32" OLED has arrived - LG 32EP950

[Legend]

Interesting...

https://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/147261-lg-intros-32-inch-uhd-ultrafine-32ep950-oled-monitor/
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/l...tor-announced-with-4k-for-professional-users/

I'm betting the 400 nits is to prolong the life and mitigate burn-in.

Of course, with typical monitors delays, this should be available sometime in 2025.

 

[Legend]

only 400 nits what a waste ,
Did they forget to stick a 1 in front of the 4

Guess just have to wait to see what these 1400 to 1600 nits 32 inch mini led are like

Why do people obsess over brightness? CONTRAST matters far more. If you're in a very bright room with lots of natural daylight then yes, screen brightness comes into play, but with OLEDs infinite contrast and per pixel illumination, even at 400 nits, it will leave every LCD far behind.

Mini LED will be very nice I'm sure, but its 1000+ dimming zones won't avoid blooming and can't touch the per pixel illumination of OLED. I've also yet to see any evidence that mini LED will see the end of glow/bleed, which can utterly ruin a viewing experience. OLED doesn't suffer with either.

As Greebo states, you simply don't need high bightness on OLED for an amazing experience, and dismissing this monitor because it's "only" 400 nits is just crazy. What we don't know yet however is the refresh rate or price... both of which could end up disappointing us.

 

[Legend]

There's two aspects to contrast not just black level, and to the human eye it's not about just the relative value but also the absolute values, i.e. just because you have "infinite contrast" at 100 nits doesn't mean your picture is going to look better than 10000:1 contrast at 1000 nits. Brightness doesn't impact just contrast, it also heavily affects the colour volume, which I would hope people also find important. It's also a double whammy for the WOLED because as you push their brightness up it's actually the white subpixel which drives most of that which in turn washes out the colours comparatively. It absolutely cannot compete with a QD LCD on that front.

You are also overrating the OLED's contrast's strength in any scenario outside of a pitch black room.
https://www.osapublishing.org/oe/fulltext.cfm?uri=oe-25-26-33643&id=380371

Worst of all, it's not gonna be 400 nits anyway, that's just the peak. For sustained brightness I bet it's still going to be around 100ish.

You certainly don't need pitch black for OLED to shine. LCD is just trash. I've never seen a single one, no matter the cost, that can compete with OLED in a dimly lit room. Brightly lit, lots of daylight, your argument holds some merit, but otherwise, OLED all the way. I've tried both, wasted lots of money in the process, and I know what I find best for my needs in the environment I like to view content.

You're also forgetting the utterly appalling QC on every LCD manufacturing line, resulting in dead/stuck pixels, dirt/dust under the panel and horrendous bleed and glow. IPS panels will ALWAYS suffer from this, and while VA is better, it has terrible viewing angles. Mini LED panels are all IPS, so they will suffer from glow, not to mention blooming. There's a reason all the major manufacturers are ceasing LCD production. Its days are numbered.

 

[Legend]

I agree. Actually expect it will be 120hz (because it's non trivial for OLED), but if you're after the holy grail of gaming monitors (spoiler alert - it doesn't exist), then "this is not the monitor you are looking for".
It will probably be aimed at professional content creators and will not be suitable for typical daily use, because it will probably have burn in issures.

Professional use is where the burn-in concern for OLED actually means something though. It's really not a concern for gaming, unless someone is playing the same game, day in, day out for weeks on end. But content creators tend to work in the same application(s), day in, day out, continuously. This poses a far greater risk of burn in than it will for the vast majority of gamers.

 

[Legend]

I see where you're coming from, but I don't completely agree, because most people only have one monitor and it's the same screen they are going to use for browsing, productiving, gaming etc. etc.
For me, it's simply the fact that it's used as a desktop display that causes the issue, not specifically that it's for 'gaming' or 'professional' use.

To be fair, I haven't watched the video but if it is being marketed for professional use I'm assuming it's due to colour accuracy and contrast levels etc?

I reserve the right to look into it more and do a U-turn on my opinion

How many monitors someone has doesn't change the fact that burn-in is a risk inherent to OLED. Not that it's guaranteed by any means, but the longer someone spends in the same application with static menus, the risk WILL be greater. And it's a safe bet that in such an unforuntate scenario, it won't be covered by warranty. Personally, as big a fan of OLED as I am (I own an LG 55"), I would never use one for work given the many consecutive hours I spend with the same applications on-screen.

On a side note, many dedicated professional use monitors aren't really suited for anything but the most casual of gaming. That may likely be the case with this OLED, given it appears to be 60Hz and there is no mention of any VRR functionality. I'm sure a gaming spec variant will arrive eventually now they're actually making OLED panels at this size, but this doesn't appear to be the monitor most OLED (gaming) fans are looking for. The price tag will also be rather high I suspect.

 

[Legend]

I am not convinced though that a 1000 nits LCD screen looks as good as a 600 nits OLED screen IMO.

Because it categorically doesn't, not side by side in regular/low light conditions. The per pixel illumination sees to that when viewing dark content such as star fields/space scenes, a flashlight in a dark room (so basically every horror film ever made), and anything else of that nature. OLED utterly destroys LCD in these situations, this isn't even subjective.

HOWEVER, add lots of ambient light in your environment, something like a nature programme, a colourful scene full of bright colours etc. then you will see a top-end FALD LCD pop more.

 

[Legend]

I know, I don't think I ever suggested otherwise. I'm just taking about describing it as safe for 'gaming', which I disagree with, because most consumers use the the same monitor for everything. I. E. It's not going to be just gaming, it's going to be browsers and menus

I've never seen a case of an average gamer suffer from burn-in on an OLED. I don't doubt someone playing Fortnite or any ONE single game with a HUD displayed for hours and hours on end might cause problems (and the rtings torture tests prove as much, albeit extreme), but that being the case, it would also be a concern for any application used in the same way, but as has been mentioned, desktop brightness settings would be less than a game most likely.

 

[Legend]

I can't tell if you're disagreeing with me, agreeing with me, or don't get the point I'm trying to make?
We both agree that OLED can suffer burn in. Are you suggesting that using an OLED, for example, 50% desktop use and 50% gaming isn't likely to be an issue?

I'd argue that any use case, for the most part, will not result in burn-in. Using the same application, for example a video editing app or Photoshop, for 12+ hours a day, every day, would be just as risky as playing a single game for that amount of time. Most people don't do this though. If someone is doing either, whether they're a content creator or hard core gamer, I wouldn't want to recommend that person get an OLED.