HDR Monitors

:confused:But you going to be limited at 60hz if DP1.3 is used.
And using temporary these days a brand new 60hz LG monitor while my 2730Z is getting repaired, give me 144hz 1ms panel above everything else.
And going to replace it only if equivalent 4k monitor exists, or HDR with the same spec.
 
Last edited:
Daniel - LG said:
Pls all bear in mind that there is a huge reason that OLED monitors are not available now - because currently the price is too high, they simply wouldn't sell

when we get the price down be ready :)
Click to expand...

I would've thought if people are willing to drop £1-1.2k on an IPS monitor (top end ASUS / Acer models taken as example) and still find the inherent IPS drawbacks and QC levels acceptable on purchase at this premium price point, then the premium that comes with the likes of OLED tech for a monitor of substantial spec (eliminating IPS woes) like that to last 5+ years makes it a worthy consideration to purchase and invest.
Granted revisions are released throughout it's lifespan with tweaks to the original design, but the investment is sound if buying right. Personal opinion only and not stated as gospel; if Dell were to release their OLED monitor at their touted $5k and you keep that monitor without the need to upgrade for 5+ years (because lets face it what out there can/will push the UP3017Q spec envelope in terms of hardware and software), suddenly it doesn't sound such a crazy price point for what would be a year in, year out high performer until the next big thing comes along.

(know you're LG monitors but using the Dell OLED as a case in point as that's the only OLED monitor that's been seen earlier this year)
 
Last edited:
I think that the main issue is that the pricing WILL be lower when we come to bring them to market - when you can buy a 55" ish OLED tv cheaper than an 30" OLED monitor it makes no sense

Also - I believe (read) there was an issue with screen burn on the aforementioned one that we obviously want to iron out before mass producing any sort of range
 
Its worse than that though. Your 55" OLED tvs are only £1400 now in places. Thats cheaper than some 34/38" inferior none 4k IPS PC monitors are now.
 
Last edited:
Yes Daniel. It is pointless the OLED usage as any monitor, if there is a burn on the screen.

Hence Samsung goes for VA panels and quantum dot for their monitors as the closest to HDR, before "oled" quality.

I do wonder though how HTC handles their Vive. Because that is OLED and if few hundreds of hours in Elite Dangerous, imprint (burn) the cockpit on the device panels, it makes the device looking bad on anything else.

And since you are around. Are there any chances from LG to put in the market 4k 120hz monitor between 32-40 inches with freesync/gsync in the future? (no hdr but TN or IPS).
 
Greebo said:
In the old days there used to be a reason. Tvs were 720 at best and monitors were much larger res with better refresh rates.

Now TVs seem to be leading the way. Monitors dont offer anything the TVs offer already but

a. we get charged at least double
b. the quality is even worse
Click to expand...

"If we can charge this much and get away with it, we will" - Nvidia and Intel lead the way. As long as people will pay £500 for CPU, £800 for GPU, £300 for SSD and £300 for RAM, PC monitors will not be cheap because why give one part of the computer for half the price if you can charge double for everything else.
 
When people stop buying monitors altogether because TVs are so far ahead prices will soon come down. It won't be long until this comes to pass. If there's a large premium on Quantum Dot BACKLIGHT monitors, then I'm just going to point and laugh at them. Not paying over the odds for the same LCD tech with a different light.
 
Why Tv's are so much cheaper hmm. Dont you all think thats beqouse the market is much bigger and that the big Tv screens are SLOOOW = where can you get a 1MS Tv ?

I dont know but in my mind it is obviously in that regard; Tv's are not fast, they are slow and several other issues compared to a fast nice TN/IPS monitor, thats why a Tv is way cheaper!

Or what do you Daniel@LG say ?
 
Last edited:
OLED has superior motion/response time than any LCD panel. The only problem with TVs now is input lag, iirc, about 25ms for the top OLED TVs in gaming mode.
 
MikeLoader said:
Why Tv's are so much cheaper hmm. Dont you all think thats beqouse the market is much bigger and that the big Tv screens are SLOOOW = where can you get a 1MS Tv ?

I dont know but in my mind it is obviously in that regard; Tv's are not fast, they are slow and several other issues compared to a fast nice TN/IPS monitor, thats why a Tv is way cheaper!

Or what do you Daniel@LG say ?
Click to expand...

Actually the OLEDs are 0.1ms!
 
MikeLoader said:
Why Tv's are so much cheaper hmm. Dont you all think thats beqouse the market is much bigger and that the big Tv screens are SLOOOW = where can you get a 1MS Tv ?

I dont know but in my mind it is obviously in that regard; Tv's are not fast, they are slow and several other issues compared to a fast nice TN/IPS monitor, thats why a Tv is way cheaper!

Or what do you Daniel@LG say ?
Click to expand...

From what I understand tvs are generally slow in input because all the processing for the image and webos/smarttv junk. Monitors dont have that stuff, if anything they should be cheaper not more expensive. Tvs are now ahead of monitors in terms of pixel response times with OLED now being available I believe, only advantage we have now is refresh rates (doubt that will last) and sync tech.

I see people buying more tvs as monitors these days, watching tv/films as well as gaming on one display is a massive convenience for people who don't have the space or faff around.

Personally if a 40" oled came out with a better input response than the 2016 models (reviewers seem to being complaining about it which is a good thing) I probably wouldn't bother buying another monitor with the current tech again, I mean whats the point?.
 
Nexus18 said:
OLED has superior motion/response time than any LCD panel. The only problem with TVs now is input lag, iirc, about 25ms for the top OLED TVs in gaming mode.
Click to expand...

Thats fine.

The Phillips BDM406, LG34um95, LG 38UC99 and X34 are all 25ms and even the ROG swift pg348Q is only 10ms.

So once you remove all those tuner, android bloatware etc from OLED Tv's you should have a PC monitor with much less lag than 25ms which PC monitor manufacturers are quite happy to palm onto us now and sell at £1400 when a stripped out 55" OLED for the same money would be better and cheaper.

Just that 55" is too big. In theory 40" and 32" OLEd panels should be cheaper to make anyway

There is IMO absolutely no reason manufacturers couldn't supply a fast 40" 4k HDR OLED screen right now for £1000 except that they dont want to when we keep buying inferior more expensive screens from them.

Drip feed the new tech...............
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
for single player maybe but for anything MP FPS related, not really :p
Click to expand...

Which is why TN screens keep selling............:p Plus MP FPS dont need or want 4k screens, they want 200Hz+ and are happy with 1080p.

My point is that plenty of people buy and manage with "high end" expensive IPS and VA screens now with lag between 10ms and 25ms.

And my point was that there is absolutely no reason an OLED screen should be any slower.
 
Greebo said:
Which is why TN screens keep selling............:p Plus MP FPS dont need or want 4k screens, they want 200Hz+ and are happy with 1080p.

My point is that plenty of people buy and manage with "high end" expensive IPS and VA screens now with lag between 10ms and 25ms.

And my point was that there is absolutely no reason an OLED screen should be any slower.
Click to expand...

OLED TVs by default are faster than TN monitors.
The LG for example have 0.1ms response.

As for TN panel I agree. Until we have something better with 1ms 144hz, going to keep selling.

If my current 2730Z goes pop again after April when the warranty expires, I could put from now a bet, I will buy exactly the same monitor again.
I do have a second monitor, a LG 25UM (2560x1080) and while the colours are better, cannot be compared the IPS response rate and picture quality when playing games, with the 2730Z.

Either the game is World of Tanks, while trailing with my turret enemy guns, or Elite dangerous, trying to dodge enemy spaceships.
 
Greebo said:
So once you remove all those tuner, android bloatware etc from OLED Tv's you should have a PC monitor with much less lag than 25ms which PC monitor manufacturers are quite happy to palm onto us now and sell at £1400 when a stripped out 55" OLED for the same money would be better and cheaper.

.
Click to expand...

These dont have any baring on the refresh abilities of the panel itself:confused:

Panos said:
OLED TVs by default are faster than TN monitors.
The LG for example have 0.1ms response.
.
Click to expand...
This is actually wrong, the recent LG 55B6 as tested by AVF recently is 38ms refresh rate , I dont believe a tv has EVER come out as fast as you are stating - most OLED's are in the same 30-40ms range if not more (HDR settings appear to have a adverse affect currently on refresh times)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom