OLED monitors incoming!

Frameless

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
217
Monitor that has OLED panel will appear at CES (Consumer Electronics Show) that will be held in January of 2016. :)

Source:
http://english.etnews.com/20151204200003

lgtopp1.956x538.jpg
 

Richard Jones

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
385
And I read that it's an LG panel... Ugh.
Well course they're still the only serious oled makers at the moment.

And even the 'filthy LG' oled sets put the most expensive lcd's to shame in so many areas I don't see how anyone would see this as negative news.

It's only the beginning, the price tag will be high, I think the 'big' year for oled will probably be 2017 or even 2018.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,900
Wouldn't be surprised if it's like $5,000 for a small 1080p screen. But still glad to see it take off nonetheless.
 

jbltecnicspro

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
7,002
Well course they're still the only serious oled makers at the moment.

And even the 'filthy LG' oled sets put the most expensive lcd's to shame in so many areas I don't see how anyone would see this as negative news.

It's only the beginning, the price tag will be high, I think the 'big' year for oled will probably be 2017 or even 2018.

Should clarify. I like LG. My only issue is that they're only pushing WRGB sub pixel layouts, which aren't fully compatible with RGB. For televisions this isn't that big of a deal but for PC monitors it could be? I don't know. Just goes to show that no consumer display technology is perfect, but OLED should come pretty close.
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,726
I don't think the price will be crazy. The OLED TV prices keep tanking, I've seen the 55" 4K OLED for around $2.5K on sale and it started for $5K earlier this year.

I think $1500 max honestly. Will probably only have 60 Hz options initially though
 

igluk

Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
718
Should clarify. I like LG. My only issue is that they're only pushing WRGB sub pixel layouts, which aren't fully compatible with RGB. For televisions this isn't that big of a deal but for PC monitors it could be? I don't know.


Yes the WRGB is not optimal, especially with red lines/text:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfIn5O-4hJU

There is also a stronger screen-door effect due to the smaller subpixels.
Maybe LG or Samsung will come up with a modified solution for the smaller panels, but even if not, they are still quite usable.

Other OLED questions and issues:
A potential problem with near black uniformity (banding, DSE, corner black crush), but on the new Panasonic OLED it is less of an issue (Review)

Then there is the automatic brightness depending on the size of white areas on screen (ABL) , which should be deactivatable when using OLED as a desktop monitor.
With OLED targeting twice as high peak brightness next year, should not be an issue to get the monitors bright enough though.

Viewing angles? Some OLED have issues with greenish or purple off-axis shading, but that is fixed on 3rd gen panels.

Curious how they will tackle burn-in. Maybe an intelligent pixel-orbiter system.

Color space? I hope at least DCI-P3 as native gamut with a good sRGB emulation.

Then the question of refresh rate and if/what method is used for compensation of sample-and-hold motion blur and also pixel response times between near-black shades.
I don't expect input lag to be a problem even though the TVs are pretty bad in that regard.
Might be we'll have to wait for the second generation of OLED monitors to get most satisfying results for gaming there.
 
Last edited:

Blade-Runner

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
3,784
From the thread title I feared I might be selling my X34 soon.....but nope, probably still another 3 to 5 years away before mass commercialization and decent specs.
 

Odellus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
1,699
Wouldn't be surprised if it's like $5,000 for a small 1080p screen. But still glad to see it take off nonetheless.

that wouldn't really make any sense considering even the most expensive LG OLED televisions max out at $5k, and that's for a 65" 4K model...
 

dmonkey

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
1,552
that wouldn't really make any sense considering even the most expensive LG OLED televisions max out at $5k, and that's for a 65" 4K model...

Sounds like they want to compete with Sony for the professional market first, before cannibalizing their own consumer display market. $5,000 sounds about right if that's their goal.
 

zone74

Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
621
I hope most future OLED monitors have this scanning mode as an option: https://youtu.be/jTfvwOGu4EI
That way you'll get super clear motion like with a CRT.
Sony's OLEDs still have much slower rise times, and much longer persistence than a CRT.
They're also keeping a large portion of the screen illuminated at once, compared to a CRT.
This is far better than LG's OLEDs, which are flicker-free, but far from the "super clear motion" of a CRT.

I would expect LG's monitors to be flicker-free displays. I know people that have been in contact with LG's engineers and from what I'm told, they are strongly opposed to the idea of having their OLED displays flicker.
Hopefully other manufacturers will be able to use whatever panels LG produce for monitors, so that we can get companies producing OLED monitors which do have CRT-like persistence.
I'm not convinced that OLEDs are nearly bright enough for that yet though.

Should clarify. I like LG. My only issue is that they're only pushing WRGB sub pixel layouts, which aren't fully compatible with RGB. For televisions this isn't that big of a deal but for PC monitors it could be? I don't know. Just goes to show that no consumer display technology is perfect, but OLED should come pretty close.
I would hope that LG realize that RGBW is unsuitable for monitors.

And I read that it's an LG panel... Ugh.
Could be worse: it could be an AUO panel like all the recent gaming monitors.
I'm hearing that Samsung will be returning with large size OLEDs in the next year or two though, which is exciting. I expect that Samsung will be using RGB OLEDs, and they had a black frame insertion option on their previous OLED TV. And Samsung seem to know what they're doing with image processing, unlike LG.
 

General Lee

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
245
The source still reads like they're only having an event behind closed doors, and it's likely just for industrial purposes, like broadcasting or medical. It'll probably take several years before we see a consumer OLED monitor.
 

Frameless

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
217
The source still reads like they're only having an event behind closed doors, and it's likely just for industrial purposes, like broadcasting or medical. It'll probably take several years before we see a consumer OLED monitor.

CES (Consumer Electronics Show).
 

Enhanced Interrogator

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,219
Sony's OLEDs still have much slower rise times, and much longer persistence than a CRT.
They're also keeping a large portion of the screen illuminated at once, compared to a CRT.
This is far better than LG's OLEDs, which are flicker-free, but far from the "super clear motion" of a CRT.

I would expect LG's monitors to be flicker-free displays. I know people that have been in contact with LG's engineers and from what I'm told, they are strongly opposed to the idea of having their OLED displays flicker.
Hopefully other manufacturers will be able to use whatever panels LG produce for monitors, so that we can get companies producing OLED monitors which do have CRT-like persistence.
I'm not convinced that OLEDs are nearly bright enough for that yet though.

Aren't those response times due to image processing and not the OLED pixel tech? I was under the impression that the actual pixels are capable of less persistence than CRT phosphors.

And I don't find the large scanning "band" on the Sony OLED to be a bad thing, considering how CRT flicker is very noticeable at 60hz and below. Having a larger band gives you the ability to have smoother motion at lower refresh rates without noticeable flicker. As you increase the refresh rate you could make the band smaller.
 

zone74

Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
621
Aren't those response times due to image processing and not the OLED pixel tech? I was under the impression that the actual pixels are capable of less persistence than CRT phosphors.
I'm really not sure what the cause is, just that currently they are much slower than CRTs.

And I don't find the large scanning "band" on the Sony OLED to be a bad thing, considering how CRT flicker is very noticeable at 60hz and below. Having a larger band gives you the ability to have smoother motion at lower refresh rates without noticeable flicker. As you increase the refresh rate you could make the band smaller.
Anything you do to reduce flicker means higher persistence, which means worse motion clarity.
The amount of flicker that you have is directly related to motion clarity. Flicker is a good thing for gaming/video.

I think it would be possible to create an OLED display that equals or betters CRT motion performance, but I wouldn't expect it to happen with an LG branded display.
 

Odellus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
1,699
Aren't those response times due to image processing and not the OLED pixel tech? I was under the impression that the actual pixels are capable of less persistence than CRT phosphors.

And I don't find the large scanning "band" on the Sony OLED to be a bad thing, considering how CRT flicker is very noticeable at 60hz and below. Having a larger band gives you the ability to have smoother motion at lower refresh rates without noticeable flicker. As you increase the refresh rate you could make the band smaller.

they use sample and hold, actual pixel response time of an OLED screen should be faster than a CRT. i imagine the only motion blur on current OLED TVs is entirely from sample and hold. i don't know what technique they use specifically (scanning or strobing) but there are low persistence OLED displays in a few of the upcoming VR headsets like the oculus rift.
 

flod

Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
948
Aren't those response times due to image processing and not the OLED pixel tech? I was under the impression that the actual pixels are capable of less persistence than CRT phosphors.

oled's don't intrinsically have millisecond-ranged persistence like phosphors. the rise time is limited by capacitance, which should be tiny for an oled pixel.
 

MistaSparkul

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,900
that wouldn't really make any sense considering even the most expensive LG OLED televisions max out at $5k, and that's for a 65" 4K model...

Well when one of the first consumer level 4k monitors hit the market it was a Sharp monitor that costed $5,000 which is the same price as 4k TVs at the time. Now 2 years later you can find the same size 4k screens for like $700 so I'm sure the prices are going to tank really fast, just saying that if it takes off at $3,000-$5,000 I wouldn't be surprised.
 

mesyn191

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
2,983
Here's another article with more details.
Pro click straight outta 2009 right here folks!

I was under the impression that the actual pixels are capable of less persistence than CRT phosphors.
There is a lot of stuff that the tech is capable of in theory but early implementations most always fall short. Look how long it took for 120Hz+ TN or IPS LCDs to become available much less become somewhat affordable. There is a big difference in image quality in screens from 4-5 yr ago too even if you don't care about refresh rates. Even more so vs some of the first consumer LCD's from over 10yr ago.

OLED has great potential but unless you're rich and can easily afford to drop large amounts of money every year without a care in the world they're not worth trying to be a early adopter over. Especially since IPS also keeps improving too and is already much more affordable.

In the long run that will probably change but for anyone on a budget, which is really most people, current LCD's will definitely offer more bang for the buck than OLED for a while yet. After all you need a good GPU if you wanna push lots of pixels and those don't come cheap normally either. Give em' 3-4 more years to become affordable and get the inevitable bugs worked out on OLED. You'll probably be happier in the long run.
 

rabidz7

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2014
Messages
1,296
Hmmm... If this is a proper aspect ratio, has flicker and doesn't have DRM, I might buy it. As a side monitor, as my CRT would beat it. But I know that this will probably be some blurry 16:9 contraption with HDCP to make hollywood richer.
 

rabidz7

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2014
Messages
1,296
Ideally, this would be 100Hz+, 1ms or less persistance, 4:3 or 3:2, take DL-DVI, have no DRM, be free of scalers and not be above 24". I bet they will do the exact opposite, though.
 

jackstar7

Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
568
Ideally, this would be 100Hz+, 1ms or less persistance, 4:3 or 3:2, take DL-DVI, have no DRM, be free of scalers and not be above 24". I bet they will do the exact opposite, though.

Your wishes are not those of the majority of the market, so I won't take your bet.
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,726
Ideally, this would be 100Hz+, 1ms or less persistance, 4:3 or 3:2, take DL-DVI, have no DRM, be free of scalers and not be above 24". I bet they will do the exact opposite, though.

Ya, not going to happen. The rest might.
 

Enhanced Interrogator

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,219
There is a lot of stuff that the tech is capable of in theory but early implementations most always fall short. Look how long it took for 120Hz+ TN or IPS LCDs to become available much less become somewhat affordable. There is a big difference in image quality in screens from 4-5 yr ago too even if you don't care about refresh rates. Even more so vs some of the first consumer LCD's from over 10yr ago.

OLED has great potential but unless you're rich and can easily afford to drop large amounts of money every year without a care in the world they're not worth trying to be a early adopter over. Especially since IPS also keeps improving too and is already much more affordable.

In the long run that will probably change but for anyone on a budget, which is really most people, current LCD's will definitely offer more bang for the buck than OLED for a while yet. After all you need a good GPU if you wanna push lots of pixels and those don't come cheap normally either. Give em' 3-4 more years to become affordable and get the inevitable bugs worked out on OLED. You'll probably be happier in the long run.

The difference I think is that like a lot of the tech developed for LCD panels will translate well over to OLED (adaptive refresh, strobing, etc) and won't need to be developed from the ground up.

Since I'm still using high-end CRT's for games and movies, and I own 5 of them, I'm fine holding out until proper OLED monitors arrive. I'll be skipping the TN/IPS tech altogether.
 

mesyn191

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
2,983
The difference I think is that like a lot of the tech developed for LCD panels will translate well over to OLED (adaptive refresh, strobing, etc) and won't need to be developed from the ground up.
OLED's work in a fundamentally different fashion though (back light via LED or CCFL for LCD displays while OLED each pixel is its own light) so this flat out isn't true for many things. Also I'm referring more to fundamental issues with the tech itself and not features. The way they're generating colors right now (via filters) for some of the mass produced screens is a bit hinky to say the least.

If you want to skip LCD's altogether fine but I'd make sure your CRT's are going to last if you want to take that route since its going to take a while.
 
Top