Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 49" 5120x1440 super ultrawide (QD-OLED)

Cannot believe the 49" QD-OLED panel really ended up being a super ultrawide instead of a 16:9 4K for use in a TV. a 49" QD-OLED with 144Hz would've been a worthy upgrade choice for me over my CX. Looks like my CX is sticking around for yet another year at least.
 
Some info about the OLED G9 (and Samsung's 2023 QD-OLED TVs):


1000 nits at 3% window size, 450 nits at 10% and 250 at 100%. So expect similar performance to the Alienware QD-OLEDs of last year.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Cannot believe the 49" QD-OLED panel really ended up being a super ultrawide instead of a 16:9 4K for use in a TV. a 49" QD-OLED with 144Hz would've been a worthy upgrade choice for me over my CX. Looks like my CX is sticking around for yet another year at least.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the problem. Explain please.
 
kasakka said:
Samsung has unveiled its new super ultrawide G9, this one with a QD-OLED panel, 5120x1440 res and 1800R curve.

https://news.samsung.com/global/sam...ing-the-next-generation-of-display-technology

The 1800R curve is interesting because if anything OLED should be easily bendable to a 1000R curve. This is probably very similar in specs to the Samsung OLED G8.

PS. Discussion for the Neo G9 57" Mini-LED is here.
Click to expand...
Isn't 1440 vertical res still a little low for something this size?
 
Blackstone said:
I don't understand the problem. Explain please.
Click to expand...

There is no problem. This just isn't what I was hoping for is all. We've heard rumors about a 49" QD-OLED panel months ago and my initial assumption was that Samsung would be introducing a smaller 4K TV in QD-OLED flavor to compliment their 49" 4K Mini LED QN90B as well as launching a larger than 65" size (Which they are actually doing with a 77" QD-OLED). But instead of a 4K panel it ended up being a super ultrawide 5120x1440 instead. Again it's not a problem, I've just grown comfortable with the form factor of my CX and as hoping to replace it this year with a similar form factor display that is superior to it and a 49" 4K 144Hz QD-OLED would've been a good candidate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: p3sty
like this
MistaSparkul said:
There is no problem. This just isn't what I was hoping for is all. We've heard rumors about a 49" QD-OLED panel months ago and my initial assumption was that Samsung would be introducing a smaller 4K TV in QD-OLED flavor to compliment their 49" 4K Mini LED QN90B as well as launching a larger than 65" size (Which they are actually doing with a 77" QD-OLED). But instead of a 4K panel it ended up being a super ultrawide 5120x1440 instead. Again it's not a problem, I've just grown comfortable with the form factor of my CX and as hoping to replace it this year with a similar form factor display that is superior to it and a 49" 4K 144Hz QD-OLED would've been a good candidate.
Click to expand...
Got it.
 
kasakka said:
Some info about the OLED G9 (and Samsung's 2023 QD-OLED TVs):


1000 nits at 3% window size, 450 nits at 10% and 250 at 100%. So expect similar performance to the Alienware QD-OLEDs of last year.
Click to expand...

So the tvs get a 30% brightness boost but the monitors are going with the 30% power reduction for the sake of some eu efficiency standard, is that what that video is saying?

Or maybe 30% brightness boost wouldn’t quite get them to HDR 600 Black certification on desktop so they didn’t bother this year?

Thats a shame. 250*1.3=325 nit full field is starting to get to not too bad territory isn’t it?

And then dual-stack and we are at 650 nit full field for a desktop oled?
 
Noticed in tomshardware ces blog that they say msi are claiming True Black 500 for the 491c which requires at least 500/300 for 10/100 windows. Typo? But it'd be in line with the claimed 30% boost.

Didn't look like it was working when they went past though
 
Last edited:
Yuck, another limited monitor that will consume your whole desk. I would be all over this if 5120 x 2160 (21:9), DP 2.1 + HDMI 2.1. Preferably flat.
 
1440 is a terrible resolution for productivity. Just not enough vertical real estate. Also, it just isn't sharp enough in my opinion. I wish they would take it up a notch.
 
noko said:
Yuck, another limited monitor that will consume your whole desk. I would be all over this if 5120 x 2160 (21:9), DP 2.1 + HDMI 2.1. Preferably flat.
Click to expand...

240Hz OLEDs at 5120x2160 (Or even just regular 4K) at more typical monitor sizes is what people want so that's why display makers won't make it lol. All the new 240Hz OLED options are cool but the fact that every single one of them is 1440p vertical res disappoints me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
MistaSparkul said:
240Hz OLEDs at 5120x2160 (Or even just regular 4K) at more typical monitor sizes is what people want so that's why display makers won't make it lol. All the new 240Hz OLED options are cool but the fact that every single one of them is 1440p vertical res disappoints me.
Click to expand...
It seems to be more like they can't make them, at least in OLED at this time. Expanding the 3440x1440 to 5120x1440 is easier achieved.

IMO 5120x1440 without scaling is a perfectly fine resolution for productivity. I had no complaints about desktop space when I had the Samsung CRG9, just wanted overall higher resolution. 5120x2160 will need to be scaled to something closer to 3440x1440 to be a nice size so you just get the same thing sharper.

The reason why I don't care for this model is the text rendering issues with QD-OLED. As a gaming screen I'd rather buy the 3440x1440 models. It's a shame they didn't release an upgraded 240 Hz model of those, probably will do that next year.
 
This github convo thread from Mark R of blurbusters (from about a year ago) regarding text subsampling might be of interest if anyone hasn't seen it.

https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/25595

Though there is no "fix" for rgb-based text sub-sampling to get it to work properly on a non-RGB layout OLED in order to mask how large the pixel structures actually appear , there are some suggestions in the thread that might help a little.

. . .

One of the forum members replying there suggested forcing Tahoma font in windows, which is the last reply in the thread at the moment.

Forcing a font in windows comment, and then optionally disabling text SS entirely (clickable link to the forum comment)
If you want to try it, be sure to back up your registry first. Use at your own risk of course.

. . . .

Mark R's post about developing a cleartype algorithm:

Generic Subpixel Algorithm for Triangular-Structure QD-OLEDs / Pentile / WOLED / Others

Starter Generic Subpixel-Aware Supersampling Algorithm​


A small mask bitmap is created for the subpixel structure (what the subpixel structure looks like for one real software-based pixel), which the user can specify. Or the bitmap could be represented as rows of base-4 numbers (0=transparent, 1=red, 2=green, 3=blue) so that it makes visual sense. Or it could be a transparent PNG with alpha channels (adjustable transparent edges), with transparent, red, green, blue. Etc.


Optional: For rare odd screens, such as ASUS Vivabook, you have weird structures for 2x2 groups of pixels. Therefore, you might need to use one bitmap for a 2x2 group of onscreen pixels, for slight further improvements to subpixel rendering. So mask can be configurable dimensions 1x1, 2x1, 1x2, and 2x2 for oddball displays -- one can photograph an OLED screen macro lens, then crop, then downconvert to just red/green/blue, and save the bitmap as a mask bitmap for subpixel rendering.


For every time one font glyph is rendered onscreen:

  1. Check if the glyph is already in the subpixel-scaled glyph cache (for a specific glyph at a size with all combining marks etc)
    If yes, skip to step 5.
  2. Render a single character (font glyph) in-memory at high scaling factor (e.g. 16x size).
    Example: If it's a 16point character of Arial, draw it at 256point size within GPU memory
  3. Downscale the supersized font letter through the subpixel-structure bitmask
    Example: Use a GPU shader to push the large font letter through the subpixel-structure bitmask during downsample
  4. Cache the resulting downsampled bitmap (for faster run at step 1)
  5. Draw the glyph onto the screen
    The bitmaps should be transparent with an alpha channel, to be compatible with overwritten text / overlay on complex background / linked letters like Arabic / etc).

Basically, pushing a supersized version of the glyph through the subpixel mask during downsample. This is very simple ultra-fast GPU shader code.


Or you could use layering of existing DirectWrite/Direct2D APIs instead (e.g. bitmap scaling and bitmap-combining mathematics similar to ADD, SUBTRACT, AND, OR, XOR, alpha-blend operations etc) instead of GPU shader code. (And many of these APIs compile as shaders anyway when GPU acceleration is enabled). Various settings can be done to adjust.


There should be a "Contrast" setting adjustment like ClearType APIs, which is metaphorically an alphablend between subpixel rendered and not subpixel-rendered.


ClearType Contrast can be simply an alphablend/math between a non-subpixel-compensated glyph and a subpixel-compensated glyph. And configurable supersample size (6x, 8x, 10x, 12x, 14x, 16x, [...]) for quality experiments.


One consideration; there will be loss of OpenType/TrueType "hinting" for small-size fonts (due the large-glyph rendering step) but the resulting correct subpixel render (up to ~3x more resolution possible) without hinting, will look superior to hinted-but-incorrect/blurrier. In other words, the nonstandard-subpixel-structure sharpness improvement outweighs the loss of "hinting" support for the vast majority of fonts -- even for complex fonts such as Mandarin, etc, that goes very soft/blurry on WOLEDs.


Either way, while it sounds difficult at first -- the generic algorithm is actually absurdly simple to a shader programmer or bitmap-mathematics programmer, once they're trained to understand ClearType better (e.g. treat the subpixels like additional pixels spatially)
Click to expand...


. . .

Mark R brings up some good info about future algorithms by developers, but personally I have hope that AI / machine learning tech could someday be applied to the text sub-sampling masking methodology overall, even replacing the existing RGB one if it can do better, along with being applied to all of the other non-RGB pixel layouts. AI / machine learning seems to do pattern optimization extremely well when trained on something long enough.

I still use a few 27" 1440p LCD screens for some finances and misc at another spot in my house at times. Their text looks fine with subsampling as long as you don't scale the fonts down lower than 100% scaling 1:1. A 27" 1440 screen with Non-standard RGB layout with text sub-sampling at the same PPD wouldn't look as nice. E.g. the OLED ultrawide g95sc at 1440p being like two 27" 1440p OLEDs.

A 27" 1440p at 60deg to 50 deg viewing angle, filling your central human FoV, gets around 42 PPD to 51 PPD (pixels per degree) - which is low compared to a 4k or 2160 tall screen viewed at a similar distance/viewing angle which would get 64 to 77 PPD. . .. but with RGB -> RGB text sub-sampling, the actual granularity of the perceived pixel sizes is masked well enough on a 27" 1440p - at least for text. AA in games does well too, but everything else desktop graphics and imagery wise gets no AA.
 
Yes, Tahoma or even the original MS Sans Serif is what I use when doing productivity on OLEDs. Never understood why people insisted on using fonts made for ClearType for a display not suited for ClearType.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top