Modern display discussion

[atheistgod1999]

I feel like there should be some thread on modern monitors to go alongside Fudoh's Ode to Old Display Technology, so people can share info on displays currently on the market.

Starting it off, I hear that NVIDIA is gonna release a local-dimming, 4K, 144Hz, G-Sync, IPS LCD monitor. I cannot fucking wait for that to come out and for me to get it (maybe an 18th birthday present ). I also hear that Sony is gonna start making OLED displays. I wonder when Dell is gonna come out with their OLED monitor.

[tjstogy]

All I can say is it doesn't matter how good the black levels are or whatever... if the tv has a poor refresh rate and if it lags, then it's not good for gaming. Oled tvs in particular suffer with poor processing of on screen movement. I wouldn't buy one until they figure that out. Remember plasmas and how they processed movement the best? And LCDs were terrible and got much better (but not as good as plasmas) well OLEDS are on par with the first LCDs in terms of image processing speed. Don't believe me, go look at an OLED tv demo at a store and watch closely anything moving- it looks terrible. Honestly I'd recommend people go find a Panasonic or Pioneer plasma on Craigslist in the meantime and wait a couple years so technology can catch up. Btw plasmas were incredible- truly some of the best pictures money could buy. Your wallet and your eyes will thank you.

[atheistgod1999]

All I can say is it doesn't matter how good the black levels are or whatever... if the tv has a poor refresh rate and if it lags, then it's not good for gaming. Oled tvs in particular suffer with poor processing of on screen movement. I wouldn't buy one until they figure that out. Remember plasmas and how they processed movement the best? And LCDs were terrible and got much better (but not as good as plasmas) well OLEDS are on par with the first LCDs. Honestly I'd recommend people go find a Panasonic plasma on Craigslist in the meantime and wait a couple years so technology can catch up.

I know; I'm just mentioning OLED TVs because they might be good for TV and movies.

[tjstogy]

Oled will be great one day. Anything you see is a special HDR demo, which really shows its capabilities. Put regular cable through it and it looks like dookie. It's a brand new consumer product and in the tech world that's usually a bad purchase. It will get much better and much cheaper over the next couple years. . Then they will come out with 8k something else

[LDigital]

This is utter nonsense. I recently picked up an lg55c6v and the picture quality on PS4 sdr content is staggering. It's easily the best display I have ever personally witnessed. Hdr is another level again. It has none of the motion and judder issues that the Samsung ks series has

[Guspaz]

OLED has a very low response time, and some of LG's OLED displays are 34ms of latency. What in particular is bad about motion?

[Lord of Pirates]

OLED has a very low response time, and some of LG's OLED displays are 34ms of latency. What in particular is bad about motion?

I'd guess there are overshoot problems if response times are low on every transition.

[kamiboy]

All I know is that the second an OLED by a Japanese TV maker with an ~80" size dips into my price range I'll be buying it. Currently there is a 15000 Euro jump in price going from the affordable 65" to anything in the 77-85" range which puts them way out of my reach.

I've been following OLED technology since the late 2000's waiting for the year where it would finally go from trade show prototypes to actual affordable consumer products. I kind of gave up on it when SONY and other Japanese TV makers stopped sinking R&D money into the tech. Fortunately LG kept the candle lit and is now the sole provider of panels.

I am not keen on owning an LG TV though, so I've been waiting for the Japanese to enter the OLED game. This year the ball is finally rolling, SONY and Panasonic are offering LG panels with their own superior processing. All I need now is to wait a year or two until I can get one in the ~80" range for less then 5000 Euros.

I might get impatient though and get a 65" this year, and then upgrade to a 100" a few years later.

[bobrocks95]

I feel like there should be some thread on modern monitors to go alongside Fudoh's Ode to Old Display Technology, so people can share info on displays currently on the market.

Starting it off, I hear that NVIDIA is gonna release a local-dimming, 4K, 144Hz, G-Sync, IPS LCD monitor. I cannot fucking wait for that to come out and for me to get it (maybe an 18th birthday present ). I also hear that Sony is gonna start making OLED displays. I wonder when Dell is gonna come out with their OLED monitor.

Good god that monitor is going to cost $1400+ isn't it? And I bet you'll still have to play the IPS panel lottery.

I'm about to get a C24FG70 from Samsung, a 24" 1080p 144Hz Freesync VA screen, and if Samsung would update the firmware on old units it wouldn't be a gamble, but instead I'll be returning each one until I get a unit made in November or later. There are massive overshoot issues on older models. One guy sent his in to be updated, and they sent it back with a new scratch on the screen and the same old firmware.

[Guspaz]

OLED has a very low response time, and some of LG's OLED displays are 34ms of latency. What in particular is bad about motion?

I'd guess there are overshoot problems if response times are low on every transition.

There isn't any overshoot, AFAIK (OLEDs just naturally have very low response times). Reading into it more, the concerns are really just perceptual persistence due to using sample-and-hold. But basically all modern displays use sample-and-hold, and I've never had an issue with it, so for anybody else who hasn't gone down the black-frame-insertion (or lightboost) rabbit-hole, OLED motion should be perfectly fine.

Note: This is not the case for VR. Low persistence displays make an absolutely massive difference in VR. The reduction in motion blur on a VR headset is dramatic, and it goes a long way to reducing simulator sickness.

[bobrocks95]

I believe that since VR requires very low light levels, with the display completely isolated, they've used black frame insertion from the start, since the reduction in brightness doesn't really matter.

[Guspaz]

Basically, although slightly more sophisticated than that: since they're using custom OLED screens with custom controllers, they can control the timing with more granularity than the frame level. They only display each frame for 2ms using a 90Hz refresh cycle, and doing that with regular black-frame-insertion would require a roughly 500Hz refresh rate. IIRC they also do global updates (and not a rolling refresh). They can get this custom stuff because they have a very deep partnership with Samsung.

Fun fact: the DK2 version of the Rift (75Hz OLED with low persistence) was made by simply taking the entire display assembly of a Galaxy Note 3 and sticking it in the headset. That includes the glass face with cutouts for the speaker/microphone/cameras, and it includes the touch sensor layer and touch controller. For a dev kit prototype, I guess it just made financial sense to use an existing part, although they did overclock it:

https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Oculus+ ... 613#s67544

[Xer Xian]

Do you guys think there's any chance of seeing a non-4K OLED monitor/tv?

I now have a decent setup for 1080p retrogaming (via OSCC+CII) and I'd like to upgrade from my old IPS without having to chain another contraption to the lot for 1080p upscaling..

[Guspaz]

I doubt it. OLED displays are 4K today because the manufacturing cost is sufficiently high as to require that they be premium displays. By the time OLED prices come down to budget levels, enough years will have gone by that 1080p won't really be a thing anymore.

There's a possibility that OLED displays come down in price to enter the budget market segment fast enough that 1080p is still a thing in budget TVs.

[Xer Xian]

Yeah, that's what I envision too unfortunately.. even if a 1080p OLED does come along, it will be some mid-tier or even budget product that will cut other corners beside resolution

I remember reading about OLED displays in an EDGE article back in 2005 at the beginning of the last gen era of consoles, it's incredible how long it has taken for this technology to hit mass production.

[Guspaz]

I remember how it was supposed to be super cheap because they could print OLED displays with an inkjet-like manufacturing process. It seems that didn't work out, or at least didn't provide the cost advantages they were hoping for.

In fact, traditional RGB OLED technology seems to have hit a brick wall years ago on large panels, since everybody abandoned that technique for large displays (still using it for smaller displays in microdisplays/phones/tablets/laptops), and large displays are right now exclusively the LG approach: each subpixel consists of a stack of yellow and blue OLED layers, which is then turned into R/G/B/W via colour filters (4 subpixels per pixel, white to improve brightness). LG's claims are that their approach is largely compatible with existing LCD manufacturing equipment, and produces much higher yields than RGB panels... Since they're the only company left making large OLED panels, it would seem they were proven right.

[Xyga]

Yeah, that's what I envision too unfortunately.. even if a 1080p OLED does come along, it will be some mid-tier or even budget product that will cut other corners beside resolution

I remember reading about OLED displays in an EDGE article back in 2005 at the beginning of the last gen era of consoles, it's incredible how long it has taken for this technology to hit mass production.

You kidding, right ? Both Plasma and LCD TVs took ages to get to mass market, in comparison consumer OLEDs just happened like around 2012 and went from 1080p to 4K in just one year or two. Outstanding fast price drops as well.

[kamiboy]

The wait has been excruciating, but better late than never. That being said I wouldn't expect to see OLED panels made by anyone but LG for the time being, which is not good for competition and pricing going forward. Only LG put in the R&D money and time while everyone else just gave up. Even Samsung that actually got so far as to put out a product pulled the plug. Now LG sits very comfortably on a monopoly for the next few years. Rather than face a race to the bottom as with LCD they'll prolly try to keep panel prices and profit margins high.

I guess even by the time the price of 4k OLED has come down due to better manufacturing techniques they can just start the cycle over again with 8K, even though there prolly won't be many sources for it, outside of maybe future gaming hardware.

In any regard, just as with my current TV, my next should last me the better part of a decade. With OLED my only excuse to upgrade would be higher resolution, for future gaming, or more likely, bigger size.

[Guspaz]

I don't think it's a matter of LG being the only one putting in the R&D money, it's a matter of LG going down a different avenue of research, and it turned out that that was the only avenue of research that was able to produce usable yields in the near future. Last I heard, Samsung eventually plans to make large panels again once they solve the yield issues, but they may have decided to move down the QLED path instead. Real QLED displays* would basically have similar performance/behaviour to OLED, but without any endurance issues.

In terms of the speed to market, I think Xyga's memory is faulty. Work on OLED started in the 1950s, and the first practical OLED was developed in 1987. This is technically faster than LCDs, where work started in the late 1880s, but they're both very long-term fields of study where many decades of research was required to get here.

*: What Samsung showed off at CES 2017 was not a QLED display, despite them using "QLED" as the marketing term for it. QLED involves self-emissive quantum dots (similar to OLED), while Samsung is still basically building an LCD panel that excites quantum dots. Their current "QLED" display just introduces a new structure that improves contrast and viewing angles. It may produce better contrast ratios and colours than traditional LCDs, but it still has the response time of an LCD.

[Xyga]

I'm not talking about all the experiments and protos, but actual attempts at producing and selling working TV sets for consumers, and at what pace those then evolved technically speaking. OLED beat both plasma and LCD hands down.

[kamiboy]

At least on the surface it seems Samsung has completely given up on OLED and is pushing their QLED technology for 2017. Not sure whether they did like SONY who completely closed the door on future developments by closing down and selling off their OLED plants or not.

I doubt we'll see them coming with anything but an even more polished LCD turd for 2018. SONY and Panasonic sure as deuce won't in this decade.

[Guspaz]

Did they? Plasma launched at the conventional resolution of the time, and kept up with the standard resolution of the industry. OLED launched at the conventional resolution of the time, and kept up with the standard resolution of the industry.

OLED made the switch from 1080p to 4K quickly not because of anything to do with OLED, but merely because large OLED TVs were introduced right before the whole industry moved from 1080p to 4K.

[Lord of Pirates]

OLED has a very low response time, and some of LG's OLED displays are 34ms of latency. What in particular is bad about motion?

I'd guess there are overshoot problems if response times are low on every transition.

There isn't any overshoot, AFAIK (OLEDs just naturally have very low response times). Reading into it more, the concerns are really just perceptual persistence due to using sample-and-hold. But basically all modern displays use sample-and-hold, and I've never had an issue with it, so for anybody else who hasn't gone down the black-frame-insertion (or lightboost) rabbit-hole, OLED motion should be perfectly fine.

Note: This is not the case for VR. Low persistence displays make an absolutely massive difference in VR. The reduction in motion blur on a VR headset is dramatic, and it goes a long way to reducing simulator sickness.

I see. I haven't been following the progression of OLED tech much. Until it gets to the level of LCD/CRT in terms of availability and range of options (performance and price) I'm not too interested.

[tjstogy]

If someone really wanted to buy a new 4K tv today- I'd recommend a top of the line Sony... they have the best video processing of the bunch. Also, the HDR technology is amazing. Way more relevant than 4K, which can't be fully realized unless you are much closer to the TV than you'd think. Regardless, if you want a great new tv it's going to be 4K whether you care or not.
LG was never known to make great tv's- until this OLED came about- and IDC what the specs read- go look at one for yourself with something moving on the screen. If you know what to look for (and most people don't, thus wouldn't care...) it's something you can't unsee. I'm not talking about resolution, or clarity, or anything else- the OLED technology looks stunning (again, with the right source material). I'm only talking about things moving on the screen. I've stared at them for the past 2 years (I sold them, and have sold TV's for about 10 years...) so I'm a bit anal about this stuff. Also, the LG OLEDS paid me incredibly well... they are about 50% markup and I would make about $600 on every OLED I sold. A comparable Sony would pay about $100, and with muuuuuch less markup. It's the "new technology" and people will spend money on it- bottom line.... don't always listen to specs, and don't always jump for the newest technology. Price doesn't always equate to quality.

[kamiboy]

I'll never buy an LCD TV again. OLED is the future, even if it may have some kinks to work out, as all new technologies do. I think the movement thing you mention is the judder that some really anal AVSFORUM posters complain about on the 2015-16 LG OLED's. So far as I understand that is an issue with LG's inferior picture processing. I expect SONY's first class processing will make those LG panels shine better than they themselves ever could.

Of course I'll wait and see what those anal retentive AVSFORUM members will say about it after few months first. If there are any flaws they'll find it. After all, those people could behold the radiant face of god and find a blemish.

[orange808]

Home theatre video guys don't give a darn about lag, so take the avsforums with a grain of salt. On the other hand, arcade guys don't give a darn about quality.

Retro gaming is one helluva niche.

[kamiboy]

I don't give a damn about lag either. I have CRT's for retro gaming, and the handful of modern games that I do play on occasion are designed in a way as to make such concerns completely moot. Unless, of course, one is into fighters, or multiplayer shooters, which I certainly am not.

Honestly speaking, I think some people here have been conditioned to worry about this mythical bane called lag, even when in practice it does not matter. In my opinion for most video games it has not for the better part of a decade. At least not the ones I tend to play.

[tjstogy]

Whether or not you perceive it, doesn't mean input lag doesn't exist... and many many people who play through a framemeister have noticed it.
A retro gamer's criteria for a flat screen tv should start with 2 questions, "which tv has the lowest input lag" and "which tv has the fastest image processing". If you have ever run through super mario world on a crt, and then done the same on a flat screen and noticed everything looked blurry when you were running... that's what these TV manufacturers call "refresh rate", or how fast it processes movement on the screen.
You might not care, but a lot of other people do. It's like any hobby.
Plasma's have always had the best refresh rate for flat screen technology. But regarding input lag, I don't have a framemeister to measure it, but I bet it's not perfect like a CRT- and that's one reason I use a CRT for retro gaming. BTW, CRT's were such a perfect technology in so many ways... but they were just too damn large and heavy. The TV manufacturers are saving incredible costs by not having to make these giant heavy things, and ship them, etc.... but they still charge you an arm and a leg of course. This is the same reason plasmas don't exist any more- amazing picture quality, but compared to an LCD at 1/3 the weight and material cost.... these manufacturers are in the business of making money. The typical cable watching end-user probably doesn't notice a big difference anyway (except, wow it doesn't weigh as much!).

I don't give a damn about lag either. I have CRT's for retro gaming, and the handful of modern games that I do play on occasion are designed in a way as to make such concerns completely moot. Unless, of course, one is into fighters, or multiplayer shooters, which I certainly am not.

Honestly speaking, I think some people here have been conditioned to worry about this mythical bane called lag, even when in practice it does not matter. In my opinion for most video games it has not for the better part of a decade. At least not the ones I tend to play.

[kamiboy]

Plasma had its own problems, I owned one once. Just like with LCD it was a dead end and I didn't mourn its passing because I knew OLED was coming.

People have their own criteria, but I am a firm believer in marrying a source with the display technology which matches it most naturally. That way I spend my time enjoying the source material, rather than messing with long chains of devices to mend a bad match.

[Ikaruga11]

What are considered the best Plasma models around here?