UnknownSouljer
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2001
- Messages
- 9,041
That's really exciting. I'm looking forward to testing showing different window sizes in terms of brightness levels.
Also makes me wish there was a 42" (or really a 32").
Last edited:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Why OLED for PC use?
- Thread starter Quiz
- Start date
Also makes me wish there was a 42" (or really a 32").
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2000
- Messages
- 16,189
After reading this thread, I feel like this is how my wall should look after watching TV.
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
A little more continuing from my last reply:
=======================
The PAg32UQX FALD has a response time of 7.3, in some transitions to white it's ~ 12ms.
tftcentral review:
. .
==================================================================
Me too. It's always interesting to see what tech can do. Whatever they are they will be better than the FALD tradeoffs for my tastes.
https://daejeonchronicles.com/2020/01/04/apple-pro-display-xdr-blooming/
"A comparison between Apple’s 6K monitor, the FSI XM310K (zoned dimming) and XM311K (dual panel)."
.
The image he posted is likely exaggerating the effect due to camera bias and compression but he also gave his personal take on it.
If all three displays were in the same photo that's not the best way to show it either as the camera will bias the results since cameras capture things relatively.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
https://fotoeng.wordpress.com/2020/09/10/no-hdr-fun-because-pc-monitors-are-trash-2/
=======================
The PAg32UQX FALD has a response time of 7.3, in some transitions to white it's ~ 12ms.
tftcentral review:
. .
==================================================================
Me too. It's always interesting to see what tech can do. Whatever they are they will be better than the FALD tradeoffs for my tastes.
https://daejeonchronicles.com/2020/01/04/apple-pro-display-xdr-blooming/
"A comparison between Apple’s 6K monitor, the FSI XM310K (zoned dimming) and XM311K (dual panel)."
.
The image he posted is likely exaggerating the effect due to camera bias and compression but he also gave his personal take on it.
If all three displays were in the same photo that's not the best way to show it either as the camera will bias the results since cameras capture things relatively.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
https://fotoeng.wordpress.com/2020/09/10/no-hdr-fun-because-pc-monitors-are-trash-2/
Last edited:
For the record the Macbook Pro 16" M2 Max looks in worst case scenarios closer to the XM310K - slight blooming but nowhere near as bad as the XDR. In most footage it's not noticeable at all.
I tried to look at some 120 fps gaming footage on the Mac and compared to my Samsung G70A, it looks just so incredibly blurry. You might not be too offended by it if you see only the Mac screen, but comparing it with a much faster screen it's apparent how much image clarity it loses thanks to its awful pixel response times. It's far less noticeable with 30-60 fps footage.
I did another comparison, this time with the OLED panel in my Samsung Galaxy Fold 4, which should be capable of 1000 nits peak brightness but had a hard time finding any solid test results. If I preferred the Macbook Pro's display to my LG CX 48", I ended up preferring the Fold 4 display to the Mac. I don't know if it's just the smaller screen, but the Fold 4 just seemed sharper all the time, maybe because in motion OLED is close to perfect.
It's a real shame we can't have it all - high HDR brightness, low to no blooming in dark areas and excellent motion clarity.
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
I moved to 43" 4k screen(s) alongside my 32" desktop monitor and then jumped to a 48" CX OLED. Desk is an island on caster wheels so keeping screens mounted separately. Can just roll the desk back up to the screens to reclaim space when not in use when desired.
Considering that I could even go as far as a 55" screen now without a problem.
. . . . . . .
3.5 feet to 4 foot viewing distance if you want to get a good viewing angle and PPD is a pretty big command/media center spread for most people though.
55" screen getting ~64 PPD at 3.5' would work but I'd rather be at 70+, at least some of the time. Could depend on if I was running uw rez on it and what kind of game. I could adjust on the fly because like I said my desk is on caster wheels and my screens aren't and won't be coupled to my desk.
55" 4k at 52inch view ~> 50deg angle 77 PPD
55" 4k at 46inch view ~> 55deg angle 70 PPD
55" 4k at 42inch view ~> 60deg angle 64 PPD
Not that big of a stretch from 48" screen really. .
48" 4k screen gets 60 to 50 degrees at 36" to 45" view
Vs.
55" 4k screen gets 60 to 50 degrees at 42" to 52" view
-so there is some overlap the high 48" screen distance vs low 52" screen distance.
- meaning there is a view distance range of 42" to 45" shared by both 48" and 55" screens that is still within the 60 to 50 deg human viewing angle.
. . . .
A 42" is still a square peg into a round hole for sitting it on a desk really. ~ 24" view distance or so is more like 1500p like pixel density and the viewing angle pushes the screen outside of your viewpoint more. So yeah I'd think a 32" to 35" would be capable of being withing the 60 to 50 deg human viewing angle range at a desk or near enough.
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
31.5" screen at 30" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
35" screen at 26" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
35" screen at 27" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
35" screen at 33" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
That's why I posted the takeaways from the reviewers too. So yeah I figured. Cameras have a lot of bias. Especially screens within the same frame taken together usually blows one out or dims and pales the other. Let alone photos of HDR material taken with a camera and posted in SDR. That's why most of the images in this thread of the screens are flawed. Plus the screen the reader is viewing them on of course and the surface and ambient light conditions.
It probably still shows the areas/screen space/zones that are lifted but not to the same degree. Just like the hdtvtest shots I posted from batman and the matrix. Like you said probably shift them all down relative to each other, and the dark dual layer lcd one would be very very dark.
There's definitely room to improve in both technologies well before microLED gaming tvs become a thing someyear.
I would prefer if displays were much thicker with considerable heatsinks and active cooling, especially OLEDs. Even water cooling if it helped. The proart displays have a boxy chasis and active cooling which avoids ABL at 1400nit-ish , but the samsung 2000+nit QD-LED LCD FALDs in their thinner housings all suffer aggressive ABL. The brighter things go relative to each tech the more important light output vs. power optimization vs. heat and the more important cooling methods will be.
PA32UCX
. .
Samsung Q90B
. .
LG C3
. .
sony xbr960 widescreen 1080i / "720p" hdmi CRT TV
. .
FW900 CRT
Last edited:
XoR_
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2016
- Messages
- 2,142
Vs. OLED even fast 4ms IPS panel seems pretty sluggish
Not enough I would use this as deciding factor but its there and pretty obvious in direct comparison
Not enough I would use this as deciding factor but its there and pretty obvious in direct comparison
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
Vs my BFI CX almost every 4K LCD would look blurry by comparison so when picking an such screen for HDR gaming I no longer put too much weight on the response times anymore as they all simply pale in comparison to a strobed OLED whether its the slowass 144Hz InnoCN or the quick 240Hz Neo G8.
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
The G8 isn't really fast though response time wise according to reports, at least with VRR active along with FALD active. It's a VA though and not a 4ms ips like XoR_ was talking about.
"The Samsung Odyssey Neo G8 has an excellent response time at its max refresh rate of 240Hz. There's minimal blur trail behind fast-moving objects, but there's significant overshoot with dark transitions that leads to inverse ghosting. Enabling VRR locks you out of any overdrive setting, and the response time is quick with it, and if you don't use VRR the best overdrive setting is 'Standard' because it performs similarly. 'Faster' and 'Extreme' have too much overshoot.
Like with the Samsung Odyssey Neo G7 S32BG75, there are reports that enabling local dimming worsens the response times. While the local dimming may cause some extra blur trail with fast-moving objects, the overall motion handling looks the same with local dimming on and off."
Using VRR your frame rate fluctuates as well so the size of the overshoot/ghosting will vary throughout depending on the game and how demanding the area of the game you are in.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
The G8 isn't really fast though response time wise according to reports, at least with VRR active along with FALD active. It's a VA though and not a 4ms ips like XoR_ was talking about.
"The Samsung Odyssey Neo G8 has an excellent response time at its max refresh rate of 240Hz. There's minimal blur trail behind fast-moving objects, but there's significant overshoot with dark transitions that leads to inverse ghosting. Enabling VRR locks you out of any overdrive setting, and the response time is quick with it, and if you don't use VRR the best overdrive setting is 'Standard' because it performs similarly. 'Faster' and 'Extreme' have too much overshoot.
Like with the Samsung Odyssey Neo G7 S32BG75, there are reports that enabling local dimming worsens the response times. While the local dimming may cause some extra blur trail with fast-moving objects, the overall motion handling looks the same with local dimming on and off."
Using VRR your frame rate fluctuates as well so the size of the overshoot/ghosting will vary throughout depending on the game and how demanding the area of the game you are in.
It was just an example of something faster than the InnoCN, and it's one of the faster 4K LCD screens out there regardless. But that wasn't even my point, my point is that there is simply no 4K LCD in existence that is going to be competing with my strobed CX for motion clarity, not unless it has strobing itself but strobing on LCDs just results in crosstalk. So at this point motion clarity isn't something I put too much emphasis on when buying a MiniLED for HDR gaming.
Last edited:
I've spent quite a bit of time reading through this lengthy discussion. Given the amount of expertise participating, I was hoping I might get some answers to my current dilemma. 4K OLED monitors are, almost across the board, the best current values, and overall performance for the dollar. Granted, as noted at so many points in this discussion, there are tradeoffs, My biggest concern remains burn in, but no one, including manufacturers and reviewers seem to be truly clear on how big a concern this is.
My other issue is that the best OLED values are in the 42-43 inch class, in terms of monitors that any normal space could support. And my space would make it very hard to accommodate anything over 32-34 (and, of course, there are no 34 inch 4k monitors due to format)
I'm looking at spending an absolute maximum of $1,300.00 and need a monitor that will provide excellent text quality, as it will be used 2/3rds of the time for internet research at sites and forums and software. The other third, and it is a very important portion, is for 4k gaming. I can find numerous great options for OLED screens in the $900-1100.00 range (for 42-43 screens that are too large). Yet finding anything worthwhile in a FALD, or other high quality panel, say, in a 32 inch in my price range, doesn't seem to exist. Even other 4k monitors at my max price like the G8 have their faults, as noted here, especially for the money. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
My other issue is that the best OLED values are in the 42-43 inch class, in terms of monitors that any normal space could support. And my space would make it very hard to accommodate anything over 32-34 (and, of course, there are no 34 inch 4k monitors due to format)
I'm looking at spending an absolute maximum of $1,300.00 and need a monitor that will provide excellent text quality, as it will be used 2/3rds of the time for internet research at sites and forums and software. The other third, and it is a very important portion, is for 4k gaming. I can find numerous great options for OLED screens in the $900-1100.00 range (for 42-43 screens that are too large). Yet finding anything worthwhile in a FALD, or other high quality panel, say, in a 32 inch in my price range, doesn't seem to exist. Even other 4k monitors at my max price like the G8 have their faults, as noted here, especially for the money. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
InnoCN 32M2V is the way to go. I replaced my LG CX with this as my primary display and for the price it's as good as it gets. It went as low as $799 on Amazon so that matches with the historical low of the LG 42 C2. For $799 you will not find a better 32" monitor out there, period. It isn't OLED so there's no fear of burn in, it's 4K at 32 inches with RGB subpixels so text clarity is AMAZING. Build quality actually feels rather excellent, but of course there will always be haters out there who don't even own the monitor but just wanna rag on the fact that it's a Chinese brand so it must be built poorly and cheaply by default, lol as if displays from Samsung, Acer, etc. don't have any build quality problems themselves.
UnknownSouljer
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2001
- Messages
- 9,041
You've made a lot of these posts, even directly to me before. However, frankly, they aren't helpful because display distance in general is going to be directly limited to room size and most often desk size for a majority of users wanting to use a TV (or monitor) to do work on a computer.I moved to 43" 4k screen(s) alongside my 32" desktop monitor and then jumped to a 48" CX OLED. Desk is an island on caster wheels so keeping screens mounted separately. Can just roll the desk back up to the screens to reclaim space when not in use when desired.
Considering that I could even go as far as a 55" screen now without a problem.
. . . . . . .
3.5 feet to 4 foot viewing distance if you want to get a good viewing angle and PPD is a pretty big command/media center spread for most people though.
55" screen getting ~64 PPD at 3.5' would work but I'd rather be at 70+, at least some of the time. Could depend on if I was running uw rez on it and what kind of game. I could adjust on the fly because like I said my desk is on caster wheels and my screens aren't and won't be coupled to my desk.
55" 4k at 52inch view ~> 50deg angle 77 PPD
55" 4k at 46inch view ~> 55deg angle 70 PPD
55" 4k at 42inch view ~> 60deg angle 64 PPD
Not that big of a stretch from 48" screen really. .
48" 4k screen gets 60 to 50 degrees at 36" to 45" view
Vs.
55" 4k screen gets 60 to 50 degrees at 42" to 52" view
-so there is some overlap the high 48" screen distance vs low 52" screen distance.
- meaning there is a view distance range of 42" to 45" shared by both 48" and 55" screens that is still within the 60 to 50 deg human viewing angle.
. . . .
A 42" is still a square peg into a round hole for sitting it on a desk really. ~ 24" view distance or so is more like 1500p like pixel density and the viewing angle pushes the screen outside of your viewpoint more. So yeah I'd think a 32" to 35" would be capable of being withing the 60 to 50 deg human viewing angle range at a desk or near enough.
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
31.5" screen at 30" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
35" screen at 26" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
35" screen at 27" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
35" screen at 33" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
I have no doubt you've found what's best for you. But you can trust other people when they state a preference that they know what they want whether they can express the reasons why or not. Yes, a 34-35" would also be fine for me for this display type. 42" is still too large and I would prefer smaller. 48" is beyond the point of consideration for me. Now, in the living room, I absolutely want the biggest TV I can afford given my space. Sure, send the 72"+ TV. That isn't what I was referring to though.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
The whole "just sit closer/further" thing can only go so far. Why don't we all just game on 11 inch monitors and press our faces right against it to get a similar experience to a 48" screen becoz PPD reasons amirite!?
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
yeah I understand. I was just talking about what I'm good with personally not saying you should be. I was just saying since I'm already set up for a 48", a 55" actually fits in part of that same optimal viewing angle of the 48" so it wouldn't be much of a stretch for me considering what I use now. Wishlisting a 1000R 55" 8k someday but probably years away yet.
There need to be more size options for desk setups for sure. And in quality HDR gaming displays.
These would be great:
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
31.5" screen at 26" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
31.5" screen at 30" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
35" screen at 26" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
35" screen at 27" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
35" screen at 33" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
We kind of do.. it's called VR but not in the PPD aspect yet because it's so close that it looks like a ginormous wall.
There need to be more size options for desk setups for sure. And in quality HDR gaming displays.
These would be great:
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
31.5" screen at 26" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
31.5" screen at 30" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
35" screen at 26" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
35" screen at 27" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
35" screen at 33" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
The whole "just sit closer/further" thing can only go so far. Why don't we all just game on 11 inch monitors and press our faces right against it to get a similar experience to a 48" screen becoz PPD reasons amirite!?
We kind of do.. it's called VR but not in the PPD aspect yet because it's so close that it looks like a ginormous wall.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
that brelyon company is trying to make vr like desktop monitors without headsets but their first one so far missed the mark on a lot of things..
conceptually they are aiming for something like this:
. . .
but so far they only have a clunky model with a dividing line in it.
conceptually they are aiming for something like this:
. . .
but so far they only have a clunky model with a dividing line in it.
UnknownSouljer
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2001
- Messages
- 9,041
I find it pretty unlikely that this will ever take off except for incredibly limited use cases. To me, this would be less useful in an office/work/gaming environment. The most useful case, would likely be if in the future, people going to a net cafe or similar could utilize this. Or the airline industry. Airplanes might be the perfect application for something like this.that brelyon company is trying to make vr like desktop monitors without headsets but their first one so far missed the mark on a lot of things..
conceptually they are aiming for something like this:
View attachment 558236
View attachment 558237
View attachment 558241
. . .
but so far they only have a clunky model with a dividing line in it.
The reason I wouldn't want to use this at home or a desk/office space and I suspect many others wouldn't as well, is it requires perfect positioning of my head all the time. The advantage of a "regular display" over this is my posture doesn't matter, my head position doesn't matter, if I roll away on my coasters on my desk chair I can still see and use my display/desktop. I don't have to get into position every time I want to see or use something. Unless that arm becomes motorized and "head tracking" to do a lot of that work for users (and what a wild and odd thing that would be) I doubt the utility. It's seeking a solution for something that I don't think users are looking for. Unless you want/need privacy. Otherwise I expect that simply getting an 8k ultra wide display with a wrap around curve will likely become less expensive sooner than something like this that requires a lot of miniaturization.
On an airplane, to go back to that, that would make the watching experience better for flights. Planes have limited seating positions, and there are no casters to have to adjust forward and backward on. Likely it would only hit first class though. It would likely take 25+ years for the tech to become cheap enough to hit coach. And that's if VR/AR or even just a "display headset" doesn't beat this company to the punch.
EDIT: Also, maybe some kind of portable display that could replace a laptop or augment one. If computing power becomes great enough on a phone, this could be your portable display for the phone with a kb/m to do all your office tasks without the need to have a laptop. That would necessitate a very thin panel, likely rollable display, and a way to make the arm very compact. Again, very niche, but a much more sound idea than a standard type display used by people at home. Again, with the caveat that wearable displays don't beat this kind of display to the punch.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
I'm gonna have to agree that thing looks absolutely dumb.
Note that VRR Control is a Samsung feature that does something to reduce flickering at the expense of higher input lag. You don't have to use it, it's a separate toggle from having VRR enabled. If you just avoid it even in local dimming mode it seems to perform pretty decently.The G8 isn't really fast though response time wise according to reports, at least with VRR active along with FALD active. It's a VA though and not a 4ms ips like XoR_ was talking about.
"The Samsung Odyssey Neo G8 has an excellent response time at its max refresh rate of 240Hz. There's minimal blur trail behind fast-moving objects, but there's significant overshoot with dark transitions that leads to inverse ghosting. Enabling VRR locks you out of any overdrive setting, and the response time is quick with it, and if you don't use VRR the best overdrive setting is 'Standard' because it performs similarly. 'Faster' and 'Extreme' have too much overshoot.
Like with the Samsung Odyssey Neo G7 S32BG75, there are reports that enabling local dimming worsens the response times. While the local dimming may cause some extra blur trail with fast-moving objects, the overall motion handling looks the same with local dimming on and off."
Using VRR your frame rate fluctuates as well so the size of the overshoot/ghosting will vary throughout depending on the game and how demanding the area of the game you are in.
There are of course other issues with it like the scanline problems and some other stuff.
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
And military use.
Motorized head tracking.. nice.
But yes if you had the right kind of headset chair you wouldn't have to move your head much. really.
Theoretically they could use eye tracking and face tracking to move the screen window relative to you a bit too, even without having a robotic arm but that's a neat idea.
The PPD is the huge problem with VR and VRlike displays like this though.
Most people think putting a shoebox on your face (VR) looks dumb too .. heh.
Not saying the invention won't tank but who knows.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
VR is neat .. on the inside..
It looks dumb on the outside .. lol.
.. on the inside..It looks dumb on the outside .. lol.
Tried to look up some YT videos and it does look like it allows you to move around a bit so it doesn't need to hold your position perfectly or anything. It would work terribly if you need to look at your display from across the room or something like that so it's definitely a bit of a "private" display in that sense.
Seems these start at 20K and have pretty much mystery specs and by appointment only showings so either they try to keep it under wraps until they get a patent approved or they are just too prototype quality at this point.
It looks like their current model takes less space than a typical superultrawide so that's pretty nice.
UnknownSouljer
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2001
- Messages
- 9,041
Perfect is relative. It has to do with the envelope of what you can see given your body positioning. A standard display has a much bigger envelope. Including, as we both note being further away from your display than 1.5' Or viewing off axis. Or vieweable when I'm slouching with my head on my shoulder and one knee up. Vs only visible within a specific optimial range and with reasonable good posture.
At those prices and considering the limitations, I would much rather have an 8k ultrawide. Heck, for 20k I could afford some "low end" cinema projectors and take up my whole wall.
https://electronics.sony.com/tv-video/projectors/all-projectors/p/vplxw6000es
And still have enough money left over for a 80"+ flagship OLED AND a flagship desktop OLED/MiniLED.
This really does beg the question: who is this for? elvn brings up the military, and even that to me is a stretch, unless it can give tangible benefit to someone flying a drone vs using FPV goggles (and I don't think this can) or using some other form of military hardware. Maybe a tank 180 degree display of the surroundings/submarine parascope?
EDIT: Anyway, this is the last one from me. I'll let you all have the last word (if you want to respond). We're going a bit off topic from OLEDs on PCs.
Last edited:
![Zarathustra[H]](/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1723407683){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 42,212
I moved to 43" 4k screen(s) alongside my 32" desktop monitor and then jumped to a 48" CX OLED. Desk is an island on caster wheels so keeping screens mounted separately. Can just roll the desk back up to the screens to reclaim space when not in use when desired.
Considering that I could even go as far as a 55" screen now without a problem.
. . . . . . .
3.5 feet to 4 foot viewing distance if you want to get a good viewing angle and PPD is a pretty big command/media center spread for most people though.
55" screen getting ~64 PPD at 3.5' would work but I'd rather be at 70+, at least some of the time. Could depend on if I was running uw rez on it and what kind of game. I could adjust on the fly because like I said my desk is on caster wheels and my screens aren't and won't be coupled to my desk.
55" 4k at 52inch view ~> 50deg angle 77 PPD
55" 4k at 46inch view ~> 55deg angle 70 PPD
55" 4k at 42inch view ~> 60deg angle 64 PPD
Not that big of a stretch from 48" screen really. .
48" 4k screen gets 60 to 50 degrees at 36" to 45" view
Vs.
55" 4k screen gets 60 to 50 degrees at 42" to 52" view
-so there is some overlap the high 48" screen distance vs low 52" screen distance.
- meaning there is a view distance range of 42" to 45" shared by both 48" and 55" screens that is still within the 60 to 50 deg human viewing angle.
. . . .
A 42" is still a square peg into a round hole for sitting it on a desk really. ~ 24" view distance or so is more like 1500p like pixel density and the viewing angle pushes the screen outside of your viewpoint more. So yeah I'd think a 32" to 35" would be capable of being withing the 60 to 50 deg human viewing angle range at a desk or near enough.
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
31.5" screen at 24" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
31.5" screen at 30" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
35" screen at 26" view distance = 60 deg viewing angle = 64 PPD
35" screen at 27" view distance = 55 deg viewing angle = 70 PPD
35" screen at 33" view distance = 50 deg viewing angle = 77 PPD
I find 42" to be perfect for desktop use.
It winds up filling my peripheral view more and becomes more immersive.
I did run 48" for a while, but that was too much.
There is probably some individual preference here though.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
I don't know if OP is still even looking for answers at this point, but hopefully the thread won't derail anymore so I'll give my thoughts on "Why OLED for PC use?"
Pros for OLED
- Very fast response times
- Per pixel dimming
- Great viewing angles
Neutral
- Can be had glossy if you go for the TVs, but matte options are available
- Relatively affordable/Great price to performance picture quality wise, BUT MiniLED monitors are also starting to come down in price and match OLED
- Size may or may not work for you, currently there are no high refresh 4K OLEDs smaller than 42 inches
Cons
- Text clarity isn't the greatest due to white subpixel, but still useable for desktop work IMO
- There will ALWAYS be a risk of burn in, small risk or big risk there is still a risk regardless
- VRR flicker compared to LCDs can be pretty noticeable at times, other times it's not a big deal. Still something to consider as a con though
Pros for OLED
- Very fast response times
- Per pixel dimming
- Great viewing angles
Neutral
- Can be had glossy if you go for the TVs, but matte options are available
- Relatively affordable/Great price to performance picture quality wise, BUT MiniLED monitors are also starting to come down in price and match OLED
- Size may or may not work for you, currently there are no high refresh 4K OLEDs smaller than 42 inches
Cons
- Text clarity isn't the greatest due to white subpixel, but still useable for desktop work IMO
- There will ALWAYS be a risk of burn in, small risk or big risk there is still a risk regardless
- VRR flicker compared to LCDs can be pretty noticeable at times, other times it's not a big deal. Still something to consider as a con though
vick1000
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,443
That's the 55" and up though, they have the MLA layer.
Inno is absolutely fantastic value at its price point its the best value panel out there right now.
Asus/Acer are way way overpriced for very marginal improvements.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 1,051
Thanks.
If possible, could you also provide a similar response highlighting the "pros, neutral, cons" of LCD/LED monitors as well?
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
good breakdown. Agree with most of that as a summary but there are more nuances.
Just to add a few things again:
Size, desks, PPD, Text clarity
===========================
- using a 42" 4k on a desk will almost certainly lower the PPD due to the view distance which will make the WRGB text clarity worse than if it was the best it could be for what it is if it were instead in the 60 to 50 degree human viewing angle at 64 to 77 PPD. I feel the text issue is larger (pun intended) and more vocal than it would otherwise be because a lot of people are cramming 42" screens onto desks and seeing larger pixels to their perspective.
- samsung's pentile qdOLEDs are also a non-standard pixel structure. Some other displays are BGR too which while supported by text sub sampling, doesn't always play nice.
- The 2d desktop's graphics and apps don't have any masking of how bad the PPD you are using is (text-ss and graphics AA).
- Below around 60PPD you'll get graphics aliasing on contrasted edges and fringed text even on rgb screens because the perceived pixels sizes will be larger and the masking methods won't be able to compensate to the same degree the lower your PPD goes.
- The higher the PPD, the smaller the fringing is so the harder it is to see, like zooming out on a staircase until it is a line, and vice-versa: the lower the ppd the larger the fringing will be so the more glaring and obnoxious it is to see. That also applies to fringing artifacts from DLSS and frame insertion tech. They'll be tinier at higher PPD. The higher the fpsHz the better for frame insertion too as there is less difference between frames to guess when manufacturing an in-between frame. The finer the details the less ugly things look. Larger pixels, larger problems.
At very high PPD like 8k at 60 to 50 deg viewing angle we wouldn't need to mask how bad the PPD was as much anymore. Wouldn't require masking with text-SS and graphics-AA to as heavy of a degree. In a high enough PPD display someday we probably wouldn't need to mask how blocky the pixel grid is at all because it would be so fine to begin with.
. . .
Burn in = "burn down" + restore as long as there is buffer remaining
=====================================================
Burn in is some risk but it's not like an oled phone left on with an app that prevents the screen from timing out. OLED tvs have a 25% reserved brightness/energize buffer. They even the wear on all of the emitters, then boost them back up to level again. This should last years unless you are foolishly abusive of the screen outside of normal gaming and media, dark themes, leaving the screen on static and paused/idle , etc. (there is a turn off the screen trick that just times out the emitters so no reason to leave it lit while afk for example). Still not a good choice for static desktop/app use imo though it's doable.
People are a bit more abusive of their oled and say look no burn in. . . but it's just burning down that much faster so using up more of the reserve buffer. It's a pretty clever system.
You can get the 42" LG C2 for $900 + tax currently at best buy. The 5 year best buy warranty on a c2 can be had for around $36 a year. That covers burn in if you are actually concerned about it but I doubt you'd burn in before 4+ years in normal media and gaming usage with some precautions taken. $36 a year insurance , $3 a month, $180 / 5 yr.
(The LG G series also comes with a LG 5 year burn in warranty by default but they start at 55")
. . .
HDR viewing: Matte abraded surface Glossy
===================================
matte ruins black depth for any screen type once it's hit by any ambient lighting. Glossy is great. HDR is designed for and looks best in dim to dark viewing conditions anyway no matter what type of screen. Allowing your ambient light levels to swing throughout the day will also change how your parameters look to your eyes and brain.
VRR Flicker
==========
Not a glaring problem for me but as I understand it the gamma is set to 120hz so the more you fluctuate from that in your game's curve via VRR the worse it will be. So running something like
90<<<- 120hz (Capped) >>>> capped
range instead of
50fpsHz <<<< 80fpsHz >>>> 110fpsHz
range might have different results as much more of the range is flucuating vs 1/3 and farther away from the 120hz gamma point. Just a thought.
Just to add a few things again:
Size, desks, PPD, Text clarity
===========================
- using a 42" 4k on a desk will almost certainly lower the PPD due to the view distance which will make the WRGB text clarity worse than if it was the best it could be for what it is if it were instead in the 60 to 50 degree human viewing angle at 64 to 77 PPD. I feel the text issue is larger (pun intended) and more vocal than it would otherwise be because a lot of people are cramming 42" screens onto desks and seeing larger pixels to their perspective.
- samsung's pentile qdOLEDs are also a non-standard pixel structure. Some other displays are BGR too which while supported by text sub sampling, doesn't always play nice.
- The 2d desktop's graphics and apps don't have any masking of how bad the PPD you are using is (text-ss and graphics AA).
- Below around 60PPD you'll get graphics aliasing on contrasted edges and fringed text even on rgb screens because the perceived pixels sizes will be larger and the masking methods won't be able to compensate to the same degree the lower your PPD goes.
- The higher the PPD, the smaller the fringing is so the harder it is to see, like zooming out on a staircase until it is a line, and vice-versa: the lower the ppd the larger the fringing will be so the more glaring and obnoxious it is to see. That also applies to fringing artifacts from DLSS and frame insertion tech. They'll be tinier at higher PPD. The higher the fpsHz the better for frame insertion too as there is less difference between frames to guess when manufacturing an in-between frame. The finer the details the less ugly things look. Larger pixels, larger problems.
At very high PPD like 8k at 60 to 50 deg viewing angle we wouldn't need to mask how bad the PPD was as much anymore. Wouldn't require masking with text-SS and graphics-AA to as heavy of a degree. In a high enough PPD display someday we probably wouldn't need to mask how blocky the pixel grid is at all because it would be so fine to begin with.
. . .
Burn in = "burn down" + restore as long as there is buffer remaining
=====================================================
Burn in is some risk but it's not like an oled phone left on with an app that prevents the screen from timing out. OLED tvs have a 25% reserved brightness/energize buffer. They even the wear on all of the emitters, then boost them back up to level again. This should last years unless you are foolishly abusive of the screen outside of normal gaming and media, dark themes, leaving the screen on static and paused/idle , etc. (there is a turn off the screen trick that just times out the emitters so no reason to leave it lit while afk for example). Still not a good choice for static desktop/app use imo though it's doable.
People are a bit more abusive of their oled and say look no burn in. . . but it's just burning down that much faster so using up more of the reserve buffer. It's a pretty clever system.
You can get the 42" LG C2 for $900 + tax currently at best buy. The 5 year best buy warranty on a c2 can be had for around $36 a year. That covers burn in if you are actually concerned about it but I doubt you'd burn in before 4+ years in normal media and gaming usage with some precautions taken. $36 a year insurance , $3 a month, $180 / 5 yr.
(The LG G series also comes with a LG 5 year burn in warranty by default but they start at 55")
. . .
HDR viewing: Matte abraded surface Glossy
===================================
matte ruins black depth for any screen type once it's hit by any ambient lighting. Glossy is great. HDR is designed for and looks best in dim to dark viewing conditions anyway no matter what type of screen. Allowing your ambient light levels to swing throughout the day will also change how your parameters look to your eyes and brain.
VRR Flicker
==========
Not a glaring problem for me but as I understand it the gamma is set to 120hz so the more you fluctuate from that in your game's curve via VRR the worse it will be. So running something like
90<<<- 120hz (Capped) >>>> capped
range instead of
50fpsHz <<<< 80fpsHz >>>> 110fpsHz
range might have different results as much more of the range is flucuating vs 1/3 and farther away from the 120hz gamma point. Just a thought.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
Someone on reddit mentioned this project to me. The guy gives some interesting info on how lcd tech works besides the project itself being interesting.
DIY Dual-Layer LCD monitor - can it match OLED??
DIY Dual-Layer LCD monitor - can it match OLED??
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 76,117
i also mentioned it a few pages back. looked good but chugged power.
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
Sorry must have missed it in the more stormy parts of the thread lol, or it didn't hit for some reason. Had time to check it out this morning. Thanks for sharing it.
edit:
I did see the images you posted but with no link I never followed up on what you were actually referencing by searching diyperks I guess.
Last edited:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503492-REG/canon_4274c002_dp_v3120_31_4k_reference.html
Here you go dual layer LED with OLED level blacks and 2000 nit sustained 100% window brightness!!
Only $32,000!!
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
I could try but the problem is that LCD monitors are much more complicated when it comes to that because there are just too many variables. You have TN, IPS, VA panel types. Then you have those which are just edge lit and those which have FALD, and those with FALD can have different numbers of dimming zones. I think it would be better if you just tell us your use case scenario then we could just recommend you something.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 1,051
Just asking in general/for knowledge. If I were to buy a screen right now, it would most likely be a 77" LG G3 for the media/home theater room. The 83" G3 doesn't have MLA this year.
I have a PG279Q for my PC which I have been using since 2017. Pretty content with it for now for PC use.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,620
Sounds good. The G3 is definitely one of the top picks for a TV this year, don't think you can go wrong with it.
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,804
The optimal view distance and viewing angle isn't usually as tightly adhered to with TVs in living rooms but it's usually thrown out of the equation on far end. Farther than a 50 to 60 degree viewing angle historically since people usually didn't have larger than 65" tvs/media viewing outside of some projector setups and often had smaller than 65" tvs even.
Sitting closer will still make a larger tv have larger blocky pixel grid compared to 60 to 50 degree human viewing angle, the same as it does on any 4k screen.
It doesn't matter what size 4k screen it is. Once you sit close (e.g. closer than ~ 64 degree viewing angle at 60PPD), the pixel grid will be pretty large by comparison.
Any 4k screen of any size at 60 deg viewing angle gets ~ 64 PPD
Any 4k screen of any size at 50 deg viewing angle gets ~ 77 PPD.
Using 60 PPD 4k as a reference point for what I consider a minimum here (optimally, not always possible obviously) :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
98" 4k screen at ~ 69" away has the same PPD and viewing angle and looks the same as
80" 4k screen at ~ 56" away
77" 4k screen at ~ 54" away (60PPD, 64deg viewing angle) ~ > 4.5'
65" 4k screen at ~ 45" away
55" 4k screen at ~ 39" away ~ > 3ft 3"
48" 4k screen at ~ 34" away
42" 4k screen at ~ 29" away
31.5" 4k screen at ~ 22" away
27" 4k screen at ~ 19" away
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Just something to consider with very large screens if you value the tighter pixel grid look most people think of when they think of a 4k screen. That said, people used 720p tvs and 1080p tv for years so it could depend on how much you value picture quality pixel density wise.
There will probably be more 8k tvs starting to hit the market in 2024 - 25 also even though they stalled out on those for 2023.
Most people with a 70"+ screen are probably not setting it up closer than 5' away but you might be surprised.
. . . .
That said the G3's sound great regardless. One of the reasons I mentioned that I'd be able to manage using a 55" screen at my current 48" screen decoupled from desk island setup is that I was window shopping and the G3's start at 55". The 8k screens in the next few years probably will be 55" or larger too at first.
============================================================================================================
I have a 77" C1 in my living room and I love it. I sit a little farther back ~ 8' - 9' away since I have a sectional couch on the opposing wall that is a pretty wide spread especially if utilizing the corner/end seating and lounge areas, and it just works out better room layout wise wall to wall. It's only 30deg+ viewing angle so outside of the single viewer sweet spot considerably I have to admit, but again it's a tv in a living room not a pc gaming screen. Personally I wouldn't set it up any closer than 5' on the short end of the equation. Optimally theater standards wise I'd need a 160" tv, the entire wall to get 60 deg from 9' away lol. . or I'd have to move my couch or the tv closer until they were ~ 6' apart but that would screw up the viewing angle for the far corners of the sectional and it isn't congruent with the room layout to do that anyway. On the plus side I get very high PPD of 100 - 110 though. If I was using it large amount of the time for gaming I'd consider a comfortable chair I could deploy when gaming to sit a nearer at around ~ 5'.
The only other things I can think of to recommend considering and watching out for at the moment other than some loose considerations of the layout and view distance are:
- I wouldn't let sunlight heat up the back of the screen, e.g. putting the back of the screen to a window unshielded from sunlight. Bad for any screen but especially oled's organics. It can heat up a screen more than you might expect, even in an air conditioned environment. Also might want to avoid heat exchanger/vents blasting it.
- consider layout vs windows and direct light sources, and ability to set up blinds, etc. OLED and HDR material in general look best in dim to dark viewing conditions. Not that (especially more modern) oleds can't be used in daylight but it's nice to have the option to dig in, deep dive watching the tv at it's optimal parameters to your eyes and brain instead of watching the room, especially with HDR movies or episodic HDR material (like last of us, mandalorian, house of dragon, nature documentaries, etc). Blinds partway open will cause striped bar effect so isn't a great setup. It's pretty much all or nothing with those if they are facing your screen.
- reflective and even matte screens will suffer light pollution when hit by direct light sources, and even non-direct ambient lighting will raise the black depths on matte abraded screen surfaces so lighting layout and orientation vs windows is something to think about, especially with a large screen. I keep a floor standing lamp alongside of my tv on each side, in line with it where they won't be hitting the screen surface directly. They are on smart switches so I can turn them on and off using voice assistant or my phone (the tv can be a voice assistant itself too, using it's mic button when set up properly). When really digging into a show or movie, usually at night after dinner at some point, I say "<voice assistant> 'movie night'" and my room lights turn off and a subtle bias led lighting strip lights up on the back of the tv. I still do my blinds manually though (for now)
- recommend learning how to use the "turn off the screen" feature via the remote for when you are going afk , or afCouch. . it's easy to do and better than turning the tv off and on or leaving the emitters running all of the time. It just turns the tv emitters off leaving everything running, almost like minimizing the screen. Audio is still running unless paused. Any button on the remote re-activates the emitters instantly.
- consider taking the time at some point to configure separate named settings in the TV's OSD for bright daylight viewing, medium light, dim to dark viewing. Our eyes+brains view screen parameters relatively so as the ambient lighting conditions change the brightness, contrast and saturation will pale or become more intense relative to that. Also maybe one for lower frame rate anime, cartoonish cgi movies, etc.
- personally I prefer sitting with head lined up with an imaginary belt that is the middle third of the screen. Not a fan of those over the fireplace setups (plus the heat concerns mentioned above if it's an actively used functional fireplace, and heat rises).
. . . . . . .
Idk what tv you are coming from but compared to the PG279Q (at your desk I'm assuming) prepare to be wowed by per pixel emissive in general in your media/theater room . . it's appreciable HDR colors at a razors edge pixel by pixel next to each other and next to blacks down to oblivion contrasted.
I had the TN version, the PG278Q for quite awhile, tried a 32" LG 1440p 850G VA briefly but the contrast was still poor and the PPD wasn't great ... then moved up to a 48" CX as my media and gaming screen at my desk for my first real HDR screen and first per pixel emissive one outside of phones/tablets. Some of the first documentary HDR content I watched had a scene of a dark night at a beach with a native spinning a double ended torch of bright flame and my jaw dropped. Soon after I noticed the gleam and reflections in everyone's eyes that per pixel contrast down to oblivion blacks can show. I've never seen another screen look like that.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 1,051