LG OLED C9 as a PC monitor - Yes, I'm crazy, Yes time to get some burn in.

Soldato
Joined
31 Oct 2002
Posts
9,863
Just take some basic precautions and you should be fine in avoiding burn in:-

1) black background
2) no icons on desktop
3) set taskbar to auto hide
4) use a screen saver

Yeap. Plus with the thousands of pounds you'll save with a CX48 vs a top of the range ASUS or Acer Predator gaming monitor, even if it does burn in after 5 years it will still work out cheaper with OLED.

That said, after the extended burning tests on rtings.com, doubt most will see burn in even after 5 years.
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Apr 2014
Posts
29,472
Location
Dominating rooms with symmetry
I'm just going to get a cheap/second hand 1080p 144hz screen until the 48CX is south of £1000, hopefully by Black Friday. If the lowest prices seen for last years 55 B9's are anything to go by then I can see the 48CX hitting £800 at its lowest in the clearance sales before next years new series.

£500 for a 1440p 144hz monitor like the LG 27GL850 is hard to swallow after using an OLED, you're told it's one of the best gaming monitors out there by all the reviews but then you look at the black uniformity, contrast ratio and IPS glow and you just know it will bother you for as long as you own it.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
31 Oct 2002
Posts
9,863
I'm just going to get a cheap/second hand 1080p 144hz screen until the 48CX is south of £1000, hopefully by Black Friday. If the lowest prices seen for last years 55 B9's are anything to go by then I can see the 48CX hitting £800 at its lowest in the clearance sales before next years new series.

Could be 6 feet under by Black Friday, I'd rather pay more now, and enjoy the best gaming monitor possible for an extra few months :)
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Apr 2014
Posts
29,472
Location
Dominating rooms with symmetry
Could be 6 feet under by Black Friday, I'd rather pay more now, and enjoy the best gaming monitor possible for an extra few months :)

I couldn't stomach £1500 for the 48CX when I got a 55C9 for £1149 a few months back. The release prices on the OLEDs have always been a bit of a joke and seem to come down rather quickly.

I stopped living life making rash decisions in the thought I could be dead soon a long time ago lol :p
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
19 May 2012
Posts
3,633
I would love to use OLED for productivity and gaming, but I am afraid of a burn in my productivity time.
Unfortunately, my productivity is mainly Slack and several browser windows which means that the static windows would definitely burn in – sooner or later.
I was thinking how to overcome this and I have an idea which could greatly minimize burn in for productivity.
TVs usually try to avoid burn in with so called "pixel shift" (the whole picture moves few pixels up/down/left/right from time to time).

I call my idea "super pixel shift with reduced resolution".

Example:
The full 4k resolution has 3840x2160 pixels.
Run a smaller Windows desktop slightly lower resolution like 3640x1960 pixels (300 pixels less in every axis). The smaller desktop would be displayed at 100% (pixel by pixel, no scaling)

The smaller desktop slowly moves on a TV screen like an “Arkanoid ball”. If this is slow enough it would not be distracting (something like 1 pixel every 10 minutes).

Advantages:
1] A burn in would probably still happen to some degree, but it would be distributed to larger portions of a screen
2] people complain that 55” is too big for desktop – this would make desktop smaller

Disadvantages:
3] Full resolution is not used
4] Desktop moves on the screen (it would not be centered on the screen most of the time)
5] I am not aware of any tool which could do this but I think it should not be overly complicated to develop one.

Do you know someone who can help with point 5? In a perfect world a TV itself could do such thing but I think we will never force LG to implement this. Changing TV's firmware can be probably quite complicated but I believe that there is a way to force windows (drivers) to do this with relatively simple script/tool.

What do you think?


So if you're using an OLED screen for productivity and want to reduce the odds of burn in, (productivity is not my suggested use), you just use custom resolutions periodically to switch between them.

So for example, have a month using 3840x2160, then a month using 3840x1940, then a month using 3840x1800.

Theoretically the static elements should all shift to different parts of the screen which should in turn reduce the likelyhood of burn in dramatically as rather than those static elements occupying the same part of the screen for 3 months straight, they'd only occupy it for 1 month during a 3month period. That means a 66% reduction in times those pixels are on a static element.

You can do this with Custom Resolution switcher which you can download. Its really quick and easy way to switch resolutions.

Another thing you can do is lower the OLED light. try lowering it to 15-20 (I honestly find this absolutely fine for SDR content in a dimly lit room.. still brigher than my plasma and reduces eye strain for such a huge screen).

If you're doing productivity work which doesn't involve colour, you can also just hotkey windows black and white mode for those odd instances although I haven't heard of any data supporting black and white leaves OLEDs completely immunse to burn in.



I believe I touched on this in one of my old very long very disorganised guides/posts about hwo to use a burn in but yes, you're basically making the 55'' screen being a bit too big work to your advantage for negation of burn in via custom resolutioning.
 

TNA

TNA

Caporegime
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
27,576
Location
Greater London
I couldn't stomach £1500 for the 48CX when I got a 55C9 for £1149 a few months back. The release prices on the OLEDs have always been a bit of a joke and seem to come down rather quickly.

I stopped living life making rash decisions in the thought I could be dead soon a long time ago lol :p
+1

Did that happen after your trip to Peru? :p
 
Soldato
Joined
3 May 2004
Posts
3,288
Noticed a couple of retailers have put the 48" up for pre order.
All going for £1,399. One retailers says coming soon, two others showing a date of 4th September!
 
Associate
Joined
18 Mar 2017
Posts
411
Location
Earth
You dont really have to buy new, you could always keep an eye on the second hand market and get c9 way under 1K if u look for something used for only a few months it`s pretty much good as new.
 

TNA

TNA

Caporegime
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
27,576
Location
Greater London
I got 6 years on mine and I want the tv to last at least that long. It is so good that I see it lasting minimum 10 years in the house. Sure it will get demoted to different rooms in that time, but it would do the job very well like say my current 1080p Plasma is doing in my bedroom right now.
 

TNA

TNA

Caporegime
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
27,576
Location
Greater London
Ah, so that explains how he got his C9 so cheap. Not brand new and little to no warranty. Hope it does not develop an issue in the first few years or he will soon be wishing he went brand new with 6 years warranty :p

I am super happy I went for a 55” B9 on Black Friday. Cost me £994 brand new with 6 years warranty and it has been brilliant. The difference between the B9 and C9 are way overblown by some out there, had the chance to see them both and I am glad I did not spend the extra money. In the end it is the same panel so not surprising I suppose.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Jan 2010
Posts
219
Location
CannonSt, London
It's very different in its abilities though - especially when it comes to gaming. I have a C8 which has the same chip as the B9 and the C9 is infinitely more competent as a gaming display when used with my XOneX

Which will only become more pronounced when the 2.1 pc cards appear later this year.
 

TNA

TNA

Caporegime
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
27,576
Location
Greater London
It's very different in its abilities though - especially when it comes to gaming. I have a C8 which has the same chip as the B9 and the C9 is infinitely more competent as a gaming display when used with my XOneX

Which will only become more pronounced when the 2.1 pc cards appear later this year.
Please explain further what you mean. Because as far as I am concerned what you said is completely wrong. They both have same display and HDMI 2.1 and G-Sync, what is the C9 chip doing that makes it “infinitely better” exactly? If that was the case I would have gone C9.

All the C9 has over the B9 is a better cpu and 1GB extra RAM which helps a little when upscaling. It has slightly higher peak brightness for HDR and is meant to be slightly better calibrated out of the box.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 Oct 2002
Posts
9,863
Please explain further what you mean. Because as far as I am concerned what you said is completely wrong. They both have same display and HDMI 2.1 and G-Sync, what is the C9 chip doing that makes it “infinitely better” exactly? If that was the case I would have gone C9.

All the C9 has over the B9 is a better cpu and 1GB extra RAM which helps a little when upscaling. It has slightly higher peak brightness for HDR and is meant to be slightly better calibrated out of the box.

There are a few notable differences:

C9 has higher hdr peak brightness (OLEDS struggle with brightness, so this is a key point for me)
b9 has more colour banding because of the weaker processor and
c9 is better calibrated out of the box (you'll need an expensive monitor calibrator device to even attempt to properly calibrate it as well)

Of course you'll find posts where people say there's no difference, these tend to be B9 owners. Either way they are very similar in price, so best to opt for the C9 if possible.

Then again, CX range brings down input lag down to 5ms, so is clearly the best option, though will be too expensive for most to consider over the C9.
 

TNA

TNA

Caporegime
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
27,576
Location
Greater London
There are a few notable differences:

C9 has higher hdr peak brightness (OLEDS struggle with brightness, so this is a key point for me)
b9 has more colour banding because of the weaker processor and
c9 is better calibrated out of the box (you'll need an expensive monitor calibrator device to even attempt to properly calibrate it as well)

Of course you'll find posts where people say there's no difference, these tend to be B9 owners. Either way they are very similar in price, so best to opt for the C9 if possible.

Then again, CX range brings down input lag down to 5ms, so is clearly the best option, though will be too expensive for most to consider over the C9.
Who said there is no difference here though?. It is just that they are very small. Pretty much everyone who knows what’s what says this. When I was buying there was a large difference in price, over 30% as I recall. No way is there 30 or even a double digit difference between the two sets for me personally.

Just look here as one of many examples: https://www.rtings.com/tv/tools/compare/lg-c9-vs-lg-b9/802/915

The only difference in scores is mixed usage and hdr gaming and the difference in score says it all. A huge 0.1, infinitely better that ain’t it. Lol.

I see nothing there that would make me pay more than £100 more personally. At this point if you want best you need a C10, but again I recon the difference it brings along is minor and does not warrant the price difference. But each to their own obviously.
 
Back
Top Bottom