Why OLED for PC use?

kramnelis said:
Don't forget you are the one with a 100nits OLED inside a cave. I like you better when you pretend to be outside staring at the sun lol.
Click to expand...
Where is your proof, moron? I don't own an OLED. I don't even watch OLEDs in a cave. You do watch your dim FALD display in a dim room (probably in your mom's basement but I will accept that this is pure speculation on my part, but since you have not refuted it even once I do think it is extremely likely) and pretend you're looking at real life. You have multiple posts saying you do this. You can't deny this. You have zero proof to your retarded lies.

And OLEDs are generally way brighter than 100 nits and even a moron like you know this, as you have posted about it repeatedly, but you just have to lie. Because you're a moron.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
Where is your proof, moron? I don't own an OLED. I don't even watch OLEDs in a cave. You do watch your dim FALD display in a dim room (probably in your mom's basement but I will accept that this is pure speculation on my part, but since you have not refuted it even once I do think it is extremely likely) and pretend you're looking at real life. You have multiple posts saying you do this. You can't deny this. You have zero proof to your retarded lies.

And OLEDs are generally way brighter than 100 nits and even a moron like you know this, as you have posted about it repeatedly, but you just have to lie. Because you're a moron.
Click to expand...
Yeah don't forget you pretend to have no display at all.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
Don't forget you have zero counter arguments, lying moron.
Click to expand...
I don't even need to counter you. You've countered yourself multiple times. You shoot yourself in your own foot.
You showed a video where professional encourage you to grade HDR with things you can buy.
You showed a review number combed with multiple LCDs lol.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
Moronic.

Lies.

I have no idea what you're trying to say as you're generally incapable of forming coherent sentences, but I'm sure your point (if you have one) is retarded. I mean you're the moron trying to argue that mini led is good because more have been sold lmao.
Click to expand...
As if what you said really matters. It only keeps me laughing.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
That's good. That means that for at least a short while you're not wasting your life crusading for/against certain technology with completely inane arguments across multiple internet forums.
Click to expand...
Again, I don't even need a second respond back.

1. You simply pull out a dual-layer LCD to undermine FALD by saying stupid crap like FALD cannot be used by professionals because it is less accurate than a $50,000 dual-layer LCD. It's always funny when I say FALD LCD > OLED in HDR while you say Dual-layer LCD > FALD LCD. It's always funny you say OLED is accurate as long as it is in the 200nits SDR range as if HDR matters more in that range. OLED doesn't even cover more color than FALD. The accuracy on low range doesn't even match a lot.

2. It's you say stupid things such as people are idiots when using FLAD for grading HDR while claiming proof of professionals using FALD. Then you double down to shoot yourself in the own foot by providing links where they encourage you to grade HDR with things you can buy. Yet you still deny it even the though some of the best HDR videos made by FALD are right front of your face. It wasn't a surprise since you cannot see better anyway.

3. Since they are idiots to you. You better prove you are not an idiot. You better make HDR videos better than they did. But in reality, you with your 200nits OLED cannot even see better not even mentioning grading HDR.

4. You can even try to prove you can make HDR like I did. I can even give you some footage to grade.
 
kramnelis said:
Again, I don't even need a second respond back.

1. You simply pull out a dual-layer LCD to undermine FALD by saying stupid crap like FALD cannot be used by professionals because it is less accurate than a $50,000 dual-layer LCD. It's always funny when I say FALD LCD > OLED in HDR while you say Dual-layer LCD > FALD LCD. It's always funny you say OLED is accurate as long as it is in the 200nits SDR range as if HDR matters more in that range. OLED doesn't even cover more color than FALD. The accuracy on low range doesn't even match a lot.

2. It's you say stupid things such as people are idiots when using FLAD for grading HDR while claiming proof of professionals using FALD. Then you double down to shoot yourself in the own foot by providing links where they encourage you to grade HDR with things you can buy. Yet you still deny it even the though some of the best HDR videos made by FALD are right front of your face. It wasn't a surprise since you cannot see better anyway.

3. Since they are idiots to you. You better prove you are not an idiot. You better make HDR videos better than they did. But in reality, you with your 200nits OLED cannot even see better not even mentioning grading HDR.

4. You can even try to prove you can make HDR like I did. I can even give you some footage to grade.
Click to expand...
Didn't ask, didn't read, LOL.

If you want to adress something I have said, please quote the specific post where I said it :)
 
AwesomeOwl said:
Didn't ask, didn't read, LOL.

If you want to adress something I have said, please quote the specific post where I said it :)
Click to expand...
Go back to find your own post lol.

Again, I don't even need a second respond back.

1. You simply pull out a dual-layer LCD to undermine FALD by saying stupid crap like FALD cannot be used by professionals because it is less accurate than a $50,000 dual-layer LCD. It's always funny when I say FALD LCD > OLED in HDR while you say Dual-layer LCD > FALD LCD. It's always funny you say OLED is accurate as long as it is in the 200nits SDR range as if HDR matters more in that range. OLED doesn't even cover more color than FALD. The accuracy on low range doesn't even match a lot.

2. It's you say stupid things such as people are idiots when using FLAD for grading HDR while claiming proof of professionals using FALD. Then you double down to shoot yourself in the own foot by providing links where they encourage you to grade HDR with things you can buy. Yet you still deny it even the though some of the best HDR videos made by FALD are right front of your face. It wasn't a surprise since you cannot see better anyway.

3. Since they are idiots to you. You better prove you are not an idiot. You better make HDR videos better than they did. But in reality, you with your 200nits OLED cannot even see better not even mentioning grading HDR.

4. You can even try to prove you can make HDR like I did. I can even give you some footage to grade.
 
kramnelis said:
Go back to find your own post lol.
Click to expand...
LOL, no? Reply like a normal human being and I will address your points. I have asked you specific things in countless posts and you never address them, yet you reply with walls of text to random posts like some schizophrenic.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
LOL, no? Reply like a normal human being and I will address your points. I have asked you specific things in countless posts and you never address them, yet you reply with walls of text to random posts like some schizophrenic.
Click to expand...
I addressed them. You don't understand lol.
 
kramnelis said:
I addressed them. You don't understand lol.
Click to expand...
LOL. All my points are substantiated. None of yours are. You shoot yourself in the foot constantly. Example: You know how flawed mini-LED is, yet you have only praise for it here because all you can do is shill.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
LOL. All my points are substantiated. None of yours are. You shoot yourself in the foot constantly. Example: You know how flawed mini-LED is, yet you have only praise for it here because all you can do is shill.
Click to expand...
Funny even with flaws such as blooming the mini-LED still have far more accuracy than OLED in HDR. This is why nobody is using a 200nits OLED to grade HDR lol.
 
kramnelis said:
Again, your preference is not a fact. It works for you doesn't mean it has better images. I never judge you. I don't recommend monitors for you. All I am saying is OLED being worse for PC use. And the market will keep the trend.
Click to expand...

Again, your preference is not a fact. It works for you doesn't mean it has no blooming and blurry motion. All I am saying is OLED being better for PC gaming from my own experience and that of most major reviewers. And the market will keep that in mind.
 
Zahua said:
Again, your preference is not a fact. It works for you doesn't mean it has no blooming and blurry motion. All I am saying is OLED being better for PC gaming from my own experience and that of most major reviewers. And the market will keep that in mind.
Click to expand...
What is my preference? It's a fact OLED is dim. It's a fact it doesn't have HDR as good as FALD LCD. It's a fact OLED has flickers. Or I would've used it.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
Funny, that it doesn't matter that you're precious mini-LED is only better than OLED in high APL HDR scenes and substantially worse in practically everything else. So bad actually that people disable FALD for normal desktop use. Also funny how hollywood movies have been graded on OLED, and probably no movies have been graded on mini-LED (definitely not on the one you're trying to sell to everyone).
Also funny how had this argument so I can just quote myself:

Literally who cares?

Yeah, this could be a huge problem, except seemingly no one on the planet has a problem with it except you. Actually I'm not even sure you have a real problem with it yourself, but it sure is convenient that you can prove that it "flickers". Also disregarding the fact that people gladly will use monitors that actually flicker a lot and have no side effects from it...
Click to expand...
Funny the hollywood movies are graded on the reference monitors like Sony BVM-X300. An consumer OLED like AW3423DW will only have much worse accuracy compared to PG35VQ. In the end it's the PG35VQ look closer to Sony BVM-X300, not a 200nits OLED like AW3423DW lol.

Maybe you can bust out your 100nits OLED for grading. Get a PA32DC first.
 
kramnelis said:
Yeah except not many people are really buying it until it solves the brightness and flickers.
Click to expand...
Most people are not concerned about either of those things. Instead I see fear of burn in and concerns over text rendering.

I don't know why HUB does not list the PG32UQX as it does deserve to be in the discussion about HDR monitors, but that's probably because for the majority of their viewers those are way, way out of the price range they are willing to pay.

On paper something like the Samsung Neo G8 is a damn near perfect monitor. 4K, 240 Hz, mini-LED with enough zones, very good pixel response times, good contrast ratio for SDR, less than half the price of the PG32UQX in my country, even less than that on sale. Of course it doesn't quite deliver with its weird curvature, VA viewing angle issues, slightly too aggressive AG coating, firmware bugs, scanline problems etc.

So people compromise. With many people coming from HDR400 edge lit monitors, anything is really a significant improvement over that and yes, even those OLEDs manage to impress with the way they handle high contrast scenes while e.g the Neo G7/G8 will deliver for some bright sunny beaches etc scenes that many games have. You can argue all you want on technicalities but people find these compromises to deliver image quality that they thoroughly enjoy.
 
Do you guys remember the big CRT price fixing lawsuits as CRT was dying off and being replaced by LCD?

FALDs are ridiculously expensive. Which is weird because OLEDs are vastly supperior and even new tech like Micro LED coming to consumers is looking inevitable.

It makes me wonder if the same price fixing shenanigans will happen or are already going on with FALDs, and maybe LCDs in general. As fewer companies produce them there is less competition and it becomes easier for the few left to make shady deals.
 
sharknice said:
Do you guys remember the big CRT price fixing lawsuits as CRT was dying off and being replaced by LCD?

FALDs are ridiculously expensive. Which is weird because OLEDs are vastly supperior and even new tech like Micro LED coming to consumers is looking inevitable.

It makes me wonder if the same price fixing shenanigans will happen or are already going on with FALDs, and maybe LCDs in general. As fewer companies produce them there is less competition and it becomes easier for the few left to make shady deals.
Click to expand...

I doubt that. The price did take a while to come down but now you can find MiniLED monitors for under $1000 (Although choices are still kinda far and few). The Cooler Master GP27U looks like a great pick and priced similarly to the 27M2V if you don't want to gamble on the InnoCN model. The Samsung Neo G7 and G8 also get discounted to under $1000. The Acer X32FP was also recently discounted to $1100 from Microcenter so it's not like the FALD monitors are staying above the $2000+ mark like that have been for the last 5 years. Eventually we will get even more options from Msi, Gigabyte, LG, etc etc.
 
sharknice said:
Do you guys remember the big CRT price fixing lawsuits as CRT was dying off and being replaced by LCD?

FALDs are ridiculously expensive. Which is weird because OLEDs are vastly supperior and even new tech like Micro LED coming to consumers is looking inevitable.

It makes me wonder if the same price fixing shenanigans will happen or are already going on with FALDs, and maybe LCDs in general. As fewer companies produce them there is less competition and it becomes easier for the few left to make shady deals.
Click to expand...
I think it's this way for every new tech. There's a period when they are very expensive and slowly come down.

At the moment FALD/mini-LED displays are still fairly expensive, but so are e.g 5120x2160 ultrawides and those are basically garbage for most other specs like refresh rates, HDR support etc. yet cost 1500-1700 euros.

TVs are probably the most interesting as they can drop to less than half the price within a year.
 
kasakka said:
Most people are not concerned about either of those things. Instead I see fear of burn in and concerns over text rendering.

I don't know why HUB does not list the PG32UQX as it does deserve to be in the discussion about HDR monitors, but that's probably because for the majority of their viewers those are way, way out of the price range they are willing to pay.

On paper something like the Samsung Neo G8 is a damn near perfect monitor. 4K, 240 Hz, mini-LED with enough zones, very good pixel response times, good contrast ratio for SDR, less than half the price of the PG32UQX in my country, even less than that on sale. Of course it doesn't quite deliver with its weird curvature, VA viewing angle issues, slightly too aggressive AG coating, firmware bugs, scanline problems etc.

So people compromise. With many people coming from HDR400 edge lit monitors, anything is really a significant improvement over that and yes, even those OLEDs manage to impress with the way they handle high contrast scenes while e.g the Neo G7/G8 will deliver for some bright sunny beaches etc scenes that many games have. You can argue all you want on technicalities but people find these compromises to deliver image quality that they thoroughly enjoy.
Click to expand...
Price is a factor to consider. Not everything is covered on paper. Features such as DC dimming backlight, G-sync, and native 10-bit panels are very important factors for HDR monitors.

Your eyes need to be comfortable to see flicker-free 1000 nits without eyestrain. Displaying good HDR, such as maintaining accurate EOTF, requires a lot of processing power to to analyze the image data and apply precise adjustments to the display's gamma curve, color gamut, and brightness levels. These adjustments must be made on a per-pixel basis and must be updated frequently to account for changes in the image content. Then the backlight needs to have a high degree of local dimming control, which allows the backlight to be controlled at a fine-grained level. The panel itself also needs to contain enough color. These features are expensive and are not covered as much on paper. However, the trend of technology will continue to advance to the consumer level once the price is cut down.

The same thing applies to OLED. Yet, I doubt OLED can fix flickers and brightness at the same time since they are against each other. So far, the brightness is still low. The price plus tax for a 27" 2K 240Hz HDR300 OLED at $1370 is almost double the price of a $790 32" 4K 144Hz HDR 1000 miniLED in certain regions.

Each reviewer has their own preference. This is why Snowman stands out because he just reviews products he sells without much suggestion. The price is there. You want it, then go pay for it.
 
kramnelis said:
That's all the trash talk you can throw. Keep it up.
Click to expand...
No you've got it all wrong. You're supposed to be telling me I can see better images. Somehow.

Oh, and that I don't understand. And that I've never seen "rEaL hDr!!!" or something.

And that I love and/or somehow own an OLED... and that it WILL BE TRASHED!!

That's generally your comebacks in a nutshell.
 
Senn said:
No you've got it all wrong. You're supposed to be telling me I can see better images. Somehow.

Oh, and that I don't understand. And that I've never seen "rEaL hDr!!!" or something.

And that I love and/or somehow own an OLED... and that it WILL BE TRASHED!!

That's generally your comebacks in a nutshell.
Click to expand...

You forgot the 200 nits flicker! Or was it 80 nits? 250 nits? Idk this guy constantly changes his numbers on the fly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Senn
like this
kramnelis said:
Of course actual figures won't be available to show you. The higher the review number the higher the sale numbers lol.

It's you need a crutch pretending having a PG32UQX while owned a NEO G8 instead lol. I have AW3423DW. I know how shitty it looks compared to a 4-year-old good miniLED.

PG35VQ HDR vs AW3423DW HDR
View attachment 554097

PG35VQ SDR vs AW3423DW HDR
View attachment 554098


Tell me OLED is good for the eyes lol.

Click to expand...


At least you post comparisons and let the user judge for themselves.

And you backup your claims as well.
 
Senn said:
No you've got it all wrong. You're supposed to be telling me I can see better images. Somehow.

Oh, and that I don't understand. And that I've never seen "rEaL hDr!!!" or something.

And that I love and/or somehow own an OLED... and that it WILL BE TRASHED!!

That's generally your comebacks in a nutshell.
Click to expand...
That's all the trash talk you can throw? Don't forget you envy the OLED for CAD. Self-emissive tech is nothing without brightness.

You've got nothing to show me yet.
 
Senn said:
...lol

Everyone else, here's proof this complete idiot doesn't listen to what people say.
Click to expand...
Funny that is all the trash talk you can throw?You got nothing to show OLED is good for pc use. I don't listen to someone who envy OLED for CAD lol.
 
kramnelis said:
Funny that is all the trash talk you can throw?You got nothing to show OLED is good for pc use. I don't listen to someone who envy OLED for CAD lol.
Click to expand...
If you actually listened to what others said, you'd know my work is the very reason I don't have an OLED.

Not that I'd expect you to be paying attention.
 
james2400 said:
What made you get the OLED does it have a use for you?
Click to expand...
He's already given the reason - he keeps it around to compare it to whatever LCD he acquires next to compare them, to then just shit on OLED on the internet.
 
Senn said:
If you actually listened to what others said, you'd know my work is the very reason I don't have an OLED.

Not that I'd expect you to be paying attention.
Click to expand...
I have been paying attention since the beginning. You can still keep UI and use CAD on OLED if you keep the brightness low. You missed that self-emissive tech is nothing without brightness. Now give me something new.
 
kramnelis said:
You missed that self-emissive tech is nothing without brightness.
Click to expand...
Why? You still haven't explained why everyone must have 1000+ nits shot into their eyes at all times to use a display. No one wants that for their day to day work. No one wants that to browse the web. I sure as shit don't when I'm working with white sheet drawings, documents and spreadsheets. That's a sure fire way to get eyestrain, above and beyond any flicker you're so concerned about.

HDR and high brightness/contrast has its place and it looks fantastic when done right, for the right reasons. Gaming with 2000 nit highlights is quite impactful, for example.

Taking everyday office-centric sRGB content and blowing it out of proportion is not a good use of HDR - it isn't even "HDR" to begin with.

Attacking people on the internet for using "dim" displays for their work just because you have OPINIONS on various display tech methods is the saddest thing I've seen in a long, long time.
 
james2400 said:
What made you get the OLED does it have a use for you?
Click to expand...
I need to keep an OLED around for comparison from time to time. Despite being an OLED, the AW3423DW has good build quality. It's also packed with G-Sync, making it worth the price to keep.
 
Senn said:
Why? You still haven't explained why everyone must have 1000+ nits shot into their eyes at all times to use a display. No one wants that for their day to day work. No one wants that to browse the web. I sure as shit don't when I'm working with white sheet drawings, documents and spreadsheets. That's a sure fire way to get eyestrain, above and beyond any flicker you're so concerned about.

HDR and high brightness/contrast has its place and it looks fantastic when done right, for the right reasons. Gaming with 2000 nit highlights is quite impactful, for example.

Taking everyday office-centric sRGB content and blowing it out of proportion is not a good use of HDR - it isn't even "HDR" to begin with.

Attacking people on the internet for using "dim" displays for their work just because you have OPINIONS on various display tech methods is the saddest thing I've seen in a long, long time.
Click to expand...
I've mentioned multiple times that our eyes prefer high range images as they tend to have better images. This is simply how our eyes work, similar to how eyes like high refresh rates.

However, there's a difference between having the option to see high range images versus not having that option at all. If you choose an OLED, you're stuck in the low range with limited brightness and a limited color space. The image quality is not impressive at low range.

Furthermore, the most common screen brightness for PC use is around 250-300 nits, which OLED screens cannot achieve. If you want to use an OLED to display dim images, then go for it. But if you want the option to see better and high range images, OLED is not the way to go. This is not how the monitor market goes as well. Plus OLED is flickering. These are why OLED is not a good choice for PC use.
 
kramnelis said:
I've mentioned multiple times that our eyes prefer high range images as they tend to have better images. This is simply how our eyes work, similar to how eyes like high refresh rates.

However, there's a difference between having the option to see high range images versus not having that option at all. If you choose an OLED, you're stuck in the low range with limited brightness and a limited color space. The image quality is not impressive at low range.

Furthermore, the most common screen brightness for PC use is around 250-300 nits, which OLED screens cannot achieve. If you want to use an OLED to display dim images, then go for it. But if you want the option to see better and high range images, OLED is not the way to go. This is not how the monitor market goes as well. Plus OLED is flickering. These are why OLED is not a good choice for PC use.
Click to expand...
But... why do you care so much?

You get extremely passionate about other people's setups to the point where you believe their preference is invalid and that they "must see better images!!!"

Which is again, based on your opinions and preferences, some people may not like the extreme brightness and contrast of HDR1000 or greater.

None of your repetitive posting of the same points has made any sense, has persuaded anyone away from their choice of tech, or has been productive in any way.

Hope you've enjoyed wasting your own time with your hatred for a technology.
 
Senn said:
But... why do you care so much?

You get extremely passionate about other people's setups to the point where you believe their preference is invalid and that they "must see better images!!!"

Which is again, based on your opinions and preferences, some people may not like the extreme brightness and contrast of HDR1000 or greater.

None of your repetitive posting of the same points has made any sense, has persuaded anyone away from their choice of tech, or has been productive in any way.

Hope you've enjoyed wasting your own time with your hatred for a technology.
Click to expand...
If all the monitors are dim then there won't be more and better HDR content anyway.

The availability of HDR content is limited by the display technology available. If monitors are not capable of displaying HDR content with sufficient brightness and contrast, then content creators may not be motivated to invest in creating better HDR.

The major task here is to popularize HDR content as much as possible. But OLED is limited to show better HDR.
 
kramnelis said:
If all the monitors are dim then there won't be more and better HDR content anyway.

The availability of HDR content is limited by the display technology available. If monitors are not capable of displaying HDR content with sufficient brightness and contrast, then content creators may not be motivated to invest in creating better HDR.

The major task here is to popularize HDR content as much as possible. But OLED is limited to show better HDR.
Click to expand...
Ever thought that the vast majority of monitors sold, for the purpose of work, are purchased with cost in mind?

Large companies filling their office floors with new setups aren't going to buy expensive HDR monitors for their workforce, they will buy what is suitable to get work done at the lowest cost.

Even if costs come down, it's still going to be more expensive to implement true HDR than to just mass produce "dim" sRGB office monitors and sell millions of them.

"More and better HDR content" is utterly irrelevant to most monitor buyers and there's nothing that whining on here is going to do about it.
 
kramnelis

I posted this video couple pages back but you never commented on it. What do you think after watching it?

 
  • Like
Reactions: Senn
like this
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top