**FIRST IN THE UK WITH NEW ASUS FRAMELESS LED MONITORS!!**

It says 5ms response time, which is actually really good for an IPS panel. IPS panel has much better colour than a faster cheaper TN panel. I would expect nicer colours and better contrast, which I personally would trade in for 120Hz or super super low repsonse times any day.

For console gaming, it is probably a waste.
 
Exactly, not sure who wants 1080p at 27"??

- People who want a 27" IPS from a mainstream manufacturer for under £300
- People with a weak GPU setup
- People who primarily watch movies or game on consoles
- People who are long-sighted or otherwise prefer larger text and icons on the desktop

Many people are glad to have this as an option. There are plenty of WQHD options out there, this was never meant as one so there's no need to be elitist and closed-minded about it.
 
PCM2. What news is there on the OLED front?
When can we expect to see 23"-24" OLED monitors at under £500?

Progress is painfully slow... They seem to be up to large but expensive TVs and much smaller portable screens but need to refine the process and efficiency for use those in between (monitors) it seems. Monitors need to display lots of static content for extended periods of time and are a bit more stringent in their 'pixel lifetime' requirements. LGs current implementation uses white pixels which don't have differential degradation issues like separate RGB OLEDs (Samsung implementation). They then use a colour filter a bit like an LCD (but with a light source you have more control over and that gives a better spectrum of light). So LG could be a bit closer than Samsung and the 'true RGB OLED' monitors. I wouldn't like to speculate on a timeframe for an affordable 24" monitor though.

I suppose if you look back a few years there were 11" screens going for the same price as what LG and Samsung expect to be selling 55" models at next year. So it's nice to think things are getting there slowly.
 
Last edited:
Progress is painfully slow...

After reading your sig, I looked up Q(D)LED.

It would appear that for large screen TVs, eg. 42", QLED is the way forward. In terms of cost (and creating a mass produced commercially affordable product), QLED appears to be beating OLED.

From what I have read, QLED is most likely to succeed with OLED disappearing, UNLESS OLED makers, can create a cost effective manufacturing process to reduce the cost price to the retailer.

What is your opinion on the QLED vs OLED argument?
 
After reading your sig, I looked up Q(D)LED.

It would appear that for large screen TVs, eg. 42", QLED is the way forward. In terms of cost (and creating a mass produced commercially affordable product), QLED appears to be beating OLED.

From what I have read, QLED is most likely to succeed with OLED disappearing, UNLESS OLED makers, can create a cost effective manufacturing process to reduce the cost price to the retailer.

What is your opinion on the QLED vs OLED argument?

Well in my opinion they are two important technologies. I think OLED has had more legwork behind it and is the more developed technology at this stage. There are still some considerable cost and efficiency hurdles to overcome, however. QLED is not such a 'proven' technology but I do have high hopes for it. I know that the QD Vision and LG Display partnership is important for driving the technology forwards and I am sure that it has significant potential.

They are already starting to incorporate films of quantum dots as a sort of enhanced LED backlight for LCD monitors (something called QDEF which I am doing some quite deep research into for an upcoming article). The lifetimes of quantum dots is very good and you don't have the sort of efficiency and degradation concerns that you do with OLED. I think these two technologies will continue to develop side by side but do feel that although OLED may be further advanced commercially (at the moment) QLED may become the better option for the monitor market.
 
Back
Top Bottom