixel ordering.

Some are ordering, some are strength of effect. Definitely worth a run through if you see fringing issues.
 

Sancus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,036
Man we get crappy reviews like this from garbage youtube channels and tft central still can't source a sample :(
 

Pushead

n00b
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
20
Agreed. That review was terrible. No testing whatsoever - basically gave us no useful information about the monitor.
 

zamardii12

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
2,857
Look's like they redesigned the prototype. 60 Hz now instead of 120 Hz but at least they put DP 1.2 and HDMI 2.0 on it. Got it for $2,997 with military discount. Hopefully the input lag is low!

Damn that's baller! lol. In a year this tech will be what 4K prices are at now. What did you upgrade from if anything?
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
2,913
Agreed. That review was terrible. No testing whatsoever - basically gave us no useful information about the monitor.

Bzzzzz Bzzzzzzz dis monitor be Da Best Yo, CUZZZ Its Expinsainsinsiviesves and stuffs.

Sigh...just because something is pricey does not mean it is automatically the best.....and unfortunately this Dell Oled is far from good. The double strobe makes gaming a chore and creates havoc for dialing in proper colors...not to mention its about 33ms response time not Insta like he claimed.

I received the thing on a Friday, it was boxed back up on Saturday, and returned to Dell on Monday. Back to my LG c6 OLED and FW900.
 

guney

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
149
Vega actually tested the numbers. Also, I had the Dell OLED and its responsiveness felt identical to my LG c6

Just so I'm clear, are we talking about input lag time here or actual pixel response time? If it's the latter, when Dell is quoting a 0.1 ms response time for this monitor, even if they're misquoting it even a hundredfold, that should still mean only a 10 ms response time at worst, shouldn't it?

Plus, this is part of what's confusing me: A 33 ms translates to a 30 Hz refresh rate. Perhaps this is just my ignorance showing here but, when we know the monitor has a 60 Hz refresh rate, how could it have a pixel response time that's the equivalent of 30 Hz? In other words, how could each pixel be making only a single transition within the space of time they actually change state twice?

I feel I must be missing something.
 

Odellus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
1,696
Just so I'm clear, are we talking about input lag time here or actual pixel response time? If it's the latter, when Dell is quoting a 0.1 ms response time for this monitor, even if they're misquoting it even a hundredfold, that should still mean only a 10 ms response time at worst, shouldn't it?

Plus, this is part of what's confusing me: A 33 ms translates to a 30 Hz refresh rate. Perhaps this is just my ignorance showing here but, when we know the monitor has a 60 Hz refresh rate, how could it have a pixel response time that's the equivalent of 30 Hz? In other words, how could each pixel be making only a single transition within the space of time they actually change state twice?

I feel I must be missing something.
he's talking about input lag.
 

oledguy1

n00b
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
44
So from the people that have used this monitor, what is the bottom line? I have been using a (HP OMEN) with an R9 Fury and Freesync for some time now and before that I used a Geforce 980 with a Gsync monitor. I have come to like adaptive sync a lot. However, I have been dying for the perfect blacks and great contrast of an OLED when playing dark games like Outlast and space sims. If I get this monitor and get a beefy graphics card like a 1080TI and adjust my settings to that I am consistently getting >60fps and I enable vsync will i get a smooth gaming experience without tearing similar to what i am getting now with freesync? Thanks in advance for any input!!
 

Enhanced Interrogator

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,055
If I get this monitor and get a beefy graphics card like a 1080TI and adjust my settings to that I am consistently getting >60fps and I enable vsync will i get a smooth gaming experience without tearing similar to what i am getting now with freesync? Thanks in advance for any input!!

Yeah, motion should be super smooth, especially if you enable 60hz strobing (assuming you're not super sensitive to the flicker). The problem with vsync though is adds noticeable input lag in most game engines. There are a few exceptions, like Frostbite (which most EA games use), which are pretty good about minimizing input lag with vsync enabled, especially if used in conjunction with the game's built-in frame limiting command. Others, like Far Cry's Dunia engine, add a stupid amount of input lag with vsync. Sometimes you can reduce the lag by adjusting Nvidia's "max pre-rendered frames"
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
2,913
Yeah, motion should be super smooth, especially if you enable 60hz strobing (assuming you're not super sensitive to the flicker). The problem with vsync though is adds noticeable input lag in most game engines. There are a few exceptions, like Frostbite (which most EA games use), which are pretty good about minimizing input lag with vsync enabled, especially if used in conjunction with the game's built-in frame limiting command. Others, like Far Cry's Dunia engine, add a stupid amount of input lag with vsync. Sometimes you can reduce the lag by adjusting Nvidia's "max pre-rendered frames"

Man...I hate false information. The 60hz strobe mode on this sucker is UNBEARABLE. There is no "sensitive to it" its freaking gawd aweful...like staring into the sun. Are you sensitive to staring into the sun with your bare naked eyes? Cause that is about the jist of how terrible 60hz single strobe is.

The double strobe is horrendous in its own right as the image doubling makes distant objects in games like BF1 double up....NOT FUN!

If you want an oled for gaming get the LG C7.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,552
I haven't seen it personally, but I'm assuming they wouldn't have made it a feature if it's unbearable to everybody

Yeah but every other manufacturer refuses to do 60hz single strobe, they either force double strobing or simply limit the strobing refresh rate to a minimum of 85hz like what's found in ULMB enabled monitors. It may not be bad for everybody, but it sure is bad for ALMOST everybody if every other manufacturer is going to avoid it like the plague.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
2,913
I haven't seen it personally, but I'm assuming they wouldn't have made it a feature if it's unbearable to everybody

You have not seen it so you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. And yet you continue on with your mis-information, are you trolling? Feature??? Dude the shit and I mean SHIT is so bad on 60hz strobe that I immediately mouthed the words "FUCK YOU DELL" when I tested it.
 

Luke M

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
432
Yeah but every other manufacturer refuses to do 60hz single strobe, they either force double strobing or simply limit the strobing refresh rate to a minimum of 85hz like what's found in ULMB enabled monitors. It may not be bad for everybody, but it sure is bad for ALMOST everybody if every other manufacturer is going to avoid it like the plague.

Some TVs have a 60Hz strobe option.

I suspect this panel was intended to be used in a pro video monitor, not a computer display.
 

Drags

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
957
the screen is clearly aimed at professional users primarily, but the conversation here is largely about its performance for gaming etc. Which sadly looks to be a bit of a problem. The screen is always strobing as part of its image retention measures which is the issue. at 60HZ you get a decent image and good motion clarity for gaming, but the flicker is very noticeable based on reports here (Vega and co) and to some people probably unusable. To get around the flicker there is a 120Hz strobing option via the flicker-less setting, but that results in a double image (as do other screens which use a double strobe system) which is an issue then in itself.

probably why Dell are only releasing this in the US in a very small volume, and are not offering it out to review sites at all. It is an interesting concept screen, but i bet proper full reviews would bury it right now based on these limitations.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,557
I don't think professional reviewers would bury it. The double image "issue" at 120 Hz doesn't mean much for the professional audience as the flicker isn't noticeable there. Remember we are talking about OLED here, which naturally will destroy LCD on almost all metrics.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
I don't think professional reviewers would bury it. The double image "issue" at 120 Hz doesn't mean much for the professional audience as the flicker isn't noticeable there. Remember we are talking about OLED here, which naturally will destroy LCD on almost all metrics.

I don't even think the double scan matters that much to most gamers. Just a small percentage of forum dwellers.

I'd LOVE to have one of these, if I had the disposable income.
 

Drags

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
957
I don't think professional reviewers would bury it. The double image "issue" at 120 Hz doesn't mean much for the professional audience as the flicker isn't noticeable there. Remember we are talking about OLED here, which naturally will destroy LCD on almost all metrics.

No sorry I just meant it wasn't ideal for gaming, but totally agree for its intended uses and professional audience it shouldn't matter.
 

Sancus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,036
I'd love to buy one of these but it's really hard to part with $3500 when it only takes a 60hz input and I'm accustomed to 144hz.
 

Enhanced Interrogator

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,055
You have not seen it so you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. And yet you continue on with your mis-information, are you trolling? Feature??? Dude the shit and I mean SHIT is so bad on 60hz strobe that I immediately mouthed the words "FUCK YOU DELL" when I tested it.

I currently use Trinitron and Diamondtron monitors, so my 60hz strobed(actually, scanned) experience is based on that. And 60hz looks good on those for most content outside of text on white backgrounds. Street Fighter V with motion blur disabled looks ridiculously good.... IN MY EXPERIENCE, SO CHILL THE EFF OUT!

I'd love to buy one of these but it's really hard to part with $3500 when it only takes a 60hz input and I'm accustomed to 144hz.

And from what I've read, the input lag isn't any better than LG's tv's. So at that point it gets harder to justify.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
2,913
I currently use Trinitron and Diamondtron monitors, so my 60hz strobed(actually, scanned) experience is based on that. And 60hz looks good on those for most content outside of text on white backgrounds. Street Fighter V with motion blur disabled looks ridiculously good.... IN MY EXPERIENCE, SO CHILL THE EFF OUT!



And from what I've read, the input lag isn't any better than LG's tv's. So at that point it gets harder to justify.

Son we are not talking bout the Trinitron and Diamondtron monitors, now are we?
 

TwistedMetalGear

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
1,835
When you guys say 60Hz strobe, is that equivalent to the flicker you would get on a 60Hz CRT monitor?

If so, then I'd agree that it's unbearable. Especially on light colored backgrounds and ESPECIALLY when you catch it in your peripheral vision.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
When you guys say 60Hz strobe, is that equivalent to the flicker you would get on a 60Hz CRT monitor?

If so, then I'd agree that it's unbearable. Especially on light colored backgrounds and ESPECIALLY when you catch it in your peripheral vision.

IMO, back when CRT monitors were 14", 60Hz was kind of tolerable, but once I moved up to 19" CRT, I found 60 Hz flicker intolerable. 75 Hz was a lot better but still an issue at times.

85Hz is where I found it gone completely.
 

guney

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
149
As a user of this monitor, a quick comment on the 60Hz-strobe: The 60Hz mode is indeed unbearable for me for more than a few seconds. It looks so bad to me that, when I first tried the setting, I wondered what aim it could possibly serve. (The monitor defaults to the 120Hz mode from the factory.) And I'm a person who is normally not sensitive to screen flicker. I've used CRT monitors with 60Hz refresh rate for years, and I haven't noticed the PWM flicker on a laptop monitor even once in my life.

I have a hunch as to why 60Hz looks so bad on this monitor. CRTs have a pretty substantial persistence of each of their strobes/scans. I'm pretty sure this is on the order of several milliseconds (at least). So, after each scan/strobe is over, the phosphors on a CRT display stay lit until nearly the time of the next scan/strobe. (In fact, an ideal CRT display should presumably have a persistence time that's equal to the inverse of its optimum refresh rate; i.e., 1/60 seconds for 60Hz.) With the UP3017Q, the response time is 0.1 ms. So, the display can revert back to pure black much more quickly between each strobe. I'm not sure how much time each pixel spends in on vs. off state on this monitor (is it 1/120 seconds on and 1/120 seconds off for 60Hz strobe, or a much shorter "on" time?), but it feels like this super-quick response time would mean that the display spends much more cumulative time in its black state during strobing than a CRT display would, making the strobing that much more visible.

Meanwhile, LCD displays don't really strobe, of course. Only their backlights could. And that's PWM, which is typically at much higher frequencies and, therefore, not noticeable to most.
 

zone74

Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
621
I have a hunch as to why 60Hz looks so bad on this monitor. CRTs have a pretty substantial persistence of each of their strobes/scans. I'm pretty sure this is on the order of several milliseconds (at least). So, after each scan/strobe is over, the phosphors on a CRT display stay lit until nearly the time of the next scan/strobe. (In fact, an ideal CRT display should presumably have a persistence time that's equal to the inverse of its optimum refresh rate; i.e., 1/60 seconds for 60Hz.) With the UP3017Q, the response time is 0.1 ms. So, the display can revert back to pure black much more quickly between each strobe. I'm not sure how much time each pixel spends in on vs. off state on this monitor (is it 1/120 seconds on and 1/120 seconds off for 60Hz strobe, or a much shorter "on" time?), but it feels like this super-quick response time would mean that the display spends much more cumulative time in its black state during strobing than a CRT display would, making the strobing that much more visible.
CRT persistence is typically <2ms:

2ms.jpg


Ideally OLEDs would have the option to adjust the duty cycle to whatever you prefer.
It is very important that they never double-strobe though. Single-strobe, or don't strobe at all.
Flicker doesn't bother me at all when it's single-strobed, so I hope they don't remove the option.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
535
CRT persistance was highly variable depending on what phosphors they used. The better monitors with higher refresh rates usually were also the ones with the shorter times. One of the things I remember checking back in the CRT days. Some cheap monitors had 10+ ms decay times.
 

guney

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
149
Hmmm. There's quite a bit of difference between 2 ms and 10 ms. With only 2 ms of persistence, the difference between CRT and OLED in terms of amount of flicker should be close to negligible, following my line of reasoning. (Since 60 Hz would give you nearly 17 ms of time between strobes, even a CRT that's decaying in 2 ms should have plenty of time to stay in its "dark state" between two strobes, creating plenty of flicker.)

However, my years of CRT use were during the younger years of my life, when I couldn't really afford very high-end CRT monitors. So, perhaps the CRT displays I'm likely to have experienced were closer to that 10 ms decay time. That would mean the monitor would have stayed on for 60% of the time period between two scans/strobes, meaning quite a high percentage of "on" time. That ratio might be much lower for OLEDs. (Not sure.)

On the other hand, it's coming back to me now that the norm for a "good" CRT monitor refresh rate was actually 85 Hz during the latest years I used them; not 60 Hz. I do believe some of the CRTs I owned (at least in post-college years) were 85 Hz models. That would mean just under 12 ms of time between each scan of the phosphors. With a persistence time of 10 ms or a little less, that does translate to the phosphors being lit nearly all the time between successive refreshes thanks to persistence.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Hmmm. There's quite a bit of difference between 2 ms and 10 ms. With only 2 ms of persistence, the difference between CRT and OLED in terms of amount of flicker should be close to negligible, following my line of reasoning. (Since 60 Hz would give you nearly 17 ms of time between strobes, even a CRT that's decaying in 2 ms should have plenty of time to stay in its "dark state" between two strobes, creating plenty of flicker.)

However, my years of CRT use were during the younger years of my life, when I couldn't really afford very high-end CRT monitors. So, perhaps the CRT displays I'm likely to have experienced were closer to that 10 ms decay time. That would mean the monitor would have stayed on for 60% of the time period between two scans/strobes, meaning quite a high percentage of "on" time. That ratio might be much lower for OLEDs. (Not sure.)

On the other hand, it's coming back to me now that the norm for a "good" CRT monitor refresh rate was actually 85 Hz during the latest years I used them; not 60 Hz. I do believe some of the CRTs I owned (at least in post-college years) were 85 Hz models. That would mean just under 12 ms of time between each scan of the phosphors. With a persistence time of 10 ms or a little less, that does translate to the phosphors being lit nearly all the time between successive refreshes thanks to persistence.


I don't think too much effort should be spent on this. OLED is near square wave for responsiveness. It's blacks are blacker and it's brights are brighter (CRTs tended to be pretty dim), and this is huge compared to ancient CRT monitors, all contribute to flicker being worse on OLED if your cycle at 60Hz.

I also think older monitors that were expected to work at 60Hz had longer persistence phosphor. I remember running 60 Hz on some of these and it being no so bad, but when I moved to larger higher quality multisync, then 60 Hz became intolerable.

Bottom line. It's no surprise that 60Hz strobing on a big OLED screen is a bad idea.
 
Top