LG 48CX OLED - 4K 120 Hz

To people worrying that this is too big to use as a PC monitor, the concern doesn't make any sense to me, unless you lack the physical space or you're worried about being so close that you can actually see the pixels.

You can create any size or combinations of windows that you desire in the OS, in any location on the screen. If you don't want a 48" Chrome window at 3840 x 2160, stick it only in a portion of the screen.

The portion of the screen that you need to view for general PC usage might as well be a 14" 720p screen if that's what you want it to be. Having more screen area doesn't mean that you always have to use or look at it, but it's there if needed for gaming and films.

This screen is as close to 'all things to all men' as it's possible to get in a PC monitor at the moment - it excels at almost everything you can conceive of doing on a screen - so unless you don't have the physical space (and assuming you have the cash), then it's a winner.
 
Participant said:
To people worrying that this is too big to use as a PC monitor, the concern doesn't make any sense to me, unless you lack the physical space or you're worried about being so close that you can actually see the pixels.

You can create any size or combinations of windows that you desire in the OS, in any location on the screen. If you don't want a 48" Chrome window at 3840 x 2160, stick it only in a portion of the screen.

The portion of the screen that you need to view for general PC usage might as well be a 14" 720p screen if that's what you want it to be. Having more screen area doesn't mean that you always have to use or look at it, but it's there if needed for gaming and films.

This screen is as close to 'all things to all men' as it's possible to get in a PC monitor at the moment - it excels at almost everything you can conceive of doing on a screen - so unless you don't have the physical space (and assuming you have the cash), then it's a winner.
Click to expand...
It creates additional management faff. The peripheral parts of the screen (i.e. start and taskbar) are just so far away from your usual sight lines compared to a conventional monitor.

As an aside, I've only just realised that 48" 4k is the same resolution sharpness as 24" 1080p. Huh.

Edit - I guess that's kid of a silly comment because obviously you will see more detail if you are playing a game as a smaller part of the 1080 screen is then blown up in size. I was just thinking for conventional desktop use.
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
I've only just realised that 48" 4k is the same resolution sharpness as 24" 1080p. Huh..
Click to expand...

How did come to that conclusion, 4K picture is sharper with much more detail than the 1080p picture;)

Participant said:
people worrying that this is too big to use as a PC monitor, the concern doesn't make any sense to me,
Click to expand...

48/55 is not big for a gaming TV today, and who are theses people think it is YouTubers:eek:

Dirk Diggler said:
The 3080 is shaping up to be the fastest selling GPU of all time.
Click to expand...
And only 10gb of VRam and limited RTX titles to play it on not worth the price compare to the 3090 is the best selling GPU.:)
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
It creates additional management faff. The peripheral parts of the screen (i.e. start and taskbar) are just so far away from your usual sight lines compared to a conventional monitor.

As an aside, I've only just realised that 48" 4k is the same resolution sharpness as 24" 1080p. Huh.

Edit - I guess that's kid of a silly comment because obviously you will see more detail if you are playing a game as a smaller part of the 1080 screen is then blown up in size. I was just thinking for conventional desktop use.
Click to expand...
Just to point out that you can resize the taskbar. More faffing, I guess, but worth it to some and definitely worth it to me for the beauty of this screen's images.
 
i think Nitefly is refering to PPI pixel per inch, so yeah 4k 49inch vs 24inch 1080p is close

4k 27inch would have a better picture quality then a 4k 48inch due to PPI

24" 1920x1080 = around 91.79 pixels per inch (PPI)

48" 3840 x 2160 = 91.8 pixels per inch (PPI)

55" 3840x2160 = 80 pixels per inch (PPI)

27" 3840x2160 = 163 pixels per inch (PPI)

given same viewing distance, but bigger screen you will have to move further so then the pixel will become smaller again
 
Last edited:
JeffLoq said:
i think Nitefly is refering to PPI pixel per inch, so yeah 4k 49inch vs 24inch 1080p is close

4k 27inch would have a better picture quality then a 4k 48inch due to PPI

24" 1920x1080 = around 91.79 pixels per inch (PPI)

48" 3840 x 2160 = 91.8 pixels per inch (PPI)

55" 3840x2160 = 80 pixels per inch (PPI)

27" 3840x2160 = 163 pixels per inch (PPI)

given same viewing distance, but bigger screen you will have to move further so then the pixel will become smaller again
Click to expand...

Yes that's true in theory but in practical terms, the immersiveness and PQ of an OLED screen - especially at 4K HDR 120Hz - more than makes up for this almost imperceptible shortcoming, PPI being only one aspect of perceived PQ.
 
JeffLoq said:
i think Nitefly is refering to PPI pixel per inch, so yeah 4k 49inch vs 24inch 1080p is close

4k 27inch would have a better picture quality then a 4k 48inch due to PPI

24" 1920x1080 = around 91.79 pixels per inch (PPI)

48" 3840 x 2160 = 91.8 pixels per inch (PPI)

55" 3840x2160 = 80 pixels per inch (PPI)

27" 3840x2160 = 163 pixels per inch (PPI)

given same viewing distance, but bigger screen you will have to move further so then the pixel will become smaller again
Click to expand...
Yes that’s exactly what I was referring to, thanks for expanding.

I guess the sweet spot for a monitor is 1440p at 27” or 4K at 32-35 inch.

4K for a 27” seems overkill!
 

copied from avforums:

Cliffs

-Posterization with new firmware big improvements especially on Netflix and streaming services

-peak brightness drop confirmed

-100 nits drop is actually not that much to the human eye

-xbox/ps clicking test unreliable since its only checking the sources value not actual screen output value

-theory on drop of 100 nits either LG attempt to fix VRR fix or prevent burn in

-2019 firmware also caused a drop in 100 nits peak brightness also but fixed it in later future firmware

-LG statement, new firmware in the coming weeks will fix the brightness level and colour banding, HDR.
 
Toekiller said:
Is it rubbish what he's saying?
Click to expand...

Every video on that channel is a LG/OLED hate monologue and Samsung/QLED circle jerk (or at least that was the case when i last checked that chanel a year ago, i refuse to give him clicks so who knows what he posts now)
 
Last edited:
R3X said:

copied from avforums:

Cliffs

-Posterization with new firmware big improvements especially on Netflix and streaming services

-peak brightness drop confirmed

-100 nits drop is actually not that much to the human eye

-xbox/ps clicking test unreliable since its only checking the sources value not actual screen output value

-theory on drop of 100 nits either LG attempt to fix VRR fix or prevent burn in

-2019 firmware also caused a drop in 100 nits peak brightness also but fixed it in later future firmware

-LG statement, new firmware in the coming weeks will fix the brightness level and colour banding, HDR.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the update video:) I don't care if lose 100nits as long they fix it
 
Participant said:
To people worrying that this is too big to use as a PC monitor, the concern doesn't make any sense to me, unless you lack the physical space or you're worried about being so close that you can actually see the pixels.

You can create any size or combinations of windows that you desire in the OS, in any location on the screen. If you don't want a 48" Chrome window at 3840 x 2160, stick it only in a portion of the screen.

The portion of the screen that you need to view for general PC usage might as well be a 14" 720p screen if that's what you want it to be. Having more screen area doesn't mean that you always have to use or look at it, but it's there if needed for gaming and films.

This screen is as close to 'all things to all men' as it's possible to get in a PC monitor at the moment - it excels at almost everything you can conceive of doing on a screen - so unless you don't have the physical space (and assuming you have the cash), then it's a winner.
Click to expand...
RTings showed image burn in from playing CNN 24/7 after only two weeks.

Two... weeks.

And LG confirmed that there's no difference between two weeks 24/7 and four weeks 12/7.

Anybody using a programming IDE, or Excel, etc, for long periods, is going to see burn in using this thing as a monitor.
 
FoxEye said:
RTings showed image burn in from playing CNN 24/7 after only two weeks.

Two... weeks.

And LG confirmed that there's no difference between two weeks 24/7 and four weeks 12/7.

Anybody using a programming IDE, or Excel, etc, for long periods, is going to see burn in using this thing as a monitor.
Click to expand...
If that happens that's what warranties are for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom