PG32UQX - ASUS 32" 4K 144 Hz HDR1400 G-Sync Ultimate

[amonakira]

yes 32ep950 is the only choose if you can't stay with fald limits. have 350nit on fullscreen sustained and 500 on 50%, for example new evo oled do only 200nit full sustained or less. then 32ep950 is a true rgb oled, major drawback are burnin and 60hz

 

[TsbitPrik]

And that's just your opinion (and you do not own that OLED monitor either, funny how that works). FALD limitations with so few zones are extremely severe and will turn many people off. I personally think that FALD looks ridiculously and annoyingly bad as of today, with the content I consume and in my current dark room.

You can call OLED a sidegrade though, because the tech has limitations too, so the weight of the pros and cons will vary from user to user.

Don't own it? Have you not seen my videos and pics?

 

[kalston]

Don't own it? Have you not seen my videos and pics?

Oi, I was replying to AgentAnon not you. Thought that would be obvious lol

 

[Hubba Bubba]

Seriously people need to stop these OLED vs LCD arguments. Personal preferences should not be put to debate.
If you need to aggressively point out to others how poor their buying decision was for the purpose of justifying your own buying decision (more to yourself than anyone else really), you have already lost the credibility battle.
People need to acknowledge that when they select one technology over the other they also forego the advantages of the other, it's called opportunity cost.
If one had no discernible advantages over the other, demand would tank and the technology would disappear.
As far as I am aware both OLED and LCD are perfectly valid choices at the moment.

 

[Skyhopper01]

I tried Sea of Thieves to see what mine looks like and I had a similar experience. While mine was not as bad in person as the posted videos show that game seems to be a worst case scenario for this monitor. The cell shaded bright small objects against greyish night sky and dark blue water is causing some pretty bad halos at times. I also had the yellow glow pop up a couple times as well.

I generally like HDR gaming on this monitor but the little bit I tried Sea of Thieves it was a pretty poor experience with the FALD enabled. Definitely a worse case scenario

I tried Sea of Thieves to see what mine looks like and I had a similar experience. While mine was not as bad in person as the posted videos show that game seems to be a worst case scenario for this monitor. The cell shaded bright small objects against greyish night sky and dark blue water is causing some pretty bad halos at times. I also had the yellow glow pop up a couple times as well.

I generally like HDR gaming on this monitor but the little bit I tried Sea of Thieves it was a pretty poor experience with the FALD enabled. Definitely a worse case scenario sort of example for the limitations of fald tech.

Interesting. I don't play sea of thieves, but I did run into a possible worst case scenario with Forza Horizon 5 as well. Most of the time the game looks stunning, but there are some sections where the GPS highlights which are bright white on the screen induce blooming against the sky. Especially on a grey or dark blue hue. I do have to go out of my way to look for them so probably not as bad as your example, but def noticeable.

 

[jt39]

Small update: ASUS confirmed (again) that this is a hardware error. I forwarded their response to the vendor and I'm now awaiting their response. Let's see where this goes.

 

[Hypez]

Small update: ASUS confirmed (again) that this is a hardware error. I forwarded their response to the vendor and I'm now awaiting their response. Let's see where this goes.

Unless you can convince them to do a buy back or a refund you are likely going to just go through an endless back and forth loop unfortunately.

Asus support is just following basic protocol to keep SLA times low.

At this point it sounds like everyone here has had some degree of bloom or yellow glow. It's just an abnormality of the algorithm to control the fald (yellow glow) or a limitation of the tech (halos). Unless there is a firmware update to tweak it regardless of the display you have it will always be there to some varying degree.

I wish you the best of luck but you are likely just wasting time and effort at this point.

 

[Hubba Bubba]

Small update: ASUS confirmed (again) that this is a hardware error. I forwarded their response to the vendor and I'm now awaiting their response. Let's see where this goes.

Yeah yeah, they always confirm it's a "hardware error" and then send you a replacement with the same "hardware error".
Their after sales service is decentralised to the point of absolute disintegration, it's like addressing an entity with no central nervous system and all neurons running loops.
So best of luck to you...

 

[AgentAnon]

And that's just your opinion (and you do not own that OLED monitor either, funny how that works). FALD limitations with so few zones are extremely severe and will turn many people off. I personally think that FALD looks ridiculously and annoyingly bad as of today, with the content I consume and in my current dark room.

You can call OLED a sidegrade though, because the tech has limitations too, so the weight of the pros and cons will vary from user to user.

Peak brightness is crucial for HDR, and this isn't subject to opinion. This is why the standards are based on it. OLED is objectively not a good option for anyone looking for a good HDR experience. It's just dim and not impressive at all. It lacks the wow factor and the realism. Recommending to a 250nit OLED panel to people in this thread is silly given the demographic of the people interested in the PG32UQX.

The strengths of OLED are reduced power draw, which is why it's great for phones and handheld devices which is where it's likely going to live on.

 

[Hubba Bubba]

Peak brightness is crucial for HDR, and this isn't subject to opinion. This is why the standards are based on it. OLED is objectively not a good option for anyone looking for a good HDR experience. It's just dim and not impressive at all. It lacks the wow factor and the realism. Recommending to a 250nit OLED panel to people in this thread is silly given the demographic of the people interested in the PG32UQX.

The strengths of OLED are reduced power draw, which is why it's great for phones and handheld devices which is where it's likely going to live on.

Respectfully disagree, I have an LG C1 48 sitting right next to my PG32UQX and it is plenty impressive.

True, I prefer HDR on the PG32 but the LG also gives me less grief overall and is certainly a much better value and allround proposition.
But it is also not a monitor and in my view it should not really be used as one.

I also have a Sony OLED A90J and saying that it does not have impressive HDR is just plain false. And at 65 inches it is still cheaper than the PG32.

So let's just tone it down a bit with the OLED is subpar tune.
Slightly less impressive HDR? Arguably.
Only fit for phones and handhelds? Far from it.

 

[AgentAnon]

So let's just tone it down a bit with the OLED is subpar tune.
Slightly less impressive HDR? Arguably.

I've used both of those TVs before. You wouldn't buy them for HDR. You buy them as general purpose SDR replacements.

They are quite literally dim and not impressive at all in comparison to high end Mini-LEDs in the 1500-2000 nits realm. This is a limitation of OLED tech and buyers should be aware before purchasing one. People who own OLED TVs have incentive to not notice these differences as much since they invested a lot of money (and they're not necessarily doing this on purpose, a lot of it is psychological), but that doesn't mean we should sugarcoat it.

Only fit for phones and handhelds? Far from it.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-miniled-is-the-future-of-big-displays
I'm not the only one who is saying this.

 

[Hubba Bubba]

I've used both of those TVs before. You wouldn't buy them for HDR. You buy them as general purpose SDR replacements.

They are quite literally dim and not impressive at all in comparison to high end Mini-LEDs in the 1500-2000 nits realm. This is a limitation of OLED tech and buyers should be aware before purchasing one. People who own OLED TVs have incentive to not notice these differences as much since they invested a lot of money (and they're not necessarily doing this on purpose, a lot of it is psychological), but that doesn't mean we should sugarcoat it.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-miniled-is-the-future-of-big-displays
I'm not the only one who is saying this.

OK sure, that is one "Opinion" from a freelance journalist, it is not even that publication's position.
I appreciate that brightness is important but from a point onwards diminishing returns set in, noone likes their retinas being under constant strain.
I need to keep my PG32UQX at a 80 - 90 cm distance from my eyes otherwise it is simply unpleasant in HDR.

And your argument on incentives to not notice the limitations of OLED because people invested money in it, also applies to incentives to not notice or downplay the limitations of mini LED and FALD because people invested (even more) money in it.
In other words it also applies to you, just so that we're on the same page.
Anyway, from where I stand all this discussion is little more than wasted energy.
To each their own.

 

[AgentAnon]

OK sure, that is one "Opinion" from a freelance journalist, it is not even that publication's position.
I appreciate that brightness is important but from a point onwards diminishing returns set in, noone likes their retinas being under constant strain.
I need to keep my PG32UQX at a 80 - 90 cm distance from my eyes otherwise it is simply unpleasant in HDR.

That's a silly point to make that only hurts your position, because you hold significantly less credibility. You're an anonymous internet commenter.

The purpose of mentioning that article is because you tried to frame this as something "I'm saying" that "I should tone down" when in reality I'm not the only one saying it. If anything others are saying it even more boldly.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-miniled-is-the-future-of-big-displays

noone likes their retinas being under constant strain.

It's High Dynamic Range not High Constant Range. You don't seem to understand how HDR works or what it does which is common to people who have unfortunately spent a lot of time viewing OLED panels; it's the delta between the dark and the light that is impressive - you don't sit there and stare at the brightest element on the screen, and on the contrary you can't if your panel is any decent just like you can't walk outside, tilt your head up at the sun, and stare. Or stare directly at a light bulb.

This level of realism is lost on OLED.

And your argument on incentives to not notice the limitations of OLED because people invested money in it, also applies to incentives to not notice or downplay the limitations of mini LED and FALD because people invested (even more) money in it.
In other words it also applies to you, just so that we're on the same page.

Sure, it's a universal logic, but it doesn't apply evenly in this case because Mini-LED and OLED are not even in terms of HDR capabilities. Mini-LED is a great at it while OLED is terrible at it. Just so we're on the same page.

 

[Hubba Bubba]

Grateful for the ignore function in these forums 😁

 

[AgentAnon]

Whatever helps you sleep at night 😁

 

[fist003]

ahhh, world peace

 

[johnnysd]

That's a silly point to make that only hurts your position, because you hold significantly less credibility. You're an anonymous internet commenter.

The purpose of mentioning that article is because you tried to frame this as something "I'm saying" that "I should tone down" when in reality I'm not the only one saying it. If anything others are saying it even more boldly.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-miniled-is-the-future-of-big-displays


It's High Dynamic Range not High Constant Range. You don't seem to understand how HDR works or what it does which is common to people who have unfortunately spent a lot of time viewing OLED panels; it's the delta between the dark and the light that is impressive - you don't sit there and stare at the brightest element on the screen, and on the contrary you can't if your panel is any decent just like you can't walk outside, tilt your head up at the sun, and stare. Or stare directly at a light bulb.

This level of realism is lost on OLED.


Sure, it's a universal logic, but it doesn't apply evenly in this case because Mini-LED and OLED are not even in terms of HDR capabilities. Mini-LED is a great at it while OLED is terrible at it. Just so we're on the same page.

You literally have no idea what you are talking about. To say that HDR and specular highlights on OLED are not extremely impressive is simply ludicrous. Perceived brightness of a TV or monitor is very complex. Much more than just the measured lumens level of a TV defines the impact of HDR. Contrast, color saturation and local dimming are actually more important to HDR impact than absolute lumens readings. Lets say we have an OLED at 800 lumens and a LCD at 1600 lumens, the perceived brightess of 1600 Lumens is the approximately the square root of the increase intensity, so in this case the LCD would only be perceived to be 41% brighter. If we look at a sustained window of 2% with the Qn90A and A90J it is 1221 vs 770 lumens, which is 58% higher so only a 25% increase in perceived brightness. However, our eyes perceive higher contrast levels and color saturation as higher brightness and since OLED has essentially infinite contrast and local dimming is not required HDR, an OLED has arguably better HDR impact than HDR on a LED. Nothing wrong with you liking LED better but your statements are just incorrect . In terms of contrast It's obvious take a 100 W bulb against a grey background and put a 100W bulb against a pure black background and pretty much everyone will think that the bulb against black is brighter. Take any color and without changing the lumen level, change the saturation and it will appear brighter. On TVs the top end TVs have very similar color volume but if we are looking at monitors the ones with higher color volume will also be considered brighter. RTINGS with measured values, HDTV Test, B the installer, and others thing OLED HDR is more impactful. RTINGs rates the A90J as 8.9 at HDR and the QN90A at 8.6, because as mentioned lumens is only one element in terms of HDR impact (perceived brightness levels between different parts of the screen) as contrast and local dimming also have a lot of impact on HDR.

 

[Hubba Bubba]

You literally have no idea what you are talking about. To say that HDR and specular highlights on OLED are not extremely impressive is simply ludicrous. Perceived brightness of a TV or monitor is very complex. Much more than just the measured lumens level of a TV defines the impact of HDR. Contrast, color saturation and local dimming are actually more important to HDR impact than absolute lumens readings. Lets say we have an OLED at 800 lumens and a LCD at 1600 lumens, the perceived brightess of 1600 Lumens is the approximately the square root of the increase intensity, so in this case the LCD would only be perceived to be 41% brighter. If we look at a sustained window of 2% with the Qn90A and A90J it is 1221 vs 770 lumens, which is 58% higher so only a 25% increase in perceived brightness. However, our eyes perceive higher contrast levels and color saturation as higher brightness and since OLED has essentially infinite contrast and local dimming is not required HDR, an OLED has arguably better HDR impact than HDR on a LED. Nothing wrong with you liking LED better but your statements are just incorrect . In terms of contrast It's obvious take a 100 W bulb against a grey background and put a 100W bulb against a pure black background and pretty much everyone will think that the bulb against black is brighter. Take any color and without changing the lumen level, change the saturation and it will appear brighter. On TVs the top end TVs have very similar color volume but if we are looking at monitors the ones with higher color volume will also be considered brighter. RTINGS with measured values, HDTV Test, B the installer, and others thing OLED HDR is more impactful. RTINGs rates the A90J as 8.9 at HDR and the QN90A at 8.6, because as mentioned lumens is only one element in terms of HDR impact (perceived brightness levels between different parts of the screen) as contrast and local dimming also have a lot of impact on HDR.

He can go on forever you know and your time is precious...

 

[jt39]

AgentAnon It seems that you have a tendency to Authority Bias when it comes to reviews. Everyone is entiteled to an opinion. It does not matter if someone has a blog or a YouTube Channel or even a News publication report. Having authority does not make it true or any more valid than any other opinion, facts are.
HDR can only be truly called HDR if the the image can mimic what the world looks like to humans: That is, if all boxes are ticked: Brightness, Contrast, Blacks, Color Strength, Color Accuracy...
MiniLED delivers high brightness, true. But it comes at a cost, which is that in PG32UQX's case (the one I have seen myself) messes up contrasts. Brightness is not everything in HDR, it's a part of it.

MIniLED fails to deliver a 100% solution to this problem at the current consumer prices. Fact.
OLED fails to deliver a 100% solution to this problem at the current consumer prices. Fact.
Proof: Buy a MiniLED and OLED for under $5000. There is not one display that can deliver.

It's a transitioning technology, what are you fanboying about? Can you stand by your opinion 10 years from now?

 

[jake1977]

Man I came to this forum to learn more about the pg32uqx and if I should buy it. Seems this has turned in to a OLED vs MiniLed slugfest...I am of the opinion that each person can have their own opinions about what technology they prefer. Is there a perfect display out there? Definitely not. As I mentioned in previous posts, the pg32uqx checks all the boxes off for what I wanted in a display (4K, higher refresh rate, HDR, G-Sync, and form factor). I am very happy that I purchased this monitor, but it is perfectly fine for people to be disappointed in their purchase, that is their right.

 

[dgrdsv]

I would definitely get an OLED monitor over a FALD IPS or VA one.
Too bad that there are no OLED panels which are 32-42", have RGB pixel structure and are capable of >60 Hz.
So this whole discussion here is about nothing basically. OLED is not an option if you want a gaming PC monitor right now.

 

[SoCali]

Most of this OLED vs LCD debate in here is based off a fundamental misunderstanding of HDR (where is elvn with those HDR heatmaps).

 

[Skyhopper01]

Respectfully disagree, I have an LG C1 48 sitting right next to my PG32UQX and it is plenty impressive.

True, I prefer HDR on the PG32 but the LG also gives me less grief overall and is certainly a much better value and allround proposition.
But it is also not a monitor and in my view it should not really be used as one.

I also have a Sony OLED A90J and saying that it does not have impressive HDR is just plain false. And at 65 inches it is still cheaper than the PG32.

So let's just tone it down a bit with the OLED is subpar tune.
Slightly less impressive HDR? Arguably.
Only fit for phones and handhelds? Far from it.

I agree. I also have a LG C7 Oled in my living room. I do prefer the HDR on the PG32uqx but the C7 looks amazing in its own right.

 

[AgentAnon]

You literally have no idea what you are talking about. To say that HDR and specular highlights on OLED are not extremely impressive is simply ludicrous. Perceived brightness of a TV or monitor is very complex. Much more than just the measured lumens level of a TV defines the impact of HDR. Contrast, color saturation and local dimming are actually more important to HDR impact than absolute lumens readings. Lets say we have an OLED at 800 lumens and a LCD at 1600 lumens, the perceived brightess of 1600 Lumens is the approximately the square root of the increase intensity, so in this case the LCD would only be perceived to be 41% brighter. If we look at a sustained window of 2% with the Qn90A and A90J it is 1221 vs 770 lumens, which is 58% higher so only a 25% increase in perceived brightness. However, our eyes perceive higher contrast levels and color saturation as higher brightness and since OLED has essentially infinite contrast and local dimming is not required HDR, an OLED has arguably better HDR impact than HDR on a LED. Nothing wrong with you liking LED better but your statements are just incorrect . In terms of contrast It's obvious take a 100 W bulb against a grey background and put a 100W bulb against a pure black background and pretty much everyone will think that the bulb against black is brighter. Take any color and without changing the lumen level, change the saturation and it will appear brighter. On TVs the top end TVs have very similar color volume but if we are looking at monitors the ones with higher color volume will also be considered brighter. RTINGS with measured values, HDTV Test, B the installer, and others thing OLED HDR is more impactful. RTINGs rates the A90J as 8.9 at HDR and the QN90A at 8.6, because as mentioned lumens is only one element in terms of HDR impact (perceived brightness levels between different parts of the screen) as contrast and local dimming also have a lot of impact on HDR.

Everything in this post is false and you have no idea what you're talking about. The cold slap of reality is that contrast is a function of brightness, and that OLED will NEVER be capable of a true HDR experience like Mini-LED technology is, because it is limited by a (very low) brightness ceiling. Mini-LED on the other hand can improve local dimming and reduce black levels (which are already mathetically close to 0) by simply by increasing the amount of zones. In addition to being dim OLED has other technical disadvantages as well such as blues decaying faster than red and green and burn-in that make it entirely unsuitable for use as a PC monitor for anything longer than a year. Your sunk cost/regret over how much you spent on your now dated OLED TV has no place in this thread, and it is quite literally dragging the quality of the forum down in that LG OLED TV owners are so desperate to justify their purchases that they continuously come into future-facing threads (which also have nothing to do with TVs) to make sure they still feel relevant.

Even professionals agree. Sony ended production of the BVM X300, their former HDR reference monitor despite it being relatively new, and shifted to stacked dual layer LCD design. And get this: the reason they did so is that OLED panels aren't capable of providing the HDR compatibilities that are needed. It performed so poorly in practice that they killed it mid-cycle.

 

[AgentAnon]

I would definitely get an OLED monitor over a FALD IPS or VA one.
Too bad that there are no OLED panels which are 32-42", have RGB pixel structure and are capable of >60 Hz.
So this whole discussion here is about nothing basically. OLED is not an option if you want a gaming PC monitor right now.

OLEDs are hopelessly outclassed by the PG32UQX in almost every category. And you are correct, OLED is indeed not an option if you want a gaming PC monitor. But even aside from that it's actually quite simple:

The PG32UQX (and displays with similar next-gen Mini-LED technology) are both high and dynamic. They have High Dynamic Range.

OLED TVs are Low Dynamic Range.

 

[dgrdsv]

OLED TVs are Low Dynamic Range.

No, they are not. Dynamic range is based not only on brightness but also on contrast, and OLEDs are orders of magnitude better here. Yeah, their brightness is lower but for a monitor that's a questionable issue - 600-800 nits should be well enough. Perfect blacks and per pixel dimming though are unquestionable advantages.

But as I've said, the discussion is pointless. There are no gaming OLED monitors.

 

[celwin]

Can we keep this thread on topic please. It's a PITA having to read posts discussing OLED vs LCD when one is expecting feedback on the actual monitor this thread is about.

 

[Astral Abyss]

Can we keep this thread on topic please. It's a PITA having to read posts discussing OLED vs LCD, when one is expecting feedback on the actual monitor this thread is about.

It's funny, I've been on this forum for 20 years and it's always the same. It used to be LCD vs CRT. It's always something. People like to argue, especially when their technology of choice is under attack.

Here's a question, unrelated... I understand that the G-Sync Ultimate is there to assist with the FALD performance, but unfortunately I'm running a 6900xt. Is there any hope of a non-gsync version that doesn't have FALD latency issues?

 

[AgentAnon]

No, they are not. Dynamic range is based not only on brightness but also on contrast, and OLEDs are orders of magnitude better here. Yeah, their brightness is lower but for a monitor that's a questionable issue - 600-800 nits should be well enough. Perfect blacks and per pixel dimming though are unquestionable advantages.

But as I've said, the discussion is pointless. There are no gaming OLED monitors.

Mini-LED is much better. Contrast is a function of brightness, and Mini-LED blacks are essentially perfect too.

Can we keep this thread on topic please. It's a PITA having to read posts discussing OLED vs LCD, when one is expecting feedback on the actual monitor this thread is about.

Agreed. LG OLED TV owners should stick to their own threads. People in general need to stop coming into this thread to make off-topic "recommendations" on OLED TVs that are absolutely terrible for what the demographic in this thread is looking for, and for the most part worse in general.

 

[Kot0005]

Small update: ASUS confirmed (again) that this is a hardware error. I forwarded their response to the vendor and I'm now awaiting their response. Let's see where this goes.

I made an account just for you lol.

From what u are saying you seem to be from Australia.

Saying your country wont invade ur privacy. U already loat ur privacy when you used the internet.

Call ur bank and dispute the transaction.

Also i have a g9 neo. I had to return my pg32uqx because it came with a bunch of dead pixels and they had no stock for replacement.

My firat g9 neo had even more dead pixels. 2nd one is good on pixel side but but has issues like creaking and popping sounds when it warms up and cools down lol

1008 fw introduced a new local dimming high issue in sdr. They still need to increase peak brightness. Its not even vesa hdr1000 atm.

But it doesnt have the haloing issues that pg has. Fald grid will be on all fald devices.

I dont notice dse but fald grid i do on like browsers apps etc, not as much in games /movies.

It does have flickering, scanlines and another issue that no one talks about.

The panel produces horizontal pixel level banding when vrr control is on in certain colours such has blues, yellows, oranges and reds.

But u need vrr control so it doesnt flicked in super contrasty scenes and dark screens. I habr it off b3cause the pixel banding is horrible.

One horizontal row of pixels are darker in colour and the next row is a bit lighter and it looks ugly and pixellated.

I dunno if this will get fixed b3cause no 9ne talks about it. It was there on both the g9 neos on both hdmi and dp and at all refreshrates when vrr control is on.

 

[Kot0005]

I been playing forza 5 on the neo and its amazing in hdr. Def need mire peak brightness tho. Wen i had pg27uq the peak hilights were popping off and i had to bli k my eyes sometimes. On the neo hdr brightness feels like 650nits even on latest fw 2000nits is juat false adveryising

 

[AgentAnon]

I think this is my favorite unboxing video. So clean.

 

[Hypez]

I think this is my favorite unboxing video. So clean.

SMH.....looks like he's got some yellow glow problem at 5:06 hah

 

[Skyhopper01]

SMH.....looks like he's got some yellow glow problem at 5:06 hah

I didn't see any glow there.

 

[jt39]

I didn't see any glow there.

Right in the middle from top to bottom there is a yellow stripe.

Also I'm wondering why there was no blooming in 5:01 😆 with the crosshair over the dark background.
Maybe he turned Fald off.

 

[Skyhopper01]

Right in the middle from top to bottom there is a yellow stripe.

Also I'm wondering why there was no blooming in 5:01 😆 with the crosshair over the dark background.
Maybe he turned Fald off.

That is apart of the wall in the game. Take another look. There is no yellow banding issue.

 

[jt39]

That is apart of the wall in the game. Take another look. There is no yellow banding issue.

Yellow banding is on the dynamic wallpaper.

 

[Furikosx]

I've used both of those TVs before. You wouldn't buy them for HDR. You buy them as general purpose SDR replacements.

They are quite literally dim and not impressive at all in comparison to high end Mini-LEDs in the 1500-2000 nits realm. This is a limitation of OLED tech and buyers should be aware before purchasing one. People who own OLED TVs have incentive to not notice these differences as much since they invested a lot of money (and they're not necessarily doing this on purpose, a lot of it is psychological), but that doesn't mean we should sugarcoat it.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-miniled-is-the-future-of-big-displays
I'm not the only one who is saying this.

I'm big fan of oled since the first days but people really defend their new toy and it's annoying. OLED HDR is barely a HDR. Most of the wow factor comes from the big size and the glossy screen. I bet most people doesn't even view it in a suitable environment to appreciate the contrast benefits.

 

[Furikosx]

I been playing forza 5 on the neo and its amazing in hdr. Def need mire peak brightness tho. Wen i had pg27uq the peak hilights were popping off and i had to bli k my eyes sometimes. On the neo hdr brightness feels like 650nits even on latest fw 2000nits is juat false adveryising

Check out Days Gone. The best HDR implementation i've seen in a game. Just legit HDR. No bs.

 

[AgentAnon]

That is apart of the wall in the game. Take another look. There is no yellow banding issue.

Yup there's none. OLED remorse buyers are starting to hallucinate.