Rant: switched back to IPS after being on OLED for a year

[MistaSparkul]

On OLED now. Never going back. Only real annoyance is VRR flicker but I turned off Gsync / VRR and it's gone now. Not an issue when you have a 4K 240 Hz as I see no tearing and can cap frame rates in case I do. Once you go OLED you can't really go back imo.

If you have Asus model OLED, try out it's Anti Flicker function. I initially wrote it off as "yet another stupid Asus gimmick", but to my surprise it does seem to work at reducing VRR flicker.

 

[CHCsky]

Actually the PG32UQX is superior to almost all the OLEDs in color. Since it is IPS and not a VA panel, which has been seen in recent televisions such as the Bravia 9, color is one of its advantages.

It has a MUCH wider color gamut than than the WOLED variants and even higher than the QD-OLED. This is a common misconception among OLED users.

According to TFTCentral:
Rec 2020 coverage:

PG32UQX ~82%
PG32UCDM (QD-OLED): ~79%
WOLED: ~74%


This is to not even touch on color volume, of which given its peak HDR 1400 certification it would eclipse any OLED monitor on the market.

It is also in my experience more accurate in HDR than the Qd-OLEDs which tend to over saturate colors in HDR. I have both.

Yea, PRetty much sums up the point I was making to the other user. Its close.

 

[XoR_]

The Samsung panels do. LG OLEDs have always had bad color accuracy due to the fact that the panel itself tilts toward blue/aqua color spectrum once you go around 20-30 degrees off-axis, which means its something you can't even color calibrate because its a progressive color shift issue on the panel itself. Not sure if its an effect of the anti-glare coating they are using or something else.

Wasn't MLA supposed to eliminate this effect?
All smaller 240+Hz WOLED panels should come with MLA

Actually the PG32UQX is superior to almost all the OLEDs in color. Since it is IPS and not a VA panel, which has been seen in recent televisions such as the Bravia 9, color is one of its advantages.

PG32UQX ~82%
PG32UCDM (QD-OLED): ~79%
WOLED: ~74%

There is almost no content using that wide gamut so do you mean it as gamut affecting how something like sRGB/Rec.709 looks like?
Also have you actually visually compared your Asus to QD-OLED or only WOLED?

WOED colors are actually more like standard gamut monitor withing typically used range of Rec.709/sRGB and only really look anything like >70% Rec.2020 display should for most saturated colors. This is because WOLED is WRGB display and W subpixel light spectrum causes unusual nuance in WOLED colors. I have Nano IPS at slightly below WOLED Rec.2020 coverage and it looks much more like QD-OLED than WOLED

Anyways, past certain point of rod (under)stimulation afforded by wide gamut there is more like change of character of colors and not necessarily to be more vibrant. I myself cannot really decide which of the wide gamut displays have nicer, better, etc. colors and this starts with Pioneer Kuro or WCG-CCFL which by modern standards don't even have that wide gamut.

WOLED though... it looks like standard gamut display and just with perfect contrast ratio and tendency for saturation changing how colors look compared to how it looks on all RGB displays I ever seen.
Certain games look pretty nice on WOLED and why I haven't replaced it for QD-OLED yet but most stuff... yeah, colors are not the strongest point of WOLD panels.
QD-OLED though its enough refined to have this high end sharp look just like RGB-LED. Asus PG32UQX from what I have seen from its ICC profiles should be even more comparable to RGB-LED and suggests it has really excellent colors. Still in some sense smaller gamut of some other monitors can at times look better because these things are not that straightforward.

 

[Sycraft]

Asus PG32UQX from what I have seen from its ICC profiles should be even more comparable to RGB-LED and suggests it has really excellent colors. Still in some sense smaller gamut of some other monitors can at times look better because these things are not that straightforward.

It's basically a "QD-OLED" in how it does colors so they are extremely similar. Bright blue backlights, red and green quantum dots to convert the light to different frequencies. Produces three very strong spectral peaks giving high saturate, just like QD-OLED does, which is blue OLEDs that use quantum dots to get red and green.

 

[MistaSparkul]

It's basically a "QD-OLED" in how it does colors so they are extremely similar. Bright blue backlights, red and green quantum dots to convert the light to different frequencies. Produces three very strong spectral peaks giving high saturate, just like QD-OLED does, which is blue OLEDs that use quantum dots to get red and green.

IMO none of this really matters for gaming because the majority of games are still stuck in Rec.709 color space for the most part. You can AutoHDR/RTX HDR many games that lack a native implementation these days but it's not like that will also magically inject wider color gamut and turn the game's Rec.709 colors into Rec.2020 colors, you'll just get the HDR brightness only. Pretty much why I can't justify going for something like a top end QD OLED TV like a Samsung S95D when I feel like I would only get half of it's benefits for HDR which is brightness, but not the colors.

 

[SoCali]

I have compared the PG32UQX to a 32" QD-OLED and when it comes to color they are super close for small highlights like the light saber in Star wars but anything bigger and the OLED just looks like washed out trash next to the PG32UQX.

Small blues and greens the OLED has a minor edge with them appearing more saturated but it's such a minor difference that without both side by side it would be hard to tell.

 

[JohnnyFlash]

I have compared the PG32UQX to a 32" QD-OLED and when it comes to color they are super close for small highlights like the light saber in Star wars but anything bigger and the OLED just looks like washed out trash next to the PG32UQX.

Small blues and greens the OLED has a minor edge with them appearing more saturated but it's such a minor difference that without both side by side it would be hard to tell.

I'm really hoping the next version of this panel will be matched with the new nvidia chips.

 

[XoR_]

IMO none of this really matters for gaming because the majority of games are still stuck in Rec.709 color space for the most part

Just because games and pretty much everything else is still Rec.709 it doesn't mean that Rec.709 content looks the same between displays which can cover Rec.709 gamut.
To my relatively trained eye QD-OLED and WOLED look completely different and it is nothing that can be changed with calibration.

That tidbit about the so called delta E when it is below 1 or even 2 being impossible to differentiate does not even refer to comparing different displays with different light spectrum.
Just think about what this metric is for and what kind of costs and difficulty is to control light spectrum accurately and how pointless it would be and it will be obvious it only refers to calibration itself - so error of calibration. Especially important thing for CRTs which would drift over time and it would be quick to validate last profile and long to make new one so you could quickly check if your colors drifter more than where it matters. Of course any precision issues and errors from not covering gamut would also be added but even aiming at virtual e.g. Rec.709 and having low delta E doesn't mean that two displays with low delta E will look the same.

You know what... Rec.709 is virtual standard and there is nothing to compare it to. And there always were disclaimers that colors will be the same until they won't be. Like if I had two different SMPTE-C monitors - yeah, why not make them look identical? CCFL IPS vs WCG-CCFL IPS even if these monitors use the same IPS panels - no chance. It is the kind of difference that is eye opening for normal people.

But to be honest QD-OLED vs WOLED is not small difference either.
Modern quantum dot IPS vs QD-OLED - less difference and you could be excused. That said I see difference in colors on my Nano IPS and QD-OLED. I also directly see what causes this difference in colors. Like I connected LG 27GP950 and first thing was impression "dark gray" while on RGB-LED I had "pretty much black most of the time". WOLED is "white" like in typical W-LED. WOLED is a bit strange by how it uses WRGB panel so very saturated colors are more vibrant than W-LED with the same level of "white" color cast so still better than typical W-LED but worse than e.g. Pioneer Kuro which is also dark gray, just lighter. WCG-CCFL was light gray.

----
BTW. Imho biggest improvement brought by HDR is that no longer we have standard gamut displays. Even on fake HDR displays you get something that tries to hit DCI-P3 and have gamut clamping. Standard gamut LCDs were absolutely atrocious.

And brightness... one time I had realization: in case of flocked up image people will first complain about black level and then luminance.
They improved black level on displays and we are in to blasting eyes with light. Like in the clock

 

[MistaSparkul]

Just because games and pretty much everything else is still Rec.709 it doesn't mean that Rec.709 content looks the same between displays which can cover Rec.709 gamut.
To my relatively trained eye QD-OLED and WOLED look completely different and it is nothing that can be changed with calibration.

That tidbit about the so called delta E when it is below 1 or even 2 being impossible to differentiate does not even refer to comparing different displays with different light spectrum.
Just think about what this metric is for and what kind of costs and difficulty is to control light spectrum accurately and how pointless it would be and it will be obvious it only refers to calibration itself - so error of calibration. Especially important thing for CRTs which would drift over time and it would be quick to validate last profile and long to make new one so you could quickly check if your colors drifter more than where it matters. Of course any precision issues and errors from not covering gamut would also be added but even aiming at virtual e.g. Rec.709 and having low delta E doesn't mean that two displays with low delta E will look the same.

You know what... Rec.709 is virtual standard and there is nothing to compare it to. And there always were disclaimers that colors will be the same until they won't be. Like if I had two different SMPTE-C monitors - yeah, why not make them look identical? CCFL IPS vs WCG-CCFL IPS even if these monitors use the same IPS panels - no chance. It is the kind of difference that is eye opening for normal people.

But to be honest QD-OLED vs WOLED is not small difference either.
Modern quantum dot IPS vs QD-OLED - less difference and you could be excused. That said I see difference in colors on my Nano IPS and QD-OLED. I also directly see what causes this difference in colors. Like I connected LG 27GP950 and first thing was impression "dark gray" while on RGB-LED I had "pretty much black most of the time". WOLED is "white" like in typical W-LED. WOLED is a bit strange by how it uses WRGB panel so very saturated colors are more vibrant than W-LED with the same level of "white" color cast so still better than typical W-LED but worse than e.g. Pioneer Kuro which is also dark gray, just lighter. WCG-CCFL was light gray.

----
BTW. Imho biggest improvement brought by HDR is that no longer we have standard gamut displays. Even on fake HDR displays you get something that tries to hit DCI-P3 and have gamut clamping. Standard gamut LCDs were absolutely atrocious.

And brightness... one time I had realization: in case of flocked up image people will first complain about black level and then luminance.
They improved black level on displays and we are in to blasting eyes with light. Like in the clock

WOLEDs colors are "fine" to me. It's not like it's 2008 TN panel bad or something. It's obviously not the best but again I'm merely "fine" with it. I had both QD OLED and WOLED side by side and until the former manages to get past it's huge ABL limitations I'm not going to bother with another one. In fact I don't plan on upgrading again until OLED tech in general whether it be WOLED, QD OLED, or PHOLED finally overcome ABL issues.

 

[Epos7]

I have a 65" LG C8 I use as my main TV. It's also connected to my PC and I use it for most of my gaming. It's been flawless for the 5.5 years I've owned it.

My 27" 4K 144Hz IPS on the other hand is nothing but problems. Mostly when waking the computer, it often needs to be power cycled multiple times before it displays correctly. Sometimes it takes the computer a minute or more to figure out its display outputs. That usually involves a lot of displays switching on and off on their own while the GPU does its thing. Feels like that should be a lot faster/smoother experience.

My experience makes me wonder if it's the faster refresh rate screens causing issues. My C8 is 60Hz, and my Dell 27" photo editing monitor is also 60Hz. They both just work. The 144Hz screen is noticeably smoother of course.

 

[SH1]

WOLEDs colors are "fine" to me. It's not like it's 2008 TN panel bad or something. It's obviously not the best but again I'm merely "fine" with it. I had both QD OLED and WOLED side by side and until the former manages to get past it's huge ABL limitations I'm not going to bother with another one. In fact I don't plan on upgrading again until OLED tech in general whether it be WOLED, QD OLED, or PHOLED finally overcome ABL issues.

Yes, I actually was a bit confused by the notion that WOLED has bad color. Best I can tell the color is gorgeous and also widely reported as accurate or that certainly that it can be made to be. I mean what are people even talking about.

I think I understand now that such talk is all about realizing the full potential specifically of HDR and that QD-OLED gets one further down that path. And that the rest of this notion of WOLED having bad color or such is just hyperbole.

I'm grateful that LG, even if for a brief moment, produced the CX/C1 with OLED Motion Pro and what certainly looks like great color to me. And with the wonderful black mirror screen finish with the polarizer, which I hope we don't lose. (The main reason I kept using CRT, even before I understood more about motion resolution, was that I was appalled by what LCD did to blacks. OLEDs have been the dream here...)

 

[XoR_]

Yes, I actually was a bit confused by the notion that WOLED has bad color. Best I can tell the color is gorgeous and also widely reported as accurate or that certainly that it can be made to be. I mean what are people even talking about.

I think I understand now that such talk is all about realizing the full potential specifically of HDR and that QD-OLED gets one further down that path. And that the rest of this notion of WOLED having bad color or such is just hyperbole.

Nope, just normal Rec.709
Colors outside Rec.709 don't really matter because Rec.709 covers most of the range of colors found in reality and besides most content is in Rec.709.
For HDR the good target is DCI-P3 and displays we are talking about mostly cover it with 100% sRGB coverage.
Content with range higher than WOLED can display I neither have nor care.

The thing is that colors between displays don't look the same even if some calibration probe shows numbers which you yourself wish to interpret means colors will look the same.

As for visibility of nuances it probably depends on the person and how they use eyes. In this case between WOLED and QD-OLED I wouldn't say it is nuance but about as big difference in colors between two displays as I have ever seen. I always preferred display like WCG-CCFLs, RGB-LED, etc. so QD-OLED fits my eyes the best from current OLED technologies.

But hey, we all see world differently. I would be surprised if some people genuinely didn't see differences or preferred WOLED.
Just don't assume nonsense you hear in display reviews - it is all bunch of convenient white lies to make reviewer job easier. No one really said calibration to given standard means colors look the same.

 

[SH1]

Nope, just normal Rec.709
Colors outside Rec.709 don't really matter because Rec.709 covers most of the range of colors found in reality and besides most content is in Rec.709.
For HDR the good target is DCI-P3 and displays we are talking about mostly cover it with 100% sRGB coverage.
Content with range higher than WOLED can display I neither have nor care.

The thing is that colors between displays don't look the same even if some calibration probe shows numbers which you yourself wish to interpret means colors will look the same.

As for visibility of nuances it probably depends on the person and how they use eyes. In this case between WOLED and QD-OLED I wouldn't say it is nuance but about as big difference in colors between two displays as I have ever seen. I always preferred display like WCG-CCFLs, RGB-LED, etc. so QD-OLED fits my eyes the best from current OLED technologies.

But hey, we all see world differently. I would be surprised if some people genuinely didn't see differences or preferred WOLED.
Just don't assume nonsense you hear in display reviews - it is all bunch of convenient white lies to make reviewer job easier. No one really said calibration to given standard means colors look the same.

The discussion I've been hearing elsewhere has centered on the great extension that QD-OLED can give HDR. That additional potential there.

Not SDR, where the coverage is so similar based on instruments and where some folks are saying they can basically make their WOLED and QD-OLED look the same.

The QD-OLED RGB peaks are more pure or can be from what I understand. Maybe that's what you're seeing. Not sure...

From a perspective of being used to CRT and the OLED on my phone, colors on the C1 look ballpark to me though. And pleasing. (Colors on my projector can come across as more saturated. Not necessarily accurate though...)

 

[MistaSparkul]

The discussion I've been hearing elsewhere has centered on the great extension that QD-OLED can give HDR. That additional potential there.

Not SDR, where the coverage is so similar based on instruments and where some folks are saying they can basically make their WOLED and QD-OLED look the same.

The QD-OLED RGB peaks are more pure or can be from what I understand. Maybe that's what you're seeing. Not sure...

From a perspective of being used to CRT and the OLED on my phone, colors on the C1 look ballpark to me though. And pleasing. (Colors on my projector can come across as more saturated. Not necessarily accurate though...)

The spectral power distribution between QD OLED and WOLED is pretty different so I'm sure that even if you were to calibrate both to a Delta E of less than 1, there will probably still be a perceived difference in color between the two despite whatever results your colorimeter is giving. While the colors will look different, I don't think one would necessarily look superior to the other, at least not for Rec.709 content, they would again just look "different". For HDR content yes on paper QD OLED is the superior technology, but when it comes to monitors specifically QD OLED is simply not allowed to actually realize it's full potential over WOLED due to ABL clamming it down. It's a much different story for TVs where they can hit much much higher brightness levels and the difference in color volume between QD OLED and WOLED are now more apparent. But again for my specific use case scenario where I want a 32" monitor and not a 55+" TV, I've found there to be no significant advantage for QD OLED in the 32" options currently available. Until OLED makes a big improvement in ABL I won't bother upgrading again. Probably going to wait for the tandem stacked hybrid blue PHOLED to hit monitors for my next upgrade.

 

[SH1]

The spectral power distribution between QD OLED and WOLED is pretty different so I'm sure that even if you were to calibrate both to a Delta E of less than 1, there will probably still be a perceived difference in color between the two despite whatever results your colorimeter is giving. While the colors will look different, I don't think one would necessarily look superior to the other, at least not for Rec.709 content, they would again just look "different". For HDR content yes on paper QD OLED is the superior technology, but when it comes to monitors specifically QD OLED is simply not allowed to actually realize it's full potential over WOLED due to ABL clamming it down. It's a much different story for TVs where they can hit much much higher brightness levels and the difference in color volume between QD OLED and WOLED are now more apparent. But again for my specific use case scenario where I want a 32" monitor and not a 55+" TV, I've found there to be no significant advantage for QD OLED in the 32" options currently available. Until OLED makes a big improvement in ABL I won't bother upgrading again. Probably going to wait for the tandem stacked hybrid blue PHOLED to hit monitors for my next upgrade.

Yeah, I think the excitement I was seeing was more over the QD-OLED TVs. And I would try to make one of those a computer monitor too. If they weren't lacking the polarizer and motion clarity...