![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
I'd say I missed seeing this but... nah.
Indeed. One could make the argument that if all things are SDR, those people will never scream when HDR isn't working (again). I sort of view the surround sound folks in a similar way.I'd say I missed seeing this but... nah.
Good surround sound requires a lot more from your environment than HDR displays do, to be fair. I've dabbled with surround setups but as a music producer I'm rather attached to simple, good quality stereo rigs for mixing and I have no issue whatsoever with playing games and watching TV in this way either. Sound quality means more to me than positioning, even though I can appreciate how cool it is when done right.
It's understated to say HDR monitors have better images every single second. It's better at every single frame since I can use a proper HDR monitor to make SDR into HDR with far better range.
Yeah surround sound can require almost setting things up specifically for that or else usually it's weird placement for back speakers, running cables in odd places etc. Just not worth it for me. Maybe if in the future I can get a system that supports wireless back speakers with low enough latency.
Yeah HDR is in a weird place where OLED is relatively affordable, but HDR on them is a its best at larger TV sizes since they can push higher brightness than monitors or smaller TV sizes. Then on monitor sizes mini-LED range from ok to very expensive, with their own quirks and compromises. Anything else is going to be a subpar experience. I still prefer OLED as a compromise but my next display is likely to be a mini-LED anyway.
Still don't know why this is necessary.
It's not incompetent, it's just not perfect. No HDR implementation is. I see no reason to upgrade a flagship TV that is only a couple of years old just because of a few dark scene local dimming issues.
Hahaha what a load of bull.
Yeah this sounds like it'd make it more viable but they'd need to be active speakers meaning more cables to the wall, or a separate amp needed... which would be plugged into the wall anyway. I think no matter the tech, my environment (the living room) just isn't cut out for a good surround setup so I don't even try. I'm not that much of a movie/TV watcher but I am big on gaming, that's where I'd use it for sure.
I went mini LED because the burn in factor would play on my mind endlessly when using it as a PC desktop monitor. H ave no idea what my next display will be, I'm not currently in the market for one. Maybe once I am things will have progressed a little in the self-emissive world and I can finally go in that direction.
I don't care about "ranking high". I don't play competitive multiplayer games. I prefer single player games.
Nice of you to be so obsessed with me that you remember these things. I do CAD for work, sound (music production) as a side. I imagine you're going to have issues with this as you always do.
This is just your usual trolling.
While I'm seriously considering PQ07 I'm sure whatever TV can play your single player game like every office monitor. But good luck with these TVs if you ever have the edge to play competitively.
Well I'm not interested in playing competitively, but if I ever was is there any real reason why a display with such a low input lag would be bad for it? It being a "TV" or what its HDR capabilities are don't make a difference.
120Hz isn't even a competitive format. You can wait for a 240Hz TV several years later.
No need. I'm not into competitive gaming, for the third time.
Weird flex but OK. Look forward to the review!
It doesn't matter if you are into competitive gaming or not.
Its a 50". I have my resolution at 3840x2160, and I have my scale and layout set to +175 so I can see lol..
As usual, nothing matters but your opinion huh.
Just put him on the Ignore list, makes this forum much more pleasing to read too.
99% monitors are office monitors. These incompetent TVs with server ABL don't even produce correct brightness along side correct color. How much HDR you can even see with that much ABL? You can only seeing correct HDR less than 10% window.
Except he's trying to say it doesn't matter if you're into competitive gaming or not. We all NEED gaming monitors even if we don't require one. Why?
Possibly the most incoherent post yet.
What a bizarre argument. You talk as if there's nothing in-between desiring good picture quality without compromising much performance, so you can enjoy media, desktop use, work and gaming without having a picture that looks like complete garbage. The LG C series is the best example of PQ to performance ratio, and makes every similar spec'd LCD monitor basically irrelevant.
No. It is still a good monitor but outdated, overpriced and too slow by todays standards.
Yes. PG32UQX is the best 4K HDR gaming monitor. The panel is actually the top tier, not outdated. AUO doesn't choose a faster panel because that will shrink color volume. And you cannot get backlight much faster without G-sync. You won't get better HDR than this one unless you choose 60Hz Macbook Pro.