Would you buy a 24" 4:3 IPS with line doubling features?

[ZTylerDurden]

Let's assume a display manufacturer designed a "retro" specific 4:3 display at 24". Let's say...for $250-$300. Would you be interested in it?

IPS (OLED wouldn't make the assumed price range)
~10ms display lag
Line Doubling OSD options
HDMI/DP

Your input of why or why not would be awesome. Personally, I would love one for my cab.

[fernan1234]

This one meets all of your requirements except size (15''):

https://www.ebay.com/itm/124863000846

So yeah these exist, were made up to the late 2000s and can still be found, the trick is finding them in good condition nowadays. In some cases I find them to be one kind of ideal to view SD content.

[maxtherabbit]

I will never game on an LCD period. I have ample CRTs and a couple very nice 1080p plasmas. If I ever get something newer it will be OLED

[fernan1234]

For gaming and especially retro gaming OLED doesn't really offer benefits over LCD inherently. Tricks that can benefit PQ and CRT-like features can work just as well on either display tech, the only difference is better blacks on OLED (though LCD is catching up with more and better-controlled dimming zones). Everything else being equal, LCD actually has an upper hand for retro gaming since it can sustain more brightness for SDR content.

[ZTylerDurden]

This one meets all of your requirements except size (15''):

https://www.ebay.com/itm/124863000846

So yeah these exist, were made up to the late 2000s and can still be found, the trick is finding them in good condition nowadays. In some cases I find them to be one kind of ideal to view SD content.

Nice find! Although, size does matter here since 21" seems to be the largest you'll find (if you're lucky).

[Galgomite]

I can't see going back to LCD tech for retro gaming.

[maxtherabbit]

For gaming and especially retro gaming OLED doesn't really offer benefits over LCD inherently. Tricks that can benefit PQ and CRT-like features can work just as well on either display tech, the only difference is better blacks on OLED (though LCD is catching up with more and better-controlled dimming zones). Everything else being equal, LCD actually has an upper hand for retro gaming since it can sustain more brightness for SDR content.

I'ma keep it real with you chief I don't care

if your display consists of a membrane of goo with lights behind it I don't want it and thats on god

[azmun]

Let's assume a display manufacturer designed a "retro" specific 4:3 display at 24". Let's say...for $250-$300. Would you be interested in it?

IPS (OLED wouldn't make the assumed price range)
~10ms display lag
Line Doubling OSD options
HDMI/DP

Your input of why or why not would be awesome. Personally, I would love one for my cab.

If this was OLED, then I'd consider. Actually, still waiting for the (OLED) tech to trickle down to lower priced and sized monitors (e.g. in 27" and 1080p). Sadly, marketers and manufacturers seem to keep it positioned as a high end display. That said, the main issue or concern I have with OLEDs is burn-in and image retention and I don't think these have been resolved to this day.

[ZellSF]

Way too small.

10ms also isn't best in class for IPS monitors.

[spmbx]

Seems like complete nonsense to me. Going flatpanel you might as well hook up an emulator for pixel perfectness; no need for any linedoubling shenanigans.

[BONKERS]

For gaming and especially retro gaming OLED doesn't really offer benefits over LCD inherently. Tricks that can benefit PQ and CRT-like features can work just as well on either display tech, the only difference is better blacks on OLED (though LCD is catching up with more and better-controlled dimming zones). Everything else being equal, LCD actually has an upper hand for retro gaming since it can sustain more brightness for SDR content.

This is not even remotely true.
Viewing angles and screen uniformity and lack of back light bleed are not juts visible problems at odd viewing angles. Even viewing dead on, the awful problems IPS and VA panels are readily apparent, you only have to shift a few degrees to see horizontal gamma shift on an VA, shift a few degrees to see IPS Glow in any content with even a small amount of dark areas, shift just a few degrees to see backlight bleeding or an obvious uniformity problem in a portion of the screen when viewing solid shades of color.
Yes , LCDs get brighter but that's irrelevant when making LCDs brighter just amplifies their problems in dark content even more. (That display can hit 1000 nits but it's true contrast ratio is still only 1-7000:1, meaning your black level at 5k:1 is a laughable 0.2 cd/m. An OLED that hits 2-500 nits is still 0=0 with near perfect uniformity and no bleed)
Both IPS and VA commonly still have problems with overdrive artifacts and extremely slow response times on the low end. Making visibility of dark content worse in combination with either the low contrast ratio of an IPS, or the *extremely* slow response times of a VA panel leading to smearing.(With overshoot very commonly visible on high contrast dark portions of the image in motion).

The number of zones dimmable in VA panels is still a joke, they are often too slow to respond resulting in visible transitions or blooming or both. The contrast ratio of IPS panels hasn't changed in 10+ years, VA's have only moderately improved in the same time frame.

Spend any measure of time with a good OLED and you'll realize just how stagnant the LCD industry has become.
The perfect show case for the problems of LCDs is to play a game like the original Dead Space (With the brightness/gamma properly set) on an OLED and then go to try and play it on an IPS or a VA. (I own displays of each kind) The difference it makes is night an day not seeing shifting IPS Glow, backlight bleeding or horizontal/vertical gamma shifts or slow response times due to the dark content. It's incredible to actually see content that is very low light and actually be able to make out every single detail statically and in motion. Like a window.

Most OLEDs these days offer an option to reduce the amount of ABL present (Peak Brightness on both Sony/LG) and you can easily get a steady 200 cd/m2 in most content until you hit near 100% screen coverage. My Sony PVM-2551MD can hit 250 nits easy with 90% of content with the ABL being almost unoticeable.

For gaming and especially retro gaming OLED doesn't really offer benefits over LCD inherently. Tricks that can benefit PQ and CRT-like features can work just as well on either display tech, the only difference is better blacks on OLED (though LCD is catching up with more and better-controlled dimming zones). Everything else being equal, LCD actually has an upper hand for retro gaming since it can sustain more brightness for SDR content.

If you can find a professional OLED at a good price at some point jump on it. There are 17" and 25" models out there and unless you are leaving the same content on there for huge amounts of time the burn in isn't much of a problem. The one I got earlier this year (25" 1080p) was previously used in a medical office and had about 7,000 hours on it clearly using the same static programs and material. This did result in some burn in, but it's so incredibly light that you can only see it if the entire screen is one shade of color and it's very faint at that.

[fernan1234]

Spend any measure of time with a good OLED and you'll realize just how stagnant the LCD industry has become.

If you can find a professional OLED at a good price at some point jump on it. There are 17" and 25" models out there and unless you are leaving the same content on there for huge amounts of time the burn in isn't much of a problem. The one I got earlier this year (25" 1080p) was previously used in a medical office and had about 7,000 hours on it clearly using the same static programs and material. This did result in some burn in, but it's so incredibly light that you can only see it if the entire screen is one shade of color and it's very faint at that.

Responding to both of these points, I do have a top emission OLED as well (BVM) and as you know with your MD PVM they are so good they make LG WOLED panels look like a joke (WOLEDs also have color shifting problems when viewed off-angle). So I know what you're talking about, but I feel like you're really underrating what the good LCDs of today can do. Your characterization of the limitations of LCD make it sound as if you haven't seen high-end, let alone professional LCDs, made in the past couple of years. LCD is far from stagnant, and even as someone who watches and plays HD content on a professional OLED like you, I can easily see the improvements and advantages of LCDs.

Of course, not everyone can have a pro top emission OLED like us, so I was suggesting that the highest-end consumer LCDs can in many ways match and in some surpass consumer OLEDs. I brought up the point of SDR brightness for retro gaming because for me and many people you need both strobing/black frame insertion as well as full scanlines to get a satisfactory retro game picture on a modern flat panel, and that has a huge impact on brightness which consumer OLEDs are still not able to overcome due to their gimped SDR sustained brightness capabilities. LCDs can do the same strobing/BFI as any OLED panel, and dimming zones/algorithms have come a long way for close-to-OLED levels of contrast in most scenes, but with the added advantage of having enough brightness to compensate for the double brightness loss of BFI (@60hz, which is what is needed for retro stuff)+full scanlines.


Edit:

The difference it makes is night an day not seeing shifting IPS Glow, backlight bleeding or horizontal/vertical gamma shifts or slow response times due to the dark content. It's incredible to actually see content that is very low light and actually be able to make out every single detail statically and in motion. Like a window.

Should also clarify that you see this clear motion and through-a-window-like picture because of your OLED being top emission and having scan driving that clears motion better than BFI and fully compensates brightness. You can't say this about the consumer WOLEDs that most people have access to, so that's not representative of all OLED. Even the upcoming QD-OLED tech won't be top emission, and no manufacturer will include scan driving either like Sony did on its pro panels.

[Josh128]

I will never game on an LCD period. I have ample CRTs and a couple very nice 1080p plasmas. If I ever get something newer it will be OLED

This.

[Josh128]

Way too small.

10ms also isn't best in class for IPS monitors.

Exactly. My QHD $250 LG 32" is around 4ms with a TS. And its nowhere near top of the line.

[thebigcheese]

For a product like this to be compelling, it would either have to be cheap (like $150 maximum) or really deliver some great features that I can't already get in a regular monitor. For that same $300, I can get a pretty large 1400p monitor and hook up a RetroTink or OSSC that will almost certainly look better (though obviously the upscaler increases the total price). Or I could get a fairly cheap $100 monitor and a RetroTink 2x for the same price. So here are the features that I think would make a retro-focused monitor a compelling buy:

-Native 4:3 panel (not just a 16:9 panel with bevels that cover the sides)
-Native 480p resolution.
-Built-in line doubler with a quality deinterlacer for 480i.
-Analog inputs - composite, s-video, and YPbPr (RGB would be a nice bonus, but transcoders exist).
-Basically it should just have a RetroTink built in.
-20-30" screen.
-Really, really low input lag.
-Really, really low response time. Like 1 ms or less. Ghosting becomes really obvious on older sidescrollers, IMO.

The general idea is that people should be able to buy the monitor and just hook up their consoles as is (RF-only consoles would probably still need an adapter). I think the selling point is that it should be a modern screen that functions just like a CRT in that you don't need other products and you don't need to fuss around with settings to get it to work and look right. Otherwise, it doesn't really offer a compelling reason to get it over existing options.

[orange808]

I wouldn't want it. It needs to be less expensive.

Needs to be cheap and energy efficient if you're targeting cabinets. Also, needs excellent viewing angles. Uniformity and very low lag are a plus. If it's for the kids or casuals, they won't notice ghosting and blur. They don't know and they don't care. I wouldn't want to play it, but lots of people would.

If possible, I'd also consider mothballing a real PCB and using FPGA. No need to risk a real PCB. The FPGA will also use less power.

Finally, get a modular cabinet that's easy to move.

That would be great for the kids in the living room, if you want something that's a step above the Arcade1up stuff. Cheap to operate, durable, and easy to move. An LED is useful if you're trying to build something durable and cheap.

Personally, I absolutely refuse to game on any LED. It's substandard. It always sucks. Would be great for a "casual consumption" cabinet, though. Most people don't know or care about quality.

[strayan]

There are large 3:2 displays now. Why not just use one of them?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPttbRBOgdA

[bigbadboaz]

Yeah, I don't understand any argument that IPS can hold a candle to OLED, especially in a gaming context. Several of LCD's documented, glaring, unresolved flaws are directly at odds with the needs of gamers. Again, I don't even understand how this comes up.

That said, modern IPS is pretty solid on its own merits. I still wouldn't be interested in this. Personally, it's too small (I like the impact of a really large screen and will always center my main setup around a big screen), and the motion resolution specifically of any LCD technology is still an absolute deal-breaker for any action retrogaming.

CRTs are still fantastic and serve this purpose better than anything that's tried to replace it. If I'm building a specialty setup I see no reason not to simply use the older - still far better - tech.

[fernan1234]

and the motion resolution specifically of any LCD technology is still an absolute deal-breaker for any action retrogaming.

First note that both LCD and OLED are sample-and-hold displays, so both have the problem of persistence blur. Traditionally LCDs also had the added disadvantage of display motion blur due to slow pixel response times, but that has changed.

Pixel response time has been improving throughout the years and has gotten to a point where it is insignificant and virtually as good as OLED's instant pixel response time. For slow panning scenes the instant response time of OLED actually becomes a disadvantage as a source of visual stuttering--it's kind of a pick your poison situation between stuttering panning vs. slightly more blurry panning.

As to persistence blur, other than motion interpolation which causes issues, it can only be addressed with some kind of strobing (AKA "flicker", such as the now well known BFI technique) which can be used on both LCD and OLED equally, though LCD in this also has an advantage in being able to compensate more for brightness loss caused by the strobing.

Several of LCD's documented, glaring, unresolved flaws are directly at odds with the needs of gamers. Again, I don't even understand how this comes up.

As mentioned, motion used to be one of these flaws and it is hardly "unresolved" as you can see above, and then there was also the problem of poor contrast due to backlight tech, but that also has been steadily improving and it likely will continue to do so. And then there are alternative approaches like dual layer LCD. What else is left?

At least among the consumer options, no display tech is perfect and there's always a trade-off with any one of them. While overall I do agree than consumer OLEDs are generally better for gaming now than your typical LCD, the LCD tech in itself can and does offer some particular advantages even for that particular use.

Oh, but of course CRTs are the best for this, but that's not the topic really.

[ZTylerDurden]

There are large 3:2 displays now. Why not just use one of them?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPttbRBOgdA

Cause it's about 1000 bucks unfortunately. That's about 26 inches 4:3 which is great in terms minor excess pillarboxing.

[gray117]

29 inches would be better ... and tbh I would probably just scale to fit screen...

Interestingly enough after eizos square 27" (too small) square monitor a few years ago I've started to see more square panels appearing here and there... maybe one day they'll be something that will 29" tate/hori without needing to move...

[orange808]

Arcade1up.was selling a 4:3 17" LCD monitor for $169 with free US shipping. They are out of stock right now. I bet people that have on location cabs are buying them up. Probably too small for your use? With a little work, it would fit most standard sized cabs. Maybe reconsider the plan and use that?

[ZTylerDurden]

Arcade1up.was selling a 4:3 17" LCD monitor for $169 with free US shipping. They are out of stock right now. I bet people that have on location cabs are buying them up. Probably too small for your use? With a little work, it would fit most standard sized cabs. Maybe reconsider the plan and use that?

Yeah, too small. And in comparison to Dell, Asus etc they are visually poor with glow and viewing angles.

I’m using a 16:10 27” that yields 23-24 4:3 so it’s pretty good…but could be better.

[crmb]

Yes for a "big" 4:3 IPS/OLED. But don't need it to have a built-in framedoubler.

I would pay a lot for a ~27" 4:3 OLED to put in one of my dead-monitor cab.

I know very well how CRT looks better for 15&31Khz but i am tired of (fixing) CRTs. Because i have OCD with RGB convergence issues, i wasted to much time (and killed my eyes) trying to fix my blast cities' monitors.

I can imagine some day a 8K/16K... OLED 4:3 monitor + a scanline/shadowmask generator that will make it looks like a CRT

now... this 28" 3:2 panel looks interessing, though i am afraid of a severe IPS glow effect at close range.
I hope they will make other monitors with this panel with more OSD settings

Edit : panel used on the Huawei maybe ? : https://www.panelook.com/LQ282D1JC01_Sh ... 44461.html