• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

OLED Computer Monitors ?

Skakruk said:
I can't wait for a worthy successor to CRT. LCD has been a diabolical miscarriage since day one. Lightboost addresses only one of LCD's enormous shortcomings. This is a turd that cannot be polished. I hope OLED doesn't disappoint.
Click to expand...
I beg to disagree about turds.

Have you ever tried this $10,000 LCD display? The Viewpixx Scientific Research Monitor.
Here's the colorful specifications data-sheet.

Scientific LCD computer monitor 1920×1200, with 12-bit color, 120 Hz, optional scanning backlight (1ms response), full RGB LED array, active matrix LCD (yay, not a TN), user selectable white point, and better color gamut than CRT. 100% completely PWM-free. Flicker free sample-and-hold mode, and scanning backlight mode, with measurements reportedly better than LightBoost. Remains extremely bright even in scanning backlight mode.

Arguably, many people would prefer to feast eyes on this monitor than an average CRT. (no misconvergence, no misuniformity, great text sharpness, CRT clarity motion, wide viewing angle, better than CRT colors).
On average, this $10,000 LCD clearly eliminates more LCD disadvantages than a typical CRT can eliminate CRT disadvantages.
This could even be tomorrow's $500 LCD.
 
Last edited:
Mark Rejhon said:
I beg to disagree about turds.

Have you ever tried this $10,000 LCD display? The Viewpixx Scientific Research Monitor.
Here's the colorful specifications data-sheet.

Scientific LCD computer monitor 1920×1200, with 12-bit color, 120 Hz, optional scanning backlight (1ms response), full RGB LED array, active matrix LCD (yay, not a TN), user selectable white point, and better color gamut than CRT. 100% completely PWM-free. Flicker free sample-and-hold mode, and scanning backlight mode, with measurements reportedly better than LightBoost. Remains extremely bright even in scanning backlight mode.

Arguably, many people would prefer to feast eyes on this monitor than an average CRT. (no misconvergence, no misuniformity, great text sharpness, CRT clarity motion, wide viewing angle, better than CRT colors).
On average, this $10,000 LCD clearly eliminates more LCD disadvantages than a typical CRT can eliminate CRT disadvantages.
This could even be tomorrow's $500 LCD.
Click to expand...

I perfectly agree with you that is awesome. But there is one problem with LCD in general. As long as there isn't a technology that won't allow for artifacts that will sacrifice people eyes for a smaller price, companies like you know who will always do it, and we unfortunately will end up with having more manufacturers doing it, or they won't be able to compete price wise with those.

So sorry, but my only hope is backlight free OLED, which hopefully will allows for as few artifacts as possible. Or at least I hope that everything that they try to cheat with is measurable, just like PWM flickering that became measurable, and input lag and many other things, which we all own it to the community that did something to combat this.
 
I agree OLED is the right direction to go in over the long term; or other variants of LED (crystal LED, AMOLED, etc).

Out of the gate, OLED will have more saturated colors and better coverage of color gamut (except for ultra niche displays like these), and better contrast. No disagreement on those attributes. However, I just wonder how quickly the OLED issues can be resolved (e.g. expensive cost, lack of brightness, motion blur problem on some OLED's -- see Why Do Some OLED's Have Motion Blur?). This could easily give another full decade of LCD improvements until the crossover in every single category happens.

Maybe in 100 years from now, we'll have 1000fps@1000Hz displays becoming common. Oh well. One can dream!
-- No strobing needed for motion blur reduction
-- Flicker free sample-and-hold WITHOUT motion blur

Currently, a strobe backlight utilizing 1.4ms strobes = 1/700th second (LightBoost 10% setting) has the equivalent motion blur to a theoretical 700fps@700Hz flicker-free sample-and-hold display. So, the bar is extremely high to achieve the same amount of motion blur reduction, while staying sample-and-hold (for the flicker free advantage). Scientific papers have shown that the visible frame length dictates the motion blur, and NOT the Hz. (Although increasing Hz does shorten the upper limit of visible frame length, it's much easier to further shorten visible frame lengths via strobing like a CRT or LightBoost or pulse-driven OLED). It's the same reason why CRT 60fps@60Hz has less motion blur than traditional LCD 120fps@120Hz. This can be an issue to those more sensitive to motion blur than others.
 
Last edited:
Does it say somewhere that the $10K monitor's LED array employs local dimming? (Otherwise, not too interesting to me as my biggest gripes with LCD are black level and dynamic range...)
 
SH1 said:
Does it say somewhere that the $10K monitor's LED array employs local dimming? (Otherwise, not too interesting to me as my biggest gripes with LCD are black level and dynamic range...)
Click to expand...
Good question about that; I tried checking the specs. It doesn't seem to say anything. Technically, nothing prevents a scanning backlight by also simultaneously doing local dimming, as long as the LED's can be individually controlled. It's already a proven technology, so just have to all be brought together simultaneously into one monitor.

For me, as long as blacks are darker than movie theater film blacks, I generally don't complain. I'm far more sensitive to motion blur myself, but everybody is different.
 
Mark Rejhon said:
active matrix LCD (yay, not a TN)
Click to expand...

the passive/active refers to how the (sub)pixels are addressed, not the type of liquid crystal layout used. all modern lcd panels used in monitors and tv's are active matrix, including tn. passive matrices are now only typically used in cheap/small display applications where response time is not a concern.

so it's possible this $10k monitor uses a tn panel, it's just that we all kinda hope it doesn't.
 
livefastdieyoung said:
so it's possible this $10k monitor uses a tn panel, it's just that we all kinda hope it doesn't.
Click to expand...
It definitely ain't TN, that's for sure. It's rated at a 7ms pixel response time when the scanning backlight feature is disabled. That's the native pixel response time (non-backlight-assisted). Hmmm, somebody should probably ask them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top