Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 49" 5120x1440 super ultrawide (QD-OLED)

Cannot believe the 49" QD-OLED panel really ended up being a super ultrawide instead of a 16:9 4K for use in a TV. a 49" QD-OLED with 144Hz would've been a worthy upgrade choice for me over my CX. Looks like my CX is sticking around for yet another year at least.
 
Some info about the OLED G9 (and Samsung's 2023 QD-OLED TVs):


1000 nits at 3% window size, 450 nits at 10% and 250 at 100%. So expect similar performance to the Alienware QD-OLEDs of last year.
 
Cannot believe the 49" QD-OLED panel really ended up being a super ultrawide instead of a 16:9 4K for use in a TV. a 49" QD-OLED with 144Hz would've been a worthy upgrade choice for me over my CX. Looks like my CX is sticking around for yet another year at least.
I don't understand the problem. Explain please.
 
Samsung has unveiled its new super ultrawide G9, this one with a QD-OLED panel, 5120x1440 res and 1800R curve.

https://news.samsung.com/global/sam...ing-the-next-generation-of-display-technology

The 1800R curve is interesting because if anything OLED should be easily bendable to a 1000R curve. This is probably very similar in specs to the Samsung OLED G8.

PS. Discussion for the Neo G9 57" Mini-LED is here.
Isn't 1440 vertical res still a little low for something this size?
 
I don't understand the problem. Explain please.

There is no problem. This just isn't what I was hoping for is all. We've heard rumors about a 49" QD-OLED panel months ago and my initial assumption was that Samsung would be introducing a smaller 4K TV in QD-OLED flavor to compliment their 49" 4K Mini LED QN90B as well as launching a larger than 65" size (Which they are actually doing with a 77" QD-OLED). But instead of a 4K panel it ended up being a super ultrawide 5120x1440 instead. Again it's not a problem, I've just grown comfortable with the form factor of my CX and as hoping to replace it this year with a similar form factor display that is superior to it and a 49" 4K 144Hz QD-OLED would've been a good candidate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: p3sty
like this
There is no problem. This just isn't what I was hoping for is all. We've heard rumors about a 49" QD-OLED panel months ago and my initial assumption was that Samsung would be introducing a smaller 4K TV in QD-OLED flavor to compliment their 49" 4K Mini LED QN90B as well as launching a larger than 65" size (Which they are actually doing with a 77" QD-OLED). But instead of a 4K panel it ended up being a super ultrawide 5120x1440 instead. Again it's not a problem, I've just grown comfortable with the form factor of my CX and as hoping to replace it this year with a similar form factor display that is superior to it and a 49" 4K 144Hz QD-OLED would've been a good candidate.
Got it.
 
Some info about the OLED G9 (and Samsung's 2023 QD-OLED TVs):


1000 nits at 3% window size, 450 nits at 10% and 250 at 100%. So expect similar performance to the Alienware QD-OLEDs of last year.

So the tvs get a 30% brightness boost but the monitors are going with the 30% power reduction for the sake of some eu efficiency standard, is that what that video is saying?

Or maybe 30% brightness boost wouldn’t quite get them to HDR 600 Black certification on desktop so they didn’t bother this year?

Thats a shame. 250*1.3=325 nit full field is starting to get to not too bad territory isn’t it?

And then dual-stack and we are at 650 nit full field for a desktop oled?
 
Noticed in tomshardware ces blog that they say msi are claiming True Black 500 for the 491c which requires at least 500/300 for 10/100 windows. Typo? But it'd be in line with the claimed 30% boost.

Didn't look like it was working when they went past though
 
Last edited:
Yuck, another limited monitor that will consume your whole desk. I would be all over this if 5120 x 2160 (21:9), DP 2.1 + HDMI 2.1. Preferably flat.
 
1440 is a terrible resolution for productivity. Just not enough vertical real estate. Also, it just isn't sharp enough in my opinion. I wish they would take it up a notch.
 
Yuck, another limited monitor that will consume your whole desk. I would be all over this if 5120 x 2160 (21:9), DP 2.1 + HDMI 2.1. Preferably flat.

240Hz OLEDs at 5120x2160 (Or even just regular 4K) at more typical monitor sizes is what people want so that's why display makers won't make it lol. All the new 240Hz OLED options are cool but the fact that every single one of them is 1440p vertical res disappoints me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
240Hz OLEDs at 5120x2160 (Or even just regular 4K) at more typical monitor sizes is what people want so that's why display makers won't make it lol. All the new 240Hz OLED options are cool but the fact that every single one of them is 1440p vertical res disappoints me.
It seems to be more like they can't make them, at least in OLED at this time. Expanding the 3440x1440 to 5120x1440 is easier achieved.

IMO 5120x1440 without scaling is a perfectly fine resolution for productivity. I had no complaints about desktop space when I had the Samsung CRG9, just wanted overall higher resolution. 5120x2160 will need to be scaled to something closer to 3440x1440 to be a nice size so you just get the same thing sharper.

The reason why I don't care for this model is the text rendering issues with QD-OLED. As a gaming screen I'd rather buy the 3440x1440 models. It's a shame they didn't release an upgraded 240 Hz model of those, probably will do that next year.
 
Back
Top