What new OLED gaming monitors in 2023?

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
11,317
So now that we're in 2023, and OLED finally became a thing in PC gaming in 2022, I'm curious how displays evolve this new year?

And not those 45" new OLED displays coming from Corsair and LG. But what else is rumored for later this year?

Will Alienware make an OLED version of the award winning perfect size best monitor design of the decade the AW3821DW. Will we see a AW3824DW OLED?

Just curious where things are headed in the OLED gaming display category.
 
Last edited:
Its looking like this year will be a Oled year. in TVs and monitors. Have to wait and see what they get to market.
 
Wake me up when we actually get some 240Hz OLED monitors that are beyond 1440p. Seriously every 240Hz OLED monitor coming out this year so far is either 27 inch 2560x1440, 45 inch 3440x1440, or 49 inch 5120x1440.

People a bit too hung up on refresh rate these days IMO. 120hz with BFR is preferable to 240hz without. The 42" C2 is a disaster for gaming because it only supported BFR at 60hz, despite being advertised as a "120hz" display.
 
People a bit too hung up on refresh rate these days IMO. 120hz with BFR is preferable to 240hz without. The 42" C2 is a disaster for gaming because it only supported BFR at 60hz, despite being advertised as a "120hz" display.

You mean BFI? Problem with that is that it's basically incompatible with HDR since it destroys peak brightness. I have a CX which is capable of 120Hz BFI and while the motion clarity is awesome, it pretty much ruins HDR so the best way to get the motion clarity while retaining HDR performance is with 240Hz+.
 
From conversations in other threads, I don't think it's only that he he's focused on 240hz - it's that he already has a 4k 120hz VRR OLED with good HDR performance so until someone makes a 240hz version he has little reason to upgrade. Outside of somewhat higher nit HDR highlights in some cases but that's probably not a huge enough difference currently to be a reason to pull the trigger early tech wise for some of us considering what we already have.

That is, if you already have the ability to have the space, or the willingness to have the space in order to use a 42" to 55" OLED at a distance where you'd be near the human binocular+color vision 50 to 60 deg viewing angle and therefore get 60PPD or higher where massaged text sub-sampling and aggressive AA start to be able to compensate for fringing/aliasing adequately. Otherwise you aren't getting the full picture quality the larger 4k screens are capable of. A lot of people try to put a square peg into a round hole there and sit way too close, so for near desk to monitor requirments where the monitor is on the desk rather than uncoupled from it - some of the smaller screens would be a much better fit. I could see that as being a good reason to upgrade even if it's a side-grade as far as other of the other specs go (outside of viewing distance to pq) for a lot of people's setups considering the up close desks+peripherals pictures I've seen online of 42, 48, 55 inch oleds heh.
 
From conversations in other threads, I don't think it's only that he he's focused on 240hz - it's that he already has a 4k 120hz VRR OLED with good HDR performance so until someone makes a 240hz version he has little reason to upgrade. Outside of somewhat higher nit HDR highlights in some cases but that's probably not a huge enough difference currently to be a reason to pull the trigger early tech wise for some of us considering what we already have.
This is pretty much where I am atm. I have a LG CX 48" in my living room that can be used for HDR gaming. With the LG C3 lineup being nearly identical to previous years it's not really worth upgrading. For me getting more brightness out of an OLED is not reason enough to change and instead both higher brightness and higher refresh rate would make things more enticing now that I have a GPU capable of delivering over 200 fps framerates in games that don't heavily employ raytracing.

I would love to go for something else for desktop use but the LG C2 42" at 890 euros still seems like one of the better options. I'd rather just have something smaller or more curved at this point. Give me the LG Flex without the motorized parts and 3000 euro price tag and I would be interested.

The only monitor I'm looking forward to this year is the Samsung 57" super ultrawide because just like the LG CX was the best compromise back when I bought it, the Samsung seems like the thing that would tick many boxes for me. I am sure Samsung will still somehow manage to fuck it up by gimping say HDMI 2.1 max refresh rates or something.

I feel this year we got a lot more OLED options, but basically zero better OLED options.
 
Last edited:
Yes. A few other things to watch out for are things like anti-glare coating and it's effects on contrast/black depth and glassy saturation, and the fact that samsung doesn't support any Dolby Vision material if that matters to you media wise. DV not as big of a deal on a pc/gaming display but still annoying since there is a lot of DV material in uhd movies and streamed sci-fi/fantasy shows.

Some games support dolby vision already. While the list includes some great titles, it's not a very extensive list:

Borderlands 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War
Call of Duty Vanguard
Cyberpunk 2077
Devil May Cry 5 Special Edition
Dirt 5
F1 2021
F1 22
For Honor
Forza Horizon 4
Forza Horizon 5
Gears 5
Grand Theft Auto 5
Grand Theft Auto Online
Grid Legends
Halo Infinite
Immortals Fenyx Rising
Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy
Metro Exodus
Ori and the Will of the Wisps
Psychonauts 2
Resident Evil Village
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands
Tom Clancy's: The Division 2


. . . .

For me, I'd like a 42" or 48" fixed 1000R curvature 240hz (or higher with DSC) 4k OLED for now. Higher peak HDR brightness, or better yet a well performing heat sink for longer sustained peak brightness periods on %'s of the screen/less aggressive ABL would be a bonus. That should all be doable with the current tech but I won't hold my breath.

In the future I'd love a 55" curved 8k OLED screen where I could run a game in various 1:1 pixel window sizes including 21:10 or 32:10 across the whole width, or any sizes of 16:9 or uw resolutions 1:1 pixel on the screen. Getting quads of 4k desktop real-estate out of it too of course, tiling app windows to fit however I wanted and avoiding multi-screen bezels.

Making a wishlist, if possible, if they could eventually move AI upscaling hardware (of 4k to 8k) to the screen itself it would be a huge boon in avoiding the ports+cables bandwidth bottleneck, even considering DSC. That and start moving the gaming industry (incl. OS/drivers, inputs, displays, and game development) over to bringing in VR's frame amplification technology advances that have advanced well beyond that incorported into PC gaming. And push further.
 
Last edited:
The only monitor I'm looking forward to this year is the Samsung 57" super ultrawide because just like the LG CX was the best compromise back when I bought it, the Samsung seems like the thing that would tick many boxes for me. I am sure Samsung will still somehow manage to fuck it up by gimping say HDMI 2.1 max refresh rates or something.

True. It's only like 16" tall I think as well which is a waste for two 4k screens side by side essentially, at least for my purposes. I'd rather a 55" true 8k (quads of 4k resolution rather than two 4k's side by side by comparison). A curved 55" 8k could run that same rez, a 32:10 version of it, or any number of other resolutions 1:1 within it and/or 1:1 pixel window sizes , yet have a ton more real-estate for app windows besides . .. and of course full 16:9 media windows at the full size of the screen's width.

The 4k + 4k (but not 4k x 4k quad) samsung uw will have dp 2.1 though for amd and future nvidia gpus.

Personally I'd prob wait on a real 8k gaming display, preferably large and 1000R. Maybe they'll release something like an 8k ark at some point.
 
I just want an OLED version of the 38" Ultrawide size monitor, with the 3840 x 1600 resolution. I think that's the sweet size, or even if they made it a hair larger with the same res, make it a 40".

Currently using the AW3423DW and I really love the vibrant colors and deep blacks just an overall amazing picture quality, I just want something larger, and not a 16:9 aspect ratio.
 
True. It's only like 16" tall I think as well which is a waste for two 4k screens side by side essentially, at least for my purposes. I'd rather a 55" true 8k (quads of 4k resolution rather than two 4k's side by side by comparison). A curved 55" 8k could run that same rez, a 32:10 version of it, or any number of other resolutions 1:1 within it and/or 1:1 pixel window sizes , yet have a ton more real-estate for app windows besides . .. and of course full 16:9 media windows at the full size of the screen's width.

The 4k + 4k (but not 4k x 4k quad) samsung uw will have dp 2.1 though for amd and future nvidia gpus.

Personally I'd prob wait on a real 8k gaming display, preferably large and 1000R. Maybe they'll release something like an 8k ark at some point.
Meanwhile for me, dual 32" 4K screens is more than enough. I was happy with the desktop space I got on a 5120x1440 @ 100% scaling, in fact for personal use it often even went underutilized whereas for work with a couple of virtual desktop it was put to good use. I'd rather have a 40" 5120x2160 as a smaller option but since this year does not look to see any improvements on those, the Samsung seems like my next best option.

It seems that 8K TVs are not moving anywhere this year either. An 8K version of the ARK would be nice but I don't see it happening.
 
From conversations in other threads, I don't think it's only that he he's focused on 240hz - it's that he already has a 4k 120hz VRR OLED with good HDR performance so until someone makes a 240hz version he has little reason to upgrade. Outside of somewhat higher nit HDR highlights in some cases but that's probably not a huge enough difference currently to be a reason to pull the trigger early tech wise for some of us considering what we already have.

That is, if you already have the ability to have the space, or the willingness to have the space in order to use a 42" to 55" OLED at a distance where you'd be near the human binocular+color vision 50 to 60 deg viewing angle and therefore get 60PPD or higher where massaged text sub-sampling and aggressive AA start to be able to compensate for fringing/aliasing adequately. Otherwise you aren't getting the full picture quality the larger 4k screens are capable of. A lot of people try to put a square peg into a round hole there and sit way too close, so for near desk to monitor requirments where the monitor is on the desk rather than uncoupled from it - some of the smaller screens would be a much better fit. I could see that as being a good reason to upgrade even if it's a side-grade as far as other of the other specs go (outside of viewing distance to pq) for a lot of people's setups considering the up close desks+peripherals pictures I've seen online of 42, 48, 55 inch oleds heh.

I would also be willing to upgrade if we got a significant boost to brightness/color saturation like say a 1000 nits QD-OLED at 49" or an 48" LG G3 with heatsink + MLA tech to push 1200+ nits given the larger sizes are capable of 1600 at D65 whitepoint. Unfortunately we got neither of those options this year for the 50" and below sizes.
 
Meanwhile for me, dual 32" 4K screens is more than enough. I was happy with the desktop space I got on a 5120x1440 @ 100% scaling, in fact for personal use it often even went underutilized whereas for work with a couple of virtual desktop it was put to good use. I'd rather have a 40" 5120x2160 as a smaller option but since this year does not look to see any improvements on those, the Samsung seems like my next best option.

I guarantee someone will stack them on top of each other with the bezels right across the middle. :ROFLMAO:

. .

It seems that 8K TVs are not moving anywhere this year either. An 8K version of the ARK would be nice but I don't see it happening.

Yep it might be awhile but I think it might happen in a longer timeframe. Like I said I'd be happy with a 48" 1000R curved 4k for now esp. if it had a heatsink for longer sustained HDR brightness %'s of the screen. I'd prob want increased periods of sustained HDR brightness peaks and less aggressive ABL as much or more than getting higher brightness levels but could probably get both.
 
Last edited:
Anyone have experience with recent OLED's for ~10 hour a day productivity work?

Are we at the point where we no longer need to worry about burn-in?

I would love to pick up a 42" LG C2 (or C3 I guess whenever it is released) for my desktop, but I am still concerned that within a few monts the office ribbon or start menu or something else will be burned in...
 
Last edited:
Anyone have experience with recent OLED's for ~10 hour a day productivity work?

Are we at the point where we no longer need to worry about burn-in?

I would love to pick up a 42" LG C2 (or C3 I guess whenever it is released) for my desktop, but I am still concerned that within a few monts the office ribbon or start menu or something else will be burned in...
I used my LG CX 48" like that for two years. ~8h work and personal use on top of that. The display is still without burn in and working fine.

This will heavily depend on how you use your display. I had some mitigations in place:
  • Dark modes where available.
  • Autohide taskbar/dock/topbar. I use MacOS for work.
  • Turn off the display with the remote when taking a longer break.
  • Keep display connected to power so it can run its pixel refresh cycles.
  • Brightness calibrated to 120 nits.
  • Virtual desktops in use so there is some movement between content.
  • Blank screen saver going on in 10 minutes of idle. Faster to get out of that than display off.
  • Display off in 20 minutes of idle.
While this may seem like a lot, it's a one time setup. You really don't need the taskbar/dock for anything 99% of the time so even after returning to a smaller LCD I keep it hidden.
 
Anyone have experience with recent OLED's for ~10 hour a day productivity work?

Are we at the point where we no longer need to worry about burn-in?

I would love to pick up a 42" LG C2 (or C3 I guess whenever it is released) for my desktop, but I am still concerned that within a few monts the office ribbon or start menu or something else will be burned in...
I have kept the logo luminance adjustment setting on high and screen shift setting enabled on my LG CX, and it hasn't given me any burn-in issues yet. Owned for over two years now and played games with lots of static details. So LG's safety settings for burn-in do seem to be doing their job. I do turn off the screen if I am stepping away for a while. It turns off and on pretty quick anyway which is nice.
 
Anyone have experience with recent OLED's for ~10 hour a day productivity work?

Are we at the point where we no longer need to worry about burn-in?

I would love to pick up a 42" LG C2 (or C3 I guess whenever it is released) for my desktop, but I am still concerned that within a few monts the office ribbon or start menu or something else will be burned in...


I used my LG CX 48" like that for two years. ~8h work and personal use on top of that. The display is still without burn in and working fine.

This will heavily depend on how you use your display. I had some mitigations in place:
  • Dark modes where available.
  • Autohide taskbar/dock/topbar. I use MacOS for work.
  • Turn off the display with the remote when taking a longer break.
  • Keep display connected to power so it can run its pixel refresh cycles.
  • Brightness calibrated to 120 nits.
  • Virtual desktops in use so there is some movement between content.
  • Blank screen saver going on in 10 minutes of idle. Faster to get out of that than display off.
  • Display off in 20 minutes of idle.
While this may seem like a lot, it's a one time setup. You really don't need the taskbar/dock for anything 99% of the time so even after returning to a smaller LCD I keep it hidden.

I don't use mine as a static desktop/app screen other than a browser once in awhile or something since I have side screens for static apps and desktop stuff. I've been using multiple monitors for years so it's normal to me to do so.

I think of it like the mainscreen in star trek.. they aren't doing all of their engineering and science work and experiments on their large main viewer typically. All of their data is on other workstation screens while the main screen is the big show. Or you might think of the oled screen as a "stage" for playing media and games.


That's my personal preference. Like kasakka said there are a lot of burn-in avoidance measures, many which he listed. If you keep asbl on it would be even less likely to burn "down" (see below), but most people using them for desktop/apps turn off asbl dimming via the service menu using a remote since it's annoying to have full bright pages dim down.

=======================================================================

Pasting some info from my comment history here for you in case you find any of it useful:

Some burn-in (burning through your "burn-down" buffer) avoidance measures
A few reminders that might help in that vein:

....You can set up different named profiles with different brightness, peak brightness, etc.. and maybe contrast in the TV's OSD. You can break down any of the original ones completely and start from scratch settings wise if you wanted to. That way you could use one named profile for lower brightness and perhaps contrast for text and static app use. Just make sure to keep the game one for gaming. I keep several others set up for different kinds of media and lighting conditions.
  • Vivid
  • Standard
  • APS
  • Cinema
  • Sports
  • Game
  • FILMMAKER MODE
  • iisf Expert (Bright Room)
  • isf Expert (Dark Room)
  • Cinema Home
....You can change the TV's settings several ways. Setting up the quick menu or drilling down menus works but is tedious. Keying the mic button on the remote with voice control active is handy to change named modes or do a lot of other things. You can also use the remote control software over your LAN , even hotkeying it. You can change a lot of parameters using that directly via hotkeys. Those hotkeys could also be mapped to a stream deck's buttons with icons and labels. In that way you could press a stream deck button to change the brightness and contrast or to activate a different named setting. Using streamdeck functions/addons you can set up keys as toggles or multi press also, so you could toggle between two brightness settings or step through a brightness cycle for example.

....You can also do the "turn off the screen emitters" trick via the quick menu, voice command with the remote's mic button, or via the remote control over LAN software + hotkeys (+ streamdeck even easier). "Turn off the screen" (emitters) only turns the emitters off. It doesn't put the screen into standby mode. As far as your pc os, monitor array, games or apps are concerned the TV is still on and running. The sound keeps playing even unless you mute it separately. It's almost like minimizing the whole screen when you are afk or not giving that screen face time, and restoring the screen when you come back. It's practically instant. I think it should save a lot of "burn down" of the 25% reserved brightness buffer over time. Might not realize how much time cumulatively is wasted with the screen displaying when not actually viewing it - especially when idling in a game or on a static desktop/app screen.

...You can also use a stream deck + a handful of stream deck addons to manage window positions, saved window position profiles, app launch + positioning, min/restore, etc. You could optionally swap between a few different window layouts set to a few streamdeck buttons in order to prevent your window frames from being in the same place all of the time for example.

... Dark themes in OS and any apps that have one available, web browser addons (turn off the lights, color changer), taskbarhider app, translucent taskbar app, plain ultra black wallpaper, no app icons or system icons on screen (I throw mine all into a folder on my hard drive "desktop icons"). Black screen saver if any.

... Logo dimming on high. Pixel shift. A lot of people turn asbl off for desktop but I keep it on since mine is solely for media/gaming. That's one more safety measure.

. .

Turn off the Screen (emitters only) trick
I use the "turn off the screen" feature which turns the oled emitters off. You can set that turn off the screen command icon to the quick menu so it's only 2 clicks to activate with the remote (I set mine to the bottom-most icon on the quick menu), or you can enable voice commands and then hold the mic button and say "turn off the screen". You can also use the color control software to set a hotkey to the "turn off the screen(emitters)" function, and even map that hotkey to a stream deck button if you have one. Clicking any button on the remote or via the color control software hotkeys wakes up the emitters instantly. I usually hit the right side of the navigation wheel personally if using the remote.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OLED/comments/j0mia1/quick_tip_for_a_fast_way_to_turn_off_the_screen/

While the emitters are off everything is still running, including sound. This works great to pause games or movies and go afk/out of the room for awhile for example. I sometimes cast tidalHD to my nvidia shield in my living room from my tablet utilizing the "turn off the screen" (emitters) feature. That allows me to control the playlists, find other material, pause, skip etc from my tablet with the TV emitters off when I'm not watching tv. You can do the same with youtube material that is more about people talking than viewing anything. I do that sometimes when cooking in my kitchen that is adjacent to my living room tv. You can probably cast or airplay to the tv webOS itself similarly. Some receivers also do airplay/tidal etc directly to the receiver.

. . .
Distrust Screensavers
I wouldn't trust a screensaver, especially a pc screensaver. Not only do they fail or get blocked by apps - Apps can crash and freeze on screen, so can entire windows sessions or spontaneous reboots stuck on bios screen, etc. It's rare but can happen. Some apps and notifications even take the top layer above the screensaver leaving a notification/window there static.

While on the subject. I kind of wish we could use the LG OSD to make mask areas. Like size one or more black boxes or circles, be able to set their translucency, and move them via the remote to mask or shade a static overlay, HUD element, bright area of a stream, etc.

. .
LG's reserved brightness buffer. You aren't burning in because you are burning down that buffer first, for a long time (depending on how badly you abuse the screen).
From what I read the modern LG OLEDs reserve the top ~ 25% of their brightness/energy states outside of user available range for their wear-evening routine that is done in standby periodically while plugged in and powered. Primarily that, but along with the other brightness limiters and logo dimming, pixel shift, and the turn off the "screen" (emitters) trick if utilized, should extend the life of the screens considerably. With the ~25% wear-evening routine buffer you won't know how much you are burning down the emitter range until after you bottom out that buffer though. As far as I know there is no way to determine what % of that buffer is remaining. So you could be fine abusing the screen outside of recommended usage scenarios for quite some time thinking your aren't damaging it, and you aren't sort-of .. but you will be shortening it's lifespan wearing down the buffer of all the other emitters to match your consistently abused area(s).

A taskbar, persistent toolbar, or a cross of bright window frames the middle of the same 4 window positions or whatever.. might be the first thing to burn-in when the time comes but on the modern LG OLEDs I think the whole screen would be down to that buffer-less level and vulnerable at that point as it would have been wearing down the rest of the screen in the routine to compensate all along over a long time.
The buffer seems like a decent system for increasing OLED screen's lifespan considering what we have for now. It's like having a huge array of candles that all burn down unevenly - but with 25% more candle beneath the table so that you can push them all up a little once in awhile and burn them all down level again.
Or you might think of it like a phone or tablet's battery you are using that has an extra 25% charge module, yet after you turn on your device and start using it you have no idea what your battery charge level is. You can use more power hungry apps and disable your power saving features, screen timeouts, run higher screen brightness when you don't need to, leave the screen on when you aren't looking at it etc. and still get full charge performance for quite some time but eventually you'd burn through the extra 25% battery.

. .
View distance vs. display quality

You aren't going to get the full picture quality larger 42", 48", 55" 4k screens are capable of when you keep them near on top of a desk rather than decoupling them from the desk and gaining distance using a flat-foot or caster wheeled slim spine floor stand . . or a non-modular wall mount option, or some other 2nd surface to put it on. Your text will be fringed and your graphics in games aliased like a ~ 1500p screen, even with aggressive/alternate text sub sampling and aggressive in game AA applied. Also, the 2d desktop typically has no AA at all outside of text-ss, so desktop graphics an imagery will be uncompensated and have even more pixelization. So they aren't really the best choice for most people's desks and workstation areas.

There are two ways imo to get clear text.

- The opmitmal way is to sit far enough away to get 60PPD, or better yet higher. Sitting at near distances with the screen on your desk will result in a 1500p like pixel density to your eyes which will make text and graphics look fringed even with text-ss and game AA applied aggressively. It will also push the sides of the screen outside of your 50 deg to 60deg human viewpoint and exacerbate off-axis and color uniformity issues on the sides of the screen.

- If you have to sit that close, where you are ~ 1500p like pixel density, you can sacrifice desktop real estate down from 4k 1:1 pixel by using windows scaling to scale everything up some. That will mean more pixels per character of text so will help but you will lose space from 1:1 px 4k.



tJWvzHy.png


---------------------------------------------------------
PPD and optimal/full PQ view distances

It's all about PPD (Pixels Per Degree) and viewing angle. All 4k screen size's perceived pixel density and viewing angle is the same when the distance is scaled.

At 50 to 60 deg viewing angle on all sizes of 4k screens, you will get 64 PPD to 77 PPD.

Massaged or alternative text sub-sampling and aggressive graphics anti-aliasing (at a performance hit) starts to compensate enough vs more gross text fringing and graphics aliasing at around 60 PPD, which on a 4k screen is about 64 deg viewing angle. This works though it's outside of the 50 deg to 60deg human viewpoint a bit.

Beneath 60PPD you will get text fringing and graphics aliasing more like what a 1500p screen would look like at traditional near desk distances, and if you scale the text up to compensate for the pixelization, you'll then be dropping from 4k 1:1 to around 1500p like desktop real-estate too.. It's also worth noting that on the 2D desktop there is no AA for desktop graphics and imagery typically, just for text via text sub sampling. So the aliasing is uncompensated there entirely outside of certain authoring app's 3d viewports etc.


tJWvzHy.png


3kU3adt.png

. . .

On a flat screen, the edges of the screen are always off axis by some amount. On OLED and VA screens, these off axis extents of the screen are non uniform color (OLED) or shift/shading (VA) gradients whose sizes grow the closer you sit to the screen.
The distortion field and eye fatigue zone is still there when at the optimal viewing angle (on a flat screen), but it is smaller. The edges of a screen are still as off-axis as if you were sitting an equivalent distance from them outside of the screen:

XvKRu9t.png


When you sit closer than 50 to 60 deg viewing angle, the sides are pushed more outside of your viewpoint causing a larger eye fatigue and non-uniform screen area on each side (as well as the PPD being driven down):


RUdpoK8.png



. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Almost always better off decoupling the screen from the desk entirely with larger screens, going with something like this to get a better viewing angle and higher pixel density:

sHneoux.png
Something like that or one with caster wheels . . or a wall mount, pole mount, separate surface, etc. and drop the desk back.
 
Last edited:
OLED's for ~10 hour a day productivity work?

If using a HDR screen for 10 hours of primarily static desktop/app work a day you might want to look at the ucg/ ucx 32" FALD screens. They are expensive but they are up to 1200 - 1500nit HDR with much longer sustained brightness periods per percent of the screen and including full screen brightness, and they won't have any burn down through your buffer until burn in happens concerns so won't need to use any of the avoidance/safety features. They are sized much bettter for being used on top of a desk or on a desk arm too. They have their own tradeoffs though like anything else (even between those two models) - so you'd have to do your research if going that route. Most people sit way too close to larger gaming TV screens putting a square peg into a round hole sort of thing.
 
Last edited:
I don't use mine as a static desktop/app screen other than a browser once in awhile or something since I have side screens for static apps and desktop stuff. I've been using multiple monitors for years so it's normal to me to do so.

I think of it like the mainscreen in star trek.. they aren't doing all of their engineering and science work and experiments on their large main viewer typically. All of their data is on other workstation screens while the main screen is the big show. Or you might think of the oled screen as a "stage" for playing media and games.


That's my personal preference. Like kasakka said there are a lot of burn-in avoidance measures, many which he listed. If you keep asbl on it would be even less likely to burn "down" (see below), but most people using them for desktop/apps turn off asbl dimming via the service menu using a remote since it's annoying to have full bright pages dim down.

=======================================================================

Pasting some info from my comment history here for you in case you find any of it useful:

Some burn-in (burning through your "burn-down" buffer) avoidance measures


. .

Turn off the Screen (emitters only) trick


. . .
Distrust Screensavers


. .
LG's reserved brightness buffer. You aren't burning in because you are burning down that buffer first, for a long time (depending on how badly you abuse the screen).


. .
View distance vs. display quality

You aren't going to get the full picture quality larger 42", 48", 55" 4k screens are capable of when you keep them near on top of a desk rather than decoupling them from the desk and using a flat-foot or caster wheeled slim spine floor stand . . or a non-modular wall mount option, or some other 2nd surface to put it on. Your text will be fringed and your graphics in games aliased like a ~ 1500p screen, even with aggressive/alternate text sub sampling and aggressive in game AA applied. Also, the 2d desktop typically has no AA at all outside of text-ss, so desktop graphics an imagery will be uncompensated and have even more pixelization. So they aren't really the best choice for most people's desks and workstation areas.




---------------------------------------------------------
PPD and optimal/full PQ view distances

Great suggestions!

I also have multiple screens. 3 of them, and usually do browsing and other stuff on the side screens, but a lot of my work happens on the center screen. a 41" 4k screen is great for large spreadsheets etc.

I've been using 4k screens on the desktop, ~2 to 2.5ft (~60-75cm) from my eyes now for almost 8 years.

Started with a 48" Samsung JS9000 in 2015, and have been using a 43" Asus XG438Q since 2019. (Prior to that I used a 30" 2560x1600 Dell screen)

The 48" was a little bit too large for this purpose. Not only was it too large for my field of view, but the resolution as you mention was a little bit too low to be clear at that distance.

The 42"-43" size is perfect as far as I am concerned. Fits in the field of view, and winds up having decent resolution for that distance.

The text quality isn't the best in Windows, but that has more to do with subpixel smoothing not being optimized for BGR. Windows ClearType assumes all monitors have an RGB layout. In Linux Mint (Cinnamon) I do have a BGR subpixel smoothing setting, and it looks great. Amusingly enough, running Windows 10 inside a Virtualbox VM in Linux, it appears to inherit the Linux desktops BGR subpixel smoothing and text looks much better than Windows 10 does on bare metal.

I'm not quite sure how that works. I'm guessing the VM is passed through the linux desktops display filters, and thus winds up getting the Linux desktops subpixel smoothing.
 
Seems like 8k was all but forgotten this CES.

Maybe the display industry has come to their senses? 8k is pointless.

For any resolution that fits inside your field of view, you won't be able to tell a difference between that and 4k.

Only way it has a practical use is if you work real close to a large screen in a way that the whole thing won't fit inside your field of view. This certainly is a potential use case, but probably a less common one.
 
Anyone have experience with recent OLED's for ~10 hour a day productivity work?

Are we at the point where we no longer need to worry about burn-in?

I would love to pick up a 42" LG C2 (or C3 I guess whenever it is released) for my desktop, but I am still concerned that within a few monts the office ribbon or start menu or something else will be burned in...
Notice how all the responses require babying the display to some extent? IMO if you have to baby it then the answer is you should look elsewhere for a monitor for productivity work. A productivity monitor should just work as is without having to jump through "first/one time" hoops to have it be viable. I'm sure I will get flamed, but it's my opinion on OLED as a work monitor.
 
Seems like 8k was all but forgotten this CES.
It's probably partly due to EU tightening max power usage of televisions and partly due to lack of buyer interest.

Honestly 8K is pretty pointless at the sizes they try to push it. If you have a 100" screen, you would typically be sitting so far away that you can't tell if it's 8K or 4K. It seems pointless for media and gaming.

It's a resolution that should have been pushed as large command center type productivity displays instead. 55" 8K Samsung ARK with multiple input PbP? I'd buy it.
 
Notice how all the responses require babying the display to some extent? IMO if you have to baby it then the answer is you should look elsewhere for a monitor for productivity work. A productivity monitor should just work as is without having to jump through "first/one time" hoops to have it be viable. I'm sure I will get flamed, but it's my opinion on OLED as a work monitor.
You start by babying it but soon just stop doing that and use it as normal. At least that's how it went with my OLEDs.

OLED honestly would not be my first choice for a primarily productivity display either, but you have to pick which compromises are ok for you if you want a multi-purpose display.
 
Notice how all the responses require babying the display to some extent? IMO if you have to baby it then the answer is you should look elsewhere for a monitor for productivity work. A productivity monitor should just work as is without having to jump through "first/one time" hoops to have it be viable. I'm sure I will get flamed, but it's my opinion on OLED as a work monitor.

True, but most of it is just a one time setup. If that is all it takes to avoid burn-in, I'm on board, because OLED's look absolutely fantastic.

If ongoing babying is needed, that is another question.
 
It's probably partly due to EU tightening max power usage of televisions and partly due to lack of buyer interest.

Honestly 8K is pretty pointless at the sizes they try to push it. If you have a 100" screen, you would typically be sitting so far away that you can't tell if it's 8K or 4K. It seems pointless for media and gaming.

It's a resolution that should have been pushed as large command center type productivity displays instead. 55" 8K Samsung ARK with multiple input PbP? I'd buy it.

yep... a big 8k wall of real-estate with any 1:1 pixel gaming window anywhere you want across/within it and 4k quads worth of desktop real-estate without bezels as a basis would be amazing. And at about 122 PPD when sitting at a 1000R (1000mm, ~ 39.5") curvature's radius as view distance, where the entire screen surface would be equidistant from your eyeballs. Sign me up. It's just not the year for 8k yet. year of 1440px high oled for the most part it seems outside of 4k model updates and that one samsung 4k+4k uw.

The 42"-43" size is perfect as far as I am concerned. Fits in the field of view, and winds up having decent resolution for that distance.

The text quality isn't the best in Windows, but that has more to do with subpixel smoothing not being optimized for BGR. Windows ClearType assumes all monitors have an RGB layout. In Linux Mint (Cinnamon) I do have a BGR subpixel smoothing setting, and it looks great. Amusingly enough, running Windows 10 inside a Virtualbox VM in Linux, it appears to inherit the Linux desktops BGR subpixel smoothing and text looks much better than Windows 10 does on bare metal.

As it is now, a lot of people sit around 24" or so from a 42" 4k screen (that or the equivalent for larger screens). 24"+ view on a ~ 42" 4k ends up effectively dropping the ppd from what you'd normally associate with 4k fine pixel density down to something more like what 1500p would look like at traditional nearer desk distances. If you then use windows scaling to compensate for the more pixelated, lower PPD on text, you are then also dropping the effective desktop real-estate down more to what you'd get with 1500p too. It's usable like that certainly, as many of us used 27" 1080p and 27" to 31.5" 1440p screens for years, but it's not great in the era where we can get fine pixels via 4k+ screens when viewed at optimal distances. Aggressive AA and massaged text sub-sampling really don't start to compensate enough until around 60 PPD, probably a little higher for WOLED. The 2D desktop has no AA or sub-sampling masking compensations for it's desktop graphics and imagery either so even higher PPD is desirable.

So really, on a 42" 4k you'd be talking 29" as a minimum screen surface to eyeballs normally to get 60PPD, but you would be better off a little farther than even that as a minimum since it's a WOLED subpixel structure. That typically means decoupling the screen from the desk and moving one or the other for a longer view distance, better viewing angle, and higher PPD/smaller pixel structure to your eyes.

tJWvzHy.png




3kU3adt.png


The 42"-43" size is perfect as far as I am concerned. Fits in the field of view, and winds up having decent resolution for that distance.

The text quality isn't the best

Again not really when the screen is mounted on practically any desk outside of a few gargantuan ones. At least until about 30" view distance -screen surface to eyeballs- (not the desk's dimensions), but maybe that's what you meant. Your human binocular vision and color recognition viewing angle is 50 to 60 degrees. 60 deg on a 42" 4k is around 32" view screen to eyeballs, 50 deg on a 42" 4k is around 39" view screen surface to eyeballs. You can get away with a slightly larger areas of the screen on the "outsides" at 60PP point normally on screens which won't drop it much outside of optimal ranges. On a 42" 4k that normally ends up being 29" to 30" view distance and 64 deg viewing angle to get 60PPD, but with WOLED text you'd be better off a little farther. And like I said, 2D desktop graphics and imagery has no text-subsampling or game AA compensations to mask it's aliasing typically either so that content will suffer worse pixelization at lower ppd.

You can use it at ~ 1500p like perceived pixel density
- pushing more of the screen outside of your human viewpoint as an eye fatigue zone in gaming with huds, notifications, pointers, chat, and action at the extents. It also makes the areas of non-uniform color larger on the sides of the screen.
- where people often resort to upscaling windows scaling to compensate for text fringing and lose 1:1 pixel 4k desktop real estate
- where even when upscaled, sub 60PPD will still have 1500p-like graphics aliasing in games, even with aggressive AA applied. There is no AA or text-SS for 2d graphics and imagery on the desktop at all either typically.

. . . . . . .

On a flat screen, the edges of the screen are always off axis by some amount. On OLED and VA screens, these off axis extents of the screen are non uniform color (OLED) or shift/shading (VA) gradients whose sizes grow the closer you sit to the screen.



The distortion field and eye fatigue zone is still there when at the optimal viewing angle (on a flat screen), but it is smaller. The edges of a screen are still as off-axis as if you were sitting an equivalent distance from them outside of the screen:

XvKRu9t.png



When you sit closer than 50 to 60 deg viewing angle, the sides are pushed more outside of your viewpoint causing a larger eye fatigue and non-uniform screen area on each side (as well as the PPD being driven down):

RUdpoK8.png



. . .

The text quality isn't the best in Windows,

This quote below is from RTing's link about chroma sub-sampling but it applies to text sub-sampling too. Most people are just sitting way too close and then complaining that that can see sub-sampling artifacts/fringing. And like I said therefore some people scale windows up to compensate but that doesn't make everything else (2d desktop graphics and imagery, game aliasing even with AA applied) compensated more and it loses 1:1 px 4k desktop real-estate.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/chroma-subsampling



4:2:0 is almost lossless visually, which is why it can be found used in Blu-ray discs and a lot of modern video cameras. There is virtually no advantage to using 4:4:4 for consuming video content. If anything, it would raise the costs of distribution by far more than its comparative visual impact. This becomes especially true as we move towards 4k and beyond. The higher the resolution and pixel density of future displays, the less apparent subsampling artifacts become.

. . . .

Just to reiterate - it's usable on top of a desk like that, just not optimal nor full quality. Not only would you be compromising on the pixel density/subpixels/fringing~artifacts, the viewing angle (and color uniformity issue) is compromised too the nearer you sit.
It's usable like that PPD wise certainly, as many of us used 27" 1080p and 27" to 31.5" 1440p screens for years, but it's not great in the era where we can get fine pixels via 4k+ screens when viewed at optimal distances. Aggressive AA and massaged text sub-sampling really don't start to compensate enough until around 60 PPD, probably a little higher for WOLED. The 2D desktop has no AA or sub-sampling masking compensations for it's desktop graphics and imagery either so even higher PPD is desirable.

While people can say a 42" (4k) is "perfect" sitting on a desk they mean "perfect for them" and probably just compared to what else is available in desktop OLEDs resolution and size wise for the moment. A display's optimal quality in human viewing angle and pixel density, and especially where it becomes more and more sub-optimal and compromised (even with compensations applied aggressively where possible), are measurable.
 
Last edited:
Notice how all the responses require babying the display to some extent? IMO if you have to baby it then the answer is you should look elsewhere for a monitor for productivity work. A productivity monitor should just work as is without having to jump through "first/one time" hoops to have it be viable. I'm sure I will get flamed, but it's my opinion on OLED as a work monitor.

As someone who's been using an OLED for 2 years I agree.

It would be dumb to buy an OLED as a work only monitor.

But if you want the absolute best gaming monitor it's the only way to go.


As a dual purpose monitor it can work, but it really depends on your work. If you're using excel spreadsheets all day it's stupid. If you're using visual studio in dark mode it's fine. You should have a second LCD monitor for the start bar, outlook, or whatever on. That will minimize the amount of babying you need to do to keep it in perfect condition.


I think a big issue is people are recommending OLED because "it's the best", but It's way more money than most pople can or should be spending.
 
yep... a big 8k wall of real-estate with any 1:1 pixel gaming window anywhere you want across/within it and 4k quads worth of desktop real-estate without bezels as a basis would be amazing. And at about 122 PPD when sitting at a 1000R (1000mm, ~ 39.5") curvature's radius as view distance, where the entire screen surface would be equidistant from your eyeballs. Sign me up. It's just not the year for 8k yet. year of 1440px high oled for the most part it seems outside of 4k model updates and that one samsung 4k+4k uw.



As it is now, a lot of people sit around 24" or so from a 42" 4k screen (that or the equivalent for larger screens). 24"+ view on a ~ 42" 4k ends up effectively dropping the ppd from what you'd normally associate with 4k fine pixel density down to something more like what 1500p would look like at traditional nearer desk distances. If you then use windows scaling to compensate for the more pixelated, lower PPD on text, you are then also dropping the effective desktop real-estate down more to what you'd get with 1500p too. It's usable like that certainly, as many of us used 27" 1080p and 27" to 31.5" 1440p screens for years, but it's not great in the era where we can get fine pixels via 4k+ screens when viewed at optimal distances. Aggressive AA and massaged text sub-sampling really don't start to compensate enough until around 60 PPD, probably a little higher for WOLED. The 2D desktop has no AA or sub-sampling masking compensations for it's desktop graphics and imagery either so even higher PPD is desirable.

So really, on a 42" 4k you'd be talking 29" as a minimum screen surface to eyeballs normally to get 60PPD, but you would be better off a little farther than even that as a minimum since it's a WOLED subpixel structure. That typically means decoupling the screen from the desk and moving one or the other for a longer view distance, better viewing angle, and higher PPD/smaller pixel structure to your eyes.

View attachment 540468



View attachment 540469



Again not really when the screen is mounted on practically any desk outside of a few gargantuan ones. At least until about 30" view distance -screen surface to eyeballs- (not the desk's dimensions), but maybe that's what you meant. Your human binocular vision and color recognition viewing angle is 50 to 60 degrees. 60 deg on a 42" 4k is around 32" view screen to eyeballs, 50 deg on a 42" 4k is around 39" view screen surface to eyeballs. You can get away with a slightly larger areas of the screen on the "outsides" at 60PP point normally on screens which won't drop it much outside of optimal ranges. On a 42" 4k that normally ends up being 29" to 30" view distance and 64 deg viewing angle to get 60PPD, but with WOLED text you'd be better off a little farther. And like I said, 2D desktop graphics and imagery has no text-subsampling or game AA compensations to mask it's aliasing typically either so that content will suffer worse pixelization at lower ppd.

You can use it at ~ 1500p like perceived pixel density
- pushing more of the screen outside of your human viewpoint as an eye fatigue zone in gaming with huds, notifications, pointers, chat, and action at the extents. It also makes the areas of non-uniform color larger on the sides of the screen.
- where people often resort to upscaling windows scaling to compensate and lose 1:1 pixel 4k desktop real estate
- where even when upscaled, sub 60PPD will still have 1500p-like graphics aliasing in games, even with aggressive AA applied. There is no AA or text-SS for 2d graphics and imagery on the desktop at all either typically.

. . . . . . .

On a flat screen, the edges of the screen are always off axis by some amount. On OLED and VA screens, these off axis extents of the screen are non uniform color (OLED) or shift/shading (VA) gradients whose sizes grow the closer you sit to the screen.



The distortion field and eye fatigue zone is still there when at the optimal viewing angle (on a flat screen), but it is smaller. The edges of a screen are still as off-axis as if you were sitting an equivalent distance from them outside of the screen:

View attachment 540470


When you sit closer than 50 to 60 deg viewing angle, the sides are pushed more outside of your viewpoint causing a larger eye fatigue and non-uniform screen area on each side (as well as the PPD being driven down):

View attachment 540471


. . .

This quote below is from RTing's link about chroma sub-sampling but it applies to text sub-sampling too. Most people are just sitting way too close and then complaining that that can see sub-sampling artifacts/fringing. And like I said therefore some people scale windows up to compensate but that doesn't make everything else (2d desktop graphics and imagery, game aliasing even with AA applied) compensated more and it loses 1:1 px 4k desktop real-estate.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/chroma-subsampling



. . . .

Just to reiterate - it's usable on top of a desk like that, just not optimal nor full quality. Not only would you be compromising on the pixel density/subpixels/fringing~artifacts, the viewing angle (and color uniformity issue) is compromised too the nearer you sit.


While people can say a 42" (4k) is "perfect" sitting on a desk they mean "perfect for them" and probably just compared to what else is available in desktop OLEDs resolution and size wise for the moment. The optimal display quality in human viewing angle and pixel density, and especially where it becomes more and more sub-optimal and compromised, are measurable.

Meh.

42" 4k winds up being 104.9 ppi. That's a good bit higher than both 23" 1920x1080 (95.8 ppi) and 24" 1920x1200 (94.3 ppi) which were the standards not too long ago. It's also higher than 30" 2560x1600 (100.6 ppi). The only common resolution it isn't beating is 27" 2560x1440 which has a ppi of 108.8


For reference, typical Resolutions and PPI's:

H Res​
V Res​
Size (in)​
Approx PPI​
640​
480​
12​
66.7​
800​
600​
13​
76.9​
1024​
768​
14​
91.4​
1280​
1024​
17​
96.4​
1600​
1200​
21​
95.2​
1920​
1080​
23​
95.8​
1920​
1200​
24​
94.3​
2560​
1440​
27​
108.8​
2560​
1600​
30​
100.6​
3840​
2160​
42​
104.9​


I guess my take is if a 42" 4k screen isnt good enough at desktop distances, then neither is pretty much any monitor ever sold for desktops, except a handful of super high pixel density ones, like 32" 4k screens and the like, which are not exactly common in regular use out there.
It winds up being the second highest PPI in the typical resolutions list, I don't think that is anything to scoff at.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
It's about PPD, not PPI. You have to take the viewing distance into account.

Like I said, we used 1440 and 1600 near desktop screens and they are usable for sure, but they don't have the fine pixel granularity you'd normally expect from a 4k screen.

Sitting closer also compromises the viewing angle as I outlined.

...........................................

It would be nice if there were some 32" models eventually for people who need shorter view distances.

42" 4k screen at 24" view distance is 52 PPD.

27" screen 2688 x 1512 rez at 24" view distance = 52 PPD

The 24" view crowd are in a way using a 42" 4k like a 27" 1500p screen's pixels and exacerbating off axis viewing angle issues instead of getting 4k fine pixel PQ. 😝


768839_8ss1o9P.png



. . . . . . .



On the other hand, a

. . 32" 4k screen at 24" view would be ~ 64 PPD (and 60 deg) which can be compensated for with aggressive AA and text sub-sampling (though the 2d desktop's graphics and imagery lacks AA outside of text sub sampling)

. . 32" 4k screen at 27" view would be ~ 70 PPD and 55 deg viewing angle.

So really a much better fit for the near desk view crowd. Right now it's a square peg in a round hole thing going on with larger screens (regarding both poorer PPD and poorer viewing angles) for a lot of people from what I've read in threads and seen in images.
 
Last edited:
As someone who's been using an OLED for 2 years I agree.

It would be dumb to buy an OLED as a work only monitor.

But if you want the absolute best gaming monitor it's the only way to go.


As a dual purpose monitor it can work, but it really depends on your work. If you're using excel spreadsheets all day it's stupid. If you're using visual studio in dark mode it's fine. You should have a second LCD monitor for the start bar, outlook, or whatever on. That will minimize the amount of babying you need to do to keep it in perfect condition.


I think a big issue is people are recommending OLED because "it's the best", but It's way more money than most pople can or should be spending.

2 years also isn't very long when we are talking displays that start at nearly 4 figures and can go well past that. I'm sure most people dropping that kinda money would want their display to last a while, maybe 5+ years. We know that the CX holds up well after 2 years of heavy office use but what about 5 years? If you are concerned about longevity with OLEDs yet want to use them as everyday 8+ hour work displays then I don't know what else to tell you besides look elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
It's about PPD, not PPI. You have to take the viewing distance into account.

That is fair, but the viewing distance in this comparison is the same regardless of the screen size and resolution, allowing a comparison based on PPI.


Sitting closer also compromises the viewing angle as I outlined.

Yes, the viewing angle in the corners is affected. That was just about the only benefit I got from the curve on my JS9000 back when I used it as a monitor.

...........................................

It would be nice if there were some 32" models eventually for people who need shorter view distances.

I think that would be a waste of pixels. You'd need to scale it up for it to be usable even at close ranges, and that gives up the biggest benefit of 4k on the desktop, more screen real estate.

IMHO, anything where you have to scale to above 100% is a complete waste. Screen real estate is king.

I wouldn't mind a version with the mild curve my JS9000 had though to help with view angle on the sides, On my XG438Q there isnt any off angle color shift though, so that is good. I don't have any OLED experience, but I'm pretty sure OLED doesn't suffer from that problem either. Still would be nicer to not deal with the off-angle problem.
 
I think options will improve. The people that have what is needed to drive 240Hz at 4K is pretty low right now. I would expect in the coming years for that to change.

Let's just say, if someone does make a "smallish" 240Hz 4K monitor today, it's probably going to cost you.
 
Back
Top