LG 27GR95QE (worlds first OLED 240hz 2560x1440p) launches 28 December

Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
I think it's an OLED thing, maybe to increase brightness. But yeah that might be another reason to wait for either hardware or software fix for that.
It's LG/WOLED thing.
And it's really not for increasing brightness, but for having any real brightness without pixels burning out fast.
WOLEDs literally can't do pure colours at higher brightness, because that white subpixel is used to artificially boost brightness beyond capabilities of red/green/blue subpixel and that results literally contaminated output spectrum.

Instead of colour filter from white, Samsung's QD-OLED uses quantum dot colour converters to make green and red from blue OLED resulting far better efficiency and light output per wear and doesn't need white subpixel.
Though now subpixel layout causes fringing in "two dimensions"...


OLED is simply still far away from what was hyped dozen years ago.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
Having looked in to it further what is actually going on is that Lg’s OLED panels have a reverse sub pixel structure of BGR, with a fourth white sub pixel next to the blue. Making it technically “WBGR”. Oddly this is commonly and widely referred to as “WRGB” for some reason

So the text clarity is partly related to that reverse RGB and partly because of the additional white sub pixel. But it can’t technically be called “RBG”, as there’s a white sub pixel between red and blue :)

So WBGR is how it’s structured, or BGRW if you’d rather. But never “RBG”
I think best we just call it as mess, because that's what it is:



There needs to be a fix of some kind of the subpixel/cleartype problem for me, otherwise I'd get one. I just know that would bother me, especially if it costs £1000!
Fix is making normal subpixel layout with only red, green and blue, instead of mess WOLED is.
Upside down panel BGR of those some Innoluxes/Sharps can be solved, but doubt there's fixing that LG's SNAFU.

Here's IPS
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
I use an IPS 1440p/165 monitor now which has glow/bleed and looks quite washed out, rated for 400 nits max, but I have it at 50% brightness.
Of course there's huge backlight bleed when backlight is bright as sun.
If you want anything resembling black from LCD, you adjust brightness down according to room illumination, because that's ultimately what sets black point.


I think I'm going to wait a generation before I upgrade from my 144hz LCD. I HATE IPS glow
A-TW polarizer basically solves that.
No glowing corners:
Of normal non A-TW IPS:

A-TW polarizer should have been standard feature on any better IPS for 15 years.
 
Associate
Joined
17 Oct 2011
Posts
74
Of course there's huge backlight bleed when backlight is bright as sun.
If you want anything resembling black from LCD, you adjust brightness down according to room illumination, because that's ultimately what sets black point.
He just said that he had a 400nit monitor at 50% brightness. What are you on about?
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
He just said that he had a 400nit monitor at 50% brightness. What are you on about?
Normal monitor calibration for graphics work is for around 120 to max 150 nits for white.
50% for 400 nits monitor can well be closer to 250 nits than 200.
That's really bright and will leak seriously through panel in normal room illumination.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Oct 2018
Posts
43
Location
North West
Fair enough. Currently it's at 41/100 and it's not eye-searingly white hot, but it does lack the 'pop' of my Mini-LED Macbook display which is next to it.

Thinking about it, I work in a dimly lit room and game mostly during the night, so maybe the LG/ASUS OLED will actually make the most sense...
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
Fair enough. Currently it's at 41/100 and it's not eye-searingly white hot, but it does lack the 'pop' of my Mini-LED Macbook display which is next to it.

Thinking about it, I work in a dimly lit room and game mostly during the night
Even VA panel will look bad with that brightness in that environment.

In LCDs effect of basic monitor settings is really brightness setting black point and contrast brightness/white point.
Using them other way will only kill ability to show black.
 
Associate
Joined
23 Feb 2009
Posts
1,028
I could never get over the drop in pq when lcd came out. The blur was so bad, on my first experience, my cousin was playing UT99 and I was surprised to see a new gfx effect, I didn't even consider it was blur caused by the tech :D and light grey = the new black. Except for size, everything else was a huge downgrade. Lcd got a little better over the years.
Now with oled, there is still compromise, but I'm back to being very happy with display tech. It's better than crt in many respects, black is better, has hdr, size etc. Still chasing motion, but it is getting closer. I'm intrigued if 240 bfi on oled can be the breakthrough. I still find crt has slightly better near black performance. Scaling lower res is far better.

My Oled screens have been my best gaming tech purchase for many years.
 
Associate
Joined
17 Dec 2015
Posts
135
Whats the expected date for this at the store? I saw the Hardware Unboxed review. Their only issue seems to be it lacks brightness.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Aug 2010
Posts
527
I've pre-ordered and it says April but no specific date?

Hoping it'll come a little earlier but I've been waiting 10 months for a car to be built and its still not even started so not holding my breath with this either!!!
 
Soldato
Joined
29 May 2006
Posts
5,354
I have this screen with me now for a review coming soon at TFTCentral. Let me know if any questions you have that might not have been covered in reviews and influencer coverage so far :)
Not sure this really counts as a question more a clarification that I am sure you will already cover. Are people making the brightness sound worse then it is? My thoughts are most monitors people own at home are 400nits or less and few people say they are not bright enough.

My current screen is a LG 27GL850-B which I understand has a 347nit brightness which in reviews they say is good for SDR. Like a lot of people I have the 100% brightness reduced down to 70% ish to reduce IPS bleed so I must be even lower then 347nit yet it is still plenty bright enough. Reading reviews for other screens it feels like people are saying 347 is good brightness for usage. While a LG 27GR95QE which seems to peak at 500 to 600nits in typical usage is not good enough despite being twice as good as typical screens. How can older screens like a LG 27GL850-B be plenty bright enough but newer screens 600nits is not enough? I would have thought double brightness and massively improved contrast due to deeper blacks would be a major improvement. Many reviews make it sound like its not due to the poor peak brightness. In short is it really that poor? If someone sat down in a blind test or a random user without knowing specs sat down would they go that's not bright enough?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom