Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 25-11-21, 10:31 AM
WYP's Avatar
WYP WYP is offline
News Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 20,861
LG and Samsung are launching on smaller OLED Screens in 2022 for TVs and Monitors

Expect 34-inch and 42-inch TV screens for OLED TVs/Monitors next year.



Read more about the future of OLED monitors.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 25-11-21, 11:09 AM
NeverBackDown NeverBackDown is offline
AMD Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,979
I wish they brought it down to 27", but I realize it's probably not worth their investment. It's incredibly expensive to produce and making tiny panels per sheet more than likely wouldn't deliver the volume to make it profitable.

Still Samsung's 34" monitor sounds promising. More manageable than 42". Though I could see a bedroom console setup benefiting from 42". Just not a PC situation
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25-11-21, 12:42 PM
Warchild Warchild is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Norway, Oslo
Posts: 7,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
I wish they brought it down to 27", but I realize it's probably not worth their investment. It's incredibly expensive to produce and making tiny panels per sheet more than likely wouldn't deliver the volume to make it profitable.

Still Samsung's 34" monitor sounds promising. More manageable than 42". Though I could see a bedroom console setup benefiting from 42". Just not a PC situation
im not quite sure why they went this route really.. ASUS tried to start the movement with their BFG screens, but I don't think they really took off very well? Could be wrong, but it seems that "tv screens" were just no comparison to dedicated monitors.

I welcome the idea of OLED of course, but the costs here are just astronomical.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25-11-21, 02:39 PM
Dicehunter's Avatar
Dicehunter Dicehunter is offline
Resident Newb
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ye Olde England
Posts: 15,191
I'm still waiting for my dream desk monitor, 32," 4K, 144Hz, 1Ms response time, HDR1000+, Full array backlight dimming, VRR and not costing an arm and a leg would be nice
__________________
= Steam/Origin/Uplay - Dicehunter =
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 25-11-21, 08:41 PM
NeverBackDown NeverBackDown is offline
AMD Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warchild View Post
im not quite sure why they went this route really.. ASUS tried to start the movement with their BFG screens, but I don't think they really took off very well? Could be wrong, but it seems that "tv screens" were just no comparison to dedicated monitors.

I welcome the idea of OLED of course, but the costs here are just astronomical.
I don't think they tried either. Nvidia tried to get into the console market by making people get BFG displays, but really hasn't worked out.

Agreed on OLED. It's just to expensive. They need to figure it out otherwise monitors will be a market they won't get into. Console players aren't into expensive monitors. Just any 1080p 144hz monitor will do and PC market won't buy it. At that point I'd rather get a massive OLED TV for the whole family.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
I'm still waiting for my dream desk monitor, 32," 4K, 144Hz, 1Ms response time, HDR1000+, Full array backlight dimming, VRR and not costing an arm and a leg would be nice
You'll be waiting a long time
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 28-11-21, 04:57 PM
jcchg jcchg is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Spain
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
I'm still waiting for my dream desk monitor, 32," 4K, 144Hz, 1Ms response time, HDR1000+, Full array backlight dimming, VRR and not costing an arm and a leg would be nice
32", 1000 nits at 60-80 cm from the screen, I wonder what you'd get first, a headache or getting blind.

And for 4K gaming you need a RTX 3080 Ti minimum, not native content looks awful in a monitor, and weaker GPUs don't deliver 4K DLSS Ultra 60 fps.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 28-11-21, 10:30 PM
Warchild Warchild is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Norway, Oslo
Posts: 7,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcchg View Post
32", 1000 nits at 60-80 cm from the screen, I wonder what you'd get first, a headache or getting blind.

And for 4K gaming you need a RTX 3080 Ti minimum, not native content looks awful in a monitor, and weaker GPUs don't deliver 4K DLSS Ultra 60 fps.
I still think 4k is overrated. And if you are concerned about 60cm from the screen, i suggest never to play VR gaming
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 29-11-21, 01:12 AM
NeverBackDown NeverBackDown is offline
AMD Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcchg View Post
32", 1000 nits at 60-80 cm from the screen, I wonder what you'd get first, a headache or getting blind.

And for 4K gaming you need a RTX 3080 Ti minimum, not native content looks awful in a monitor, and weaker GPUs don't deliver 4K DLSS Ultra 60 fps.
When you quote nits for HDR it's really about the bright highlights in the scene. It's not necessarily everything at max brightness. If that's the case there's no reason for contrast to exist
I think this is what Dice is referring to

That said if the entire scene went to bright white then yes you'd definitely not be comfortable.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.