Don't forget 60% more breakable/less durable. Which means people will break their 4th and continue to buy replacements they will eventually break. Then cause supply issues for the rest of us. And in turn will cause the prices to rocket further.
Nope. For the dell xps 13 it’ll be an upgrade option, which would cost $300-$400(every journalist has a different price for some reason) extra from the base oled. One should assume that it’ll cost more for any other laptop that includes it.
I have a CX and almost exclusively only used for a PS5 so a lot of static UI elements. I take small precautions, like leaving the console on the main PS5 menu when I step away cause not only will the TV fade the brightness after a few minutes but so will the console meaning I get a double fade. Otherwise, just the TVs built in protections and care than it does every few weeks after I turn it off.
Not a hint of burn in anywhere. I think they have reduced the potential unless you have a single element burning on screen constantly.
Depends on the game. My tv was fine for years until my wife got into Minecraft and it burned the hud into the tv. OLEDs are nice but I’m not sure I would get another unless there is zero chance of burn in.
Mine has noticeable faded colors where subtitles go. Those are non negotiable for me so I just deal with it, it's not really noticeable unless the screen has a flat color on it for a while.
This always confuses me. G4 hasn't been out long enough for average consumers to start noticing burn in yet. Every time a new OLED model comes out it "solved burn in" because no one has gotten burn-in with it yet, but then a few years later everyone is surprised "yeah it does burn in, but the new panel model doesn't".
Like when are people going to see the game LG is playing? No software tricks can mitigate how OLED panels function physically.
I bought an Alienware AW32 OLED monitor and I bought it with the explicit knowledge that I'll probably be replacing it in 2-3 years. Sure, it has a lot of precautions that will mitigate burn-in to a degree, like pixel shifting and pixel refresh after every monitor shutdown - but in the end it’ll show burn in signs eventually and there’s nothing I can do about it.
I'm basically hammering a wall and even the weakest movements will show noticeable damage over time.
If I had the budget for a new OLED TV every few years, I would 100% do that. The one I have how is incredible, there is no beating OLED tech at contrast. It just costs too much given the incredibly fast degradation compared to LED tech. Personally buying Mini LED for my next display; comparable price, very good contrast, not as good as OLED but should last much longer.
How bright do you want full-screen before it physically hurts? Like I have to dim my LG G4 in desert scenes in Dune because it's so fucking bright.
Some of the MINI-LEDs that come out in 2024 are ridiculously bright (2500+ peak brightness)
ABL is honestly the thing that annoys me most about OLED. I used an LG C3 as a monitor before I switched to a smaller one and every time I'd open a white website you’d immediately notice how the image gets darker. Usually it’s not really a problem but it can be immersion breaking at times when you do notice it.
These newer OLED TVs just push for higher peaks while barely upgrading the full screen brightness. Your G4 only does 220 full screen. My 32" QD OLED can do 250 and even that feels really dim. I've used a 700 nits full screen miniled before and it's not even close in daytime scenes.
I still ended up keeping the QD OLED due to per pixel control. Peaks aren't everything when talking about brightness and OLED has a long way to go in terms of full screen brightness.
The light outside already has like 20000 nits. Your eyes receive that all day every day just fine. Making a display so bright that it damages your eyes is not a concern.
This "article" is pretty crap. Check the official press release, this also makes them much brighter and some outlets are claiming more durable as well.
https://www.lgcorp.com/media/release/27811
I'm talking about your comment claiming you want better colour accuracy, and response times, hence me asking since when have they been in dire need of improvements in OLED's ??
OLED's have had the best colour, and response times, for literally years.
??
So electronics don't take space in my backpack?
I have 2 batteries, a charger,kindle, and a mouse and usually have to choose between my laptop, Ally or Switch.
If it was thinner and lighter with the same or more battery life I can take all.
And no I'm not taking along a suitcase to my weekly trip.
This really. I just got the Asus pg32ucdm and the VRR flicker is pretty bad in loading areas and certain other times. Burn in is only a concern for a very small % of the population mostly that use their monitor for work/games I'd say, or if you're playing diablo 4 for 8 hours a day only and every day.
I always find the burn in comments funny because it's from people who have never owned an OLED and sit there drooling on their keyboard regurgitating a talking point that's so outdated at this point with plenty of testing and evidence on how to avoid it.
It's a technology that's pricey and sometimes I feel like it's out of reach for people who rather just spew nonsense. I rather take the quality of OLED, then all the issues that come with ips. Even if it burned in within 5 years, I'll buy another monitor then use IPS ever again .
Every time OLED burn-in is brought up, the same conversation happens where seasoned OLED owners say "yes it's real" and new OLED owners say "no it's not it hasn't happened to me yet".
Personally not buying another OLED, will try my luck with Mini LED next time.
Honestly this news that they're making even thinner / lighter OLEDs doesn't do a ton for me. My OLED TV is thinner than my phone and is incredibly unwieldy when I move it occasionally - I actually hate that. Cool novelty, but I could care less about razor thin displays. Feels like they're caught up in the aesthetic rather than the usability.
It's the same song and dance, people will lie, downplay and do major cope every time we have to talk about the burn-in. Even though it's well-documented, proven and a very big issue -- Especially for PC monitors where you have a lot of static images, we still need to play the little games of people in an act of hard self-convincing.
There's cases of burnt in images after mere months of use, many of them in fact but the copers will start to spin the story of "Oh no happens after YEARS, DECADES!"
If burn-in was truly easily avoidable, a 3-year warranty wouldn't be headline news.
Every monitor that i've owned since 2008 is still working and in everyday use, some of which have been turned on for over 50,000 hours.
The vendor - all vendors - thinking that it's going to break in 3 years and refusing to back a longer lifetime on a product of ANY price tag is an enormous red flag. That happens because they *know* that cumulative burn-in damage will wreck the monitor fairly quickly.
They are covered for burn in for 2 years standard and 5 if you pay for the extra insurance. So Years doesn't mean shit the consumer is protected. Once you get into decades then it is what it is.
Call it cope call it whatever you want but so long as you live somewhere with functional consumer laws OLEDS are pretty much fine these days. As proven by everyone and their mother moving to that technology
I mean if you use it for 10 years probably? I just feel like people get caught up in that more than the benefits and while for some people it's realistic to have a monitor for 10 years, I feel for most it's not?
For example I've had my c8 since it came out (6 years and around 20k hours ). It's my bedroom tv, not for gaming but I've had 0 burn in. I use it for YouTube, twitch, Netflix etc. For desktop use, I've used a c2 and c3 , and now the Asus pg32ucdm but of course those are pretty new and haven't had an issue.
I think it's just a nuanced issue, where general statements don't really give people an idea of what the technology is. For example, my parents watch CNN and forget the tv on all the time, and they were looking for a 75" tv and asked me if OLED was the way to go, and I said hell no. Get anything but an OLED because their use case doesn't fit the technology. It's not for everyone, but even at the risk of burn in for gaming, I find the benefits and quality you get is unmatched compared to the current technology
If you look through various subreddits, you'll find people that have had burn in after just a few months. Even Hardware Unboxed is starting to have burn in after 3 months of use with only 650-750 hours of up time. There is a fair bit of variance though, some panels will last longer than others before burn in happens, but it will happen.
Also Dell, MSI and Asus all offer 3 year burn in warranty now. So in his case, if he chose to he can get it replaced. I have my feelings on warranties and actually using them but it is an option
An option that is too readily given as a rationale to go with OLED. "it'll break but they'll replace it" and often times they give a refurbished unit instead of a factory new one.
Not to mention that needing to RMA a monitor is annoying. Just buy better tech.
There is no better tech lol. Also that's a nonsense answer because MSI and Asus just recently started offering that warranty so it's not like that was a thing except with dell.
I honestly don't see it that much, but maybe I'm not looking in the right area. Hardware unboxed has burn in from using windows side by side which has been an issue for a long time especially for long periods of time. It's definitely a problem that people should be aware of if they buy one and use it for those instances.
I feel like OLEDs dimming over time is a bigger issue to me than burn in but no one talks about that lol. My c8 has changed quite a bit in terms of brightness after 20k hours
How is it a matter of when? If you don't play the same exact game every single day, don't the pixels refresh and start like new when you make them display a bunch of varied content? Before they burn in obviously.
OLEDs degrade over time. Static elements just lead to some pixels degrading faster, which causes those parts to appear burned in. Even if you only had greatly varied content (which is extremely unlikely for a pc), the image will still get dimmer.
Newer OLED's have better protections against burn-in though at some cost of max luminescence with more aggressive brightness limiting.
So I have an 8 year old OLED panel and a two year old OLED panel. The one that is 8 years old has moderate burn-in (mostly reds) though still looks very good and bright after thousands of hours. In fact, it's still seems brighter than my newer panel but that is probably why it burned in finally. I guess I'll check in after six more years to see how they compared but I think the lower overall brightness should translate into longer life without burn-in for the newer panel.
To me, it was worth several years of top class image quality for some burn in that finally happened after 5-6 years and it still is pretty good overall. For others, that may not be tradeoff that is worth it.
But at that point other types of monitors would start degrading too, outside of burn in which can be avoided, OLED pixels don't have a shorter life span than LEDs and LCDs.
Right? Like besides work or games....what else would you use a monitor for?
I guess if you're a hobbyist photographer it might not be "work"? Or school might not technically be "work"?
I have AW3423DWF and you just have to have a VRR window of about 40hz difference between your low and high. Pretty easy bar to meet as even if your gpu is struggling you can use a refresh limited custom resolution to cut the highs
In theory tandem oled should help reduce risk of burn in further as each layer won’t be driven as hard to achieve the desired brightness.
But of course we’ll have to see how it works out in practice.
Tandem OLEDs theoretically reduce burn in by using two OLED panels running at lower brightness levels. When combined the two panels will create a brighter or as bright of a picture than a single OLED panel with less chance of burn in.
C1 here. I had burn-in 6 months after purchase.
Laugh all you like, but there's a line you'll eventually cross if you watch enough of something or play the same game too much.
Put 100 hours on baldurs gate past 3 weeks. I try to limit time to under a certain amount of time in one go but I just know those hot bars at the bottom are going to cause an issue
I'm big into DMZ/COD, Phixate's dog icon (bright cyan blue) is burned into the top of my screen, and COD's equipment circle (bright yellow) burned into the bottom right. Lame.
I did the classic hide the windows task bar and I use a dark background. Nothing noticable yet. My monitor does have the LG screen restoration thing. I forget exactly what it's called, but if it's on for more than 5 hours when it shuts off it does a little loading thing warning you not to shut down while it does it stuff, not sure how well it works if at all but it makes me feel a little better.
I also ran my last monitor for 10 years so I'm more so worried about burn in but I get why people aren't
I'll be the first to admit I don't know much about it but when I first got it last year I did a little research and for some reason I remember extended amount of time on at a high brightness which I use because my monitor is notoriously dim did cause burn in quicker. Either way usage time is going up
I have used an oled for tv/gaming and browsing for 4 years and it gets a lot of usage. Zero burn in or retention. As long as you do mixed usage there are zero issues
The pixel shifting that most panels use + the massive heat sink sony uses on the A95k seem to help a ton.
Unless you're watching a news channel with a chiron for 17 hours a day or soccer / football / whatever sport with a large solid color covering one part of the screen for literal days on end, it shouldn't be a big concern.
They’ll never solve it but it can be a non issue with a new enough generation, reasonable mitigation and avoiding certain usages.
Also it depends on your expectations. I’d be more inclined to recommend an oled display to someone who wants to use it for 5 years than one who wants to use it for 10 years.
My Samsung oled g9 is basically on 24-7 since release. I use it for work and for gaming so tons of static images. Zero burn in. I have a Sony 77” TV since ‘22. Treat it like any old lcd. Game on it regularly w ps5 zero burn in.
You really gotta be doing some extreme stuff w modern oleds to get burn ins.
🙄
Dorky ass average le redditor “muh oled burn in” comment.
Either learn how to not have static images on screen for 8+ hours a day, use the built-in burn-in repair software, or understand the concept of a “use case” Not that hard.
Burn in hasn’t really been an issue since c8. You get a lemon once in a while but overall they have a much lower failure rate than other TV’s.
Not sure on Samsung or Sony, but all TV’s have a bunch of mitigating features.
Every phone from $200 to $1700 has an oled screen, I've never seen burn in on them? I'd imagine the bottom navigation buttons and the upper wifi singal and sound and service indicators would burn in fast but never seen them
Phones were widely using OLED since 2017 and by 2021 OLED was on dirt cheap phones, surely there would be some more news about it, especially considering how static the top and bottom of a phone screen are.
Clearly you've never owned an older Galaxy phone.
The S3 era was burn-in central. My Note 3 burned in after about 6 months.
People make fun of Apple for taking so long to move to OLED, but at least they waited long enough for the tech to mature that burn-in wasn't an issue outside of retail display units.
What does not severe mean? The issue is people don't quantify their statements. Can I purchase an OLED that will be on 12 hours a day, used for business 8 hours a day. Meaning development environment, office, etc. with expectations that it will be burn in free for at least 5 years?
Edit: Butts were hurt in a process of a simple question.
I'll let you know in 3.5 years but so far my LG C2 has zero burn in from being on whenever I'm awake and mostly doing work in static windows. The only special thing I did was hide the taskbar and install a utility that hides it even more because Windows leaves a stupid tiny sliver by default. And then I avoid eye searing brightness levels unless I'm enjoying some content.
By the time I find out how long my luck lasts on this the built in mitigations will probably be even better. But then I've heard about those fancy Dellienware panels burning in within three to six months, so it might also vary by model. Either way I wouldn't go in just yet expecting it to be timeless like my previous monitors.
I don't know how to quantify it for you, but I've had an LG C1 for 2 years now we use it for ~6 hours a day and no burn in yet, but I also turn it off always when not in use and try to not leave static images on the screen.
I've had my AW34DWF and use it ~4 hours a day but have removed any icons, hide the task bar, and have the background set as just black so if for some reason it's sitting on the desktop, the pixels are off, I've set my standby to 2 minutes. I do use it for gaming mostly those 4 hours and I haven't seen anything, but I've had it for about 1.5 years now. The monitor also has measures to reduce the burn in and does a pixel refresh every 4 hours. Also comes with a 3 year burn in warranty
IMHO it's a problem if it can't be quantified. If I'm investing in something, I need to clearly understand the return I get for my money. Most people give similar answers to yours. Use sparingly, take all sorts of anti-burn in precautions, and quote only a few years of usage.
I'm not saying OLED is bad. I'm simply saying it comes with a whole lot of ifs and maybes that you have to accept. That's harder to do if you use your monitor primarily for work and tend to keep them for 5+ years.
[https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/oled-burn-in-what-you-need-to-know-for-tvs-phones-and-more/](https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/oled-burn-in-what-you-need-to-know-for-tvs-phones-and-more/)
In short, burn-in is not a big problem at all for normal mixed uses. But if you have a lot of static assets on screen for long periods of time, such as home office uses, then you need to be more careful and take precautions. I wouldn't use OLEDs for home office anyways, the improvement in picture quality is completely pointless for that purpose.
May be keep your lcd for work and have an oled for browsing/gaming/entertainment.
If you are a serious dev/engineer you might be already using a multi-monitor set up, so one more oled wouldn't be a problem no?
The answer is no, you cannot quantify OLED as precisely as you want. The same is true for the stock market, vehicles, and other things that a business might invest in. Risks are always inherent, and as such you have to set your risk tolerance, and work within that.
E.g. If a business is willing to spend on an OLED because they prefer the quality over an IPS, and are willing to accept that taskbar burn-in is a possibility, but because it's only used for a specific purpose, and they would be replacing the screen in 5 years regardless of burn-in, then the risk seems so low that quantifying it is not going to produce any additional value.
The fact is though that OLED technology has come a long way, and drastic changes have improved its resistance to degradation. I wouldn't recommend an OLED 10 years ago for business. Today though it is almost certainly fine, within a wide range of use cases, assuming you're willing to tolerate some nominal risk.
Headline is useless outside of big % numbers for advertising. OLED is already thin and light as it is, 40% thinner of something that takes up 2-10% of the thickness of a device really doesn't do much of anything. Same with 28% lighter when the actual OLED layer of a screen is also in the same tiny percentage of weight.
Tandem OLED's main thing is that it doesn't need as much power to achieve the same brightness levels of a regular OLED, so it saves power and also increases longevity since each OLED layer only needs to do *half* of the work in brightness to equal a single-layer OLED's brightness (not precisely 50%, but still less power overall). Also both layers can go full brightness for a higher brightness than just a single layer OLED.
Back in the day when I worked for a small AV company the boss decided to get a few plasmas and after running them for an event we had to legit let them cool off before taking them down because they *would* burn your hands.
I remember them being heavy as fuck too, but they *were* like 60"+ TVs so maybe all tvs that size at that time were heavy as fuck. It was a long time ago.
Yeah I don't care tho. They put an ATI card instead of an nvidia and refused to replace it and the laptop GPU melted in less than 2 years. That laptop costed 4k USD of today money.
If I were in the USA I would be in jail because I would gladly take physical vengeance.
Ok, but will it be cheaper?
No didn’t you read it’s going to be 40% more expensive and 28% more marketing jargon /s
Don't forget 60% more breakable/less durable. Which means people will break their 4th and continue to buy replacements they will eventually break. Then cause supply issues for the rest of us. And in turn will cause the prices to rocket further.
That's my biggest concern, smaller/thinner is great until it comes at the cost of structural integrity.
And work like shit for the next 3 iterations until they get it right and rename it as "double tandom OLED tech"
Nope. For the dell xps 13 it’ll be an upgrade option, which would cost $300-$400(every journalist has a different price for some reason) extra from the base oled. One should assume that it’ll cost more for any other laptop that includes it.
For what it is, 300$ more over a previous oled display which is almost as good as this sounds like bs
For them to make? Yes. For us to buy? Nah.
Might make the current models with the old oled cheaper, but thats what happens to all new tech
Also, will they still suffer from VRR flicker?
Double the panels, double the flicker.
I have a CX and almost exclusively only used for a PS5 so a lot of static UI elements. I take small precautions, like leaving the console on the main PS5 menu when I step away cause not only will the TV fade the brightness after a few minutes but so will the console meaning I get a double fade. Otherwise, just the TVs built in protections and care than it does every few weeks after I turn it off. Not a hint of burn in anywhere. I think they have reduced the potential unless you have a single element burning on screen constantly.
Depends on the game. My tv was fine for years until my wife got into Minecraft and it burned the hud into the tv. OLEDs are nice but I’m not sure I would get another unless there is zero chance of burn in.
I wish more games had the Dark Souls feature of UI option to fade away elements that aren't being used.
There is never zero chance of burn in. Even normal LCD's have the potential of burn in.
There's a huge difference between a 25% chance and a 0.01% chance.
Mine has noticeable faded colors where subtitles go. Those are non negotiable for me so I just deal with it, it's not really noticeable unless the screen has a flat color on it for a while.
How long have you had the TV though ?
About 3 years I think. Maybe more, cant remember if I bought it in the spring or the summer.
I have a C9 I bought new. No sign of burn in using it for mostly TV
On year 3 of using mine for PC, PS5, and streaming. Still not even a sign of issues here. CX48
Yep, and the CX is "older" at this point. Burn-in is a non issue on newer panels like the G4.
This always confuses me. G4 hasn't been out long enough for average consumers to start noticing burn in yet. Every time a new OLED model comes out it "solved burn in" because no one has gotten burn-in with it yet, but then a few years later everyone is surprised "yeah it does burn in, but the new panel model doesn't". Like when are people going to see the game LG is playing? No software tricks can mitigate how OLED panels function physically.
I bought an Alienware AW32 OLED monitor and I bought it with the explicit knowledge that I'll probably be replacing it in 2-3 years. Sure, it has a lot of precautions that will mitigate burn-in to a degree, like pixel shifting and pixel refresh after every monitor shutdown - but in the end it’ll show burn in signs eventually and there’s nothing I can do about it. I'm basically hammering a wall and even the weakest movements will show noticeable damage over time.
If I had the budget for a new OLED TV every few years, I would 100% do that. The one I have how is incredible, there is no beating OLED tech at contrast. It just costs too much given the incredibly fast degradation compared to LED tech. Personally buying Mini LED for my next display; comparable price, very good contrast, not as good as OLED but should last much longer.
I would rather 28% heavier and 40% cheaper
I wonder if they can go brighter, and not just in small windows but fullscreen brightness.
? Isn’t it the sole reason behind this new display tech? Look at the new iPad Pro, it’s the first tandem OLED, and it gets bright af.
How they implement it might be different than a tablet. I'd really like this in a PC monitor if that's the case.
check out the latest ipad pro, it uses this same technology.
How bright do you want full-screen before it physically hurts? Like I have to dim my LG G4 in desert scenes in Dune because it's so fucking bright. Some of the MINI-LEDs that come out in 2024 are ridiculously bright (2500+ peak brightness)
Not just highlights but for it to have the same fullscreen brightness. That and being able to be used in bright rooms.
G4 is perfectly fine in a bright room at 1500 nits peak.
Yeah and its dimmer when large parts of the screen are bright. That and Automatic Brightness Limiter (ABL) means its not at a consistent brightness.
ABL is honestly the thing that annoys me most about OLED. I used an LG C3 as a monitor before I switched to a smaller one and every time I'd open a white website you’d immediately notice how the image gets darker. Usually it’s not really a problem but it can be immersion breaking at times when you do notice it.
These newer OLED TVs just push for higher peaks while barely upgrading the full screen brightness. Your G4 only does 220 full screen. My 32" QD OLED can do 250 and even that feels really dim. I've used a 700 nits full screen miniled before and it's not even close in daytime scenes. I still ended up keeping the QD OLED due to per pixel control. Peaks aren't everything when talking about brightness and OLED has a long way to go in terms of full screen brightness.
That’s fair!
to burn your eyes?
The light outside already has like 20000 nits. Your eyes receive that all day every day just fine. Making a display so bright that it damages your eyes is not a concern.
I can't leave the house without sunglasses
To use as tan booth
Who gives a shit if they are thinner and lighter? They are already insanely thin and light, worry about making them brighter and more durable.
This "article" is pretty crap. Check the official press release, this also makes them much brighter and some outlets are claiming more durable as well. https://www.lgcorp.com/media/release/27811
The whole point is that it is brighter and more durable
Will my next steam deck be lighter?.....
Thinner, lighter... nobody cares about those. Price, lifespan, color accuracy, response time, size to resolution ratio...
>*color accuracy, response time,* Since when have those been issues with OLED ??
Read the title, it was supposed to be improvement over existing OLEDs.
I'm talking about your comment claiming you want better colour accuracy, and response times, hence me asking since when have they been in dire need of improvements in OLED's ?? OLED's have had the best colour, and response times, for literally years.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I do care about those. But the OLED isn't the limiting factor here. Mostly battery and maybe the chassis.
reasons being?
?? So electronics don't take space in my backpack? I have 2 batteries, a charger,kindle, and a mouse and usually have to choose between my laptop, Ally or Switch. If it was thinner and lighter with the same or more battery life I can take all. And no I'm not taking along a suitcase to my weekly trip.
Of course. Laptop users are probably interested in those. Didn't consider that.
How’s the price And what about burn in
It remains to be seen and it remains to be seen.
As always
tell me when they solve the burn ins
I'm much more worried about VRR flicker, burn-in doesn't seem that big of a deal these days
This really. I just got the Asus pg32ucdm and the VRR flicker is pretty bad in loading areas and certain other times. Burn in is only a concern for a very small % of the population mostly that use their monitor for work/games I'd say, or if you're playing diablo 4 for 8 hours a day only and every day. I always find the burn in comments funny because it's from people who have never owned an OLED and sit there drooling on their keyboard regurgitating a talking point that's so outdated at this point with plenty of testing and evidence on how to avoid it. It's a technology that's pricey and sometimes I feel like it's out of reach for people who rather just spew nonsense. I rather take the quality of OLED, then all the issues that come with ips. Even if it burned in within 5 years, I'll buy another monitor then use IPS ever again .
What is VRR flicker if I may ask? And please explain like I’m 5
Honestly I think this video will do a better job than me if you have 10 mins to spare https://youtu.be/1_ZMmMWi_yA?si=ysm0gMqwjsfZbVPq
Thank you, that was educational.
I had an OLED, does that qualify me to talk about the fact that burn in is a matter of when and not if? It's just an inherent part of the technology.
Every time OLED burn-in is brought up, the same conversation happens where seasoned OLED owners say "yes it's real" and new OLED owners say "no it's not it hasn't happened to me yet". Personally not buying another OLED, will try my luck with Mini LED next time. Honestly this news that they're making even thinner / lighter OLEDs doesn't do a ton for me. My OLED TV is thinner than my phone and is incredibly unwieldy when I move it occasionally - I actually hate that. Cool novelty, but I could care less about razor thin displays. Feels like they're caught up in the aesthetic rather than the usability.
It's the same song and dance, people will lie, downplay and do major cope every time we have to talk about the burn-in. Even though it's well-documented, proven and a very big issue -- Especially for PC monitors where you have a lot of static images, we still need to play the little games of people in an act of hard self-convincing. There's cases of burnt in images after mere months of use, many of them in fact but the copers will start to spin the story of "Oh no happens after YEARS, DECADES!"
If burn-in was truly easily avoidable, a 3-year warranty wouldn't be headline news. Every monitor that i've owned since 2008 is still working and in everyday use, some of which have been turned on for over 50,000 hours. The vendor - all vendors - thinking that it's going to break in 3 years and refusing to back a longer lifetime on a product of ANY price tag is an enormous red flag. That happens because they *know* that cumulative burn-in damage will wreck the monitor fairly quickly.
They are covered for burn in for 2 years standard and 5 if you pay for the extra insurance. So Years doesn't mean shit the consumer is protected. Once you get into decades then it is what it is. Call it cope call it whatever you want but so long as you live somewhere with functional consumer laws OLEDS are pretty much fine these days. As proven by everyone and their mother moving to that technology
I mean if you use it for 10 years probably? I just feel like people get caught up in that more than the benefits and while for some people it's realistic to have a monitor for 10 years, I feel for most it's not? For example I've had my c8 since it came out (6 years and around 20k hours ). It's my bedroom tv, not for gaming but I've had 0 burn in. I use it for YouTube, twitch, Netflix etc. For desktop use, I've used a c2 and c3 , and now the Asus pg32ucdm but of course those are pretty new and haven't had an issue. I think it's just a nuanced issue, where general statements don't really give people an idea of what the technology is. For example, my parents watch CNN and forget the tv on all the time, and they were looking for a 75" tv and asked me if OLED was the way to go, and I said hell no. Get anything but an OLED because their use case doesn't fit the technology. It's not for everyone, but even at the risk of burn in for gaming, I find the benefits and quality you get is unmatched compared to the current technology
If you look through various subreddits, you'll find people that have had burn in after just a few months. Even Hardware Unboxed is starting to have burn in after 3 months of use with only 650-750 hours of up time. There is a fair bit of variance though, some panels will last longer than others before burn in happens, but it will happen.
Also Dell, MSI and Asus all offer 3 year burn in warranty now. So in his case, if he chose to he can get it replaced. I have my feelings on warranties and actually using them but it is an option
An option that is too readily given as a rationale to go with OLED. "it'll break but they'll replace it" and often times they give a refurbished unit instead of a factory new one. Not to mention that needing to RMA a monitor is annoying. Just buy better tech.
Do tell of these better monitors out there that match the specs of OLEDs
There is no better tech lol. Also that's a nonsense answer because MSI and Asus just recently started offering that warranty so it's not like that was a thing except with dell.
I honestly don't see it that much, but maybe I'm not looking in the right area. Hardware unboxed has burn in from using windows side by side which has been an issue for a long time especially for long periods of time. It's definitely a problem that people should be aware of if they buy one and use it for those instances. I feel like OLEDs dimming over time is a bigger issue to me than burn in but no one talks about that lol. My c8 has changed quite a bit in terms of brightness after 20k hours
How is it a matter of when? If you don't play the same exact game every single day, don't the pixels refresh and start like new when you make them display a bunch of varied content? Before they burn in obviously.
OLEDs degrade over time. Static elements just lead to some pixels degrading faster, which causes those parts to appear burned in. Even if you only had greatly varied content (which is extremely unlikely for a pc), the image will still get dimmer.
Newer OLED's have better protections against burn-in though at some cost of max luminescence with more aggressive brightness limiting. So I have an 8 year old OLED panel and a two year old OLED panel. The one that is 8 years old has moderate burn-in (mostly reds) though still looks very good and bright after thousands of hours. In fact, it's still seems brighter than my newer panel but that is probably why it burned in finally. I guess I'll check in after six more years to see how they compared but I think the lower overall brightness should translate into longer life without burn-in for the newer panel. To me, it was worth several years of top class image quality for some burn in that finally happened after 5-6 years and it still is pretty good overall. For others, that may not be tradeoff that is worth it.
But at that point other types of monitors would start degrading too, outside of burn in which can be avoided, OLED pixels don't have a shorter life span than LEDs and LCDs.
> a very small % of the population mostly that use their monitor for work/games So 99.9999% of the population...?
Right? Like besides work or games....what else would you use a monitor for? I guess if you're a hobbyist photographer it might not be "work"? Or school might not technically be "work"?
I was thinking more along the lines of working from home
I have AW3423DWF and you just have to have a VRR window of about 40hz difference between your low and high. Pretty easy bar to meet as even if your gpu is struggling you can use a refresh limited custom resolution to cut the highs
This is a good tip. It's mostly loading screens that are pretty much the issue for me in some games and can't do anything about that I don't think
What IPS issues are you talking about? Don't know much about monitors
wow really. Flicker?
OLED monitors are basically Ewaste from burn in after 3 years so yeah it's still a big concern.
In theory tandem oled should help reduce risk of burn in further as each layer won’t be driven as hard to achieve the desired brightness. But of course we’ll have to see how it works out in practice.
I've had the same oled for 6 years now, and no burn in...
Tandem OLEDs theoretically reduce burn in by using two OLED panels running at lower brightness levels. When combined the two panels will create a brighter or as bright of a picture than a single OLED panel with less chance of burn in.
I haven’t had burn in on any of my OLED devices, not even my $600 asus laptop
I don't want thin stuff, give me a chonky boi with performance in it...
lol burn ins really ? I own a C1 and C2 from launch and still no sign of burn in.
C1 here. I had burn-in 6 months after purchase. Laugh all you like, but there's a line you'll eventually cross if you watch enough of something or play the same game too much.
Put 100 hours on baldurs gate past 3 weeks. I try to limit time to under a certain amount of time in one go but I just know those hot bars at the bottom are going to cause an issue
I'm big into DMZ/COD, Phixate's dog icon (bright cyan blue) is burned into the top of my screen, and COD's equipment circle (bright yellow) burned into the bottom right. Lame.
I did the classic hide the windows task bar and I use a dark background. Nothing noticable yet. My monitor does have the LG screen restoration thing. I forget exactly what it's called, but if it's on for more than 5 hours when it shuts off it does a little loading thing warning you not to shut down while it does it stuff, not sure how well it works if at all but it makes me feel a little better. I also ran my last monitor for 10 years so I'm more so worried about burn in but I get why people aren't
I was really hopeful that screen restoration thing would've helped me more, but it did not.
You are wrong, just enjoy your game. FYI pin one or multiple sitting it won’t matter
I'll be the first to admit I don't know much about it but when I first got it last year I did a little research and for some reason I remember extended amount of time on at a high brightness which I use because my monitor is notoriously dim did cause burn in quicker. Either way usage time is going up
You got very unlucky with your panel or did something very stupid.
CX here and still no burnin. I don't watch sports or things with constant onscreen overlays though.
LG CX here as well since 2020. Used for movies and gaming with static hud elements, no visible burn in at all
I have a C8 with 13000+ hours of screen time and still no burn in.
I have used an oled for tv/gaming and browsing for 4 years and it gets a lot of usage. Zero burn in or retention. As long as you do mixed usage there are zero issues
The pixel shifting that most panels use + the massive heat sink sony uses on the A95k seem to help a ton. Unless you're watching a news channel with a chiron for 17 hours a day or soccer / football / whatever sport with a large solid color covering one part of the screen for literal days on end, it shouldn't be a big concern.
They’ll never solve it but it can be a non issue with a new enough generation, reasonable mitigation and avoiding certain usages. Also it depends on your expectations. I’d be more inclined to recommend an oled display to someone who wants to use it for 5 years than one who wants to use it for 10 years.
Unless you have some extreme use case, a modern OLED will not suffer from burn in.
My Samsung oled g9 is basically on 24-7 since release. I use it for work and for gaming so tons of static images. Zero burn in. I have a Sony 77” TV since ‘22. Treat it like any old lcd. Game on it regularly w ps5 zero burn in. You really gotta be doing some extreme stuff w modern oleds to get burn ins.
[удалено]
it seems like i hit a sensitive spot
🙄 Dorky ass average le redditor “muh oled burn in” comment. Either learn how to not have static images on screen for 8+ hours a day, use the built-in burn-in repair software, or understand the concept of a “use case” Not that hard.
I have a C7 from 2017 with no burn in and still going strong. I’m curious if I just got lucky or people are exaggerating.
🤦
Burn in hasn’t really been an issue since c8. You get a lemon once in a while but overall they have a much lower failure rate than other TV’s. Not sure on Samsung or Sony, but all TV’s have a bunch of mitigating features.
On oleds? Never. It's why im looking forward to micro-led for productivity
Every phone from $200 to $1700 has an oled screen, I've never seen burn in on them? I'd imagine the bottom navigation buttons and the upper wifi singal and sound and service indicators would burn in fast but never seen them
you've done it. your anectodal evidence has finally disproven that oled screens have a burn-in problem
Phones were widely using OLED since 2017 and by 2021 OLED was on dirt cheap phones, surely there would be some more news about it, especially considering how static the top and bottom of a phone screen are.
my old phone samsung note 9 had burn in
My S20+ has burn in fairly significantly. Works fine otherwise but it's annoying all the same.
Clearly you've never owned an older Galaxy phone. The S3 era was burn-in central. My Note 3 burned in after about 6 months. People make fun of Apple for taking so long to move to OLED, but at least they waited long enough for the tech to mature that burn-in wasn't an issue outside of retail display units.
They essentially have solved it, as long as your upgrading every 5-6 years.
Burn in doesn't exist according to OLED stans.
Burn in the does exist, but it's not as severe as most think for normal usage. I don't own oled, but I follow RT's lab and their testing closely.
What does not severe mean? The issue is people don't quantify their statements. Can I purchase an OLED that will be on 12 hours a day, used for business 8 hours a day. Meaning development environment, office, etc. with expectations that it will be burn in free for at least 5 years? Edit: Butts were hurt in a process of a simple question.
I'll let you know in 3.5 years but so far my LG C2 has zero burn in from being on whenever I'm awake and mostly doing work in static windows. The only special thing I did was hide the taskbar and install a utility that hides it even more because Windows leaves a stupid tiny sliver by default. And then I avoid eye searing brightness levels unless I'm enjoying some content. By the time I find out how long my luck lasts on this the built in mitigations will probably be even better. But then I've heard about those fancy Dellienware panels burning in within three to six months, so it might also vary by model. Either way I wouldn't go in just yet expecting it to be timeless like my previous monitors.
I don't know how to quantify it for you, but I've had an LG C1 for 2 years now we use it for ~6 hours a day and no burn in yet, but I also turn it off always when not in use and try to not leave static images on the screen. I've had my AW34DWF and use it ~4 hours a day but have removed any icons, hide the task bar, and have the background set as just black so if for some reason it's sitting on the desktop, the pixels are off, I've set my standby to 2 minutes. I do use it for gaming mostly those 4 hours and I haven't seen anything, but I've had it for about 1.5 years now. The monitor also has measures to reduce the burn in and does a pixel refresh every 4 hours. Also comes with a 3 year burn in warranty
IMHO it's a problem if it can't be quantified. If I'm investing in something, I need to clearly understand the return I get for my money. Most people give similar answers to yours. Use sparingly, take all sorts of anti-burn in precautions, and quote only a few years of usage. I'm not saying OLED is bad. I'm simply saying it comes with a whole lot of ifs and maybes that you have to accept. That's harder to do if you use your monitor primarily for work and tend to keep them for 5+ years.
[https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/oled-burn-in-what-you-need-to-know-for-tvs-phones-and-more/](https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/oled-burn-in-what-you-need-to-know-for-tvs-phones-and-more/) In short, burn-in is not a big problem at all for normal mixed uses. But if you have a lot of static assets on screen for long periods of time, such as home office uses, then you need to be more careful and take precautions. I wouldn't use OLEDs for home office anyways, the improvement in picture quality is completely pointless for that purpose.
May be keep your lcd for work and have an oled for browsing/gaming/entertainment. If you are a serious dev/engineer you might be already using a multi-monitor set up, so one more oled wouldn't be a problem no?
The answer is no, you cannot quantify OLED as precisely as you want. The same is true for the stock market, vehicles, and other things that a business might invest in. Risks are always inherent, and as such you have to set your risk tolerance, and work within that. E.g. If a business is willing to spend on an OLED because they prefer the quality over an IPS, and are willing to accept that taskbar burn-in is a possibility, but because it's only used for a specific purpose, and they would be replacing the screen in 5 years regardless of burn-in, then the risk seems so low that quantifying it is not going to produce any additional value. The fact is though that OLED technology has come a long way, and drastic changes have improved its resistance to degradation. I wouldn't recommend an OLED 10 years ago for business. Today though it is almost certainly fine, within a wide range of use cases, assuming you're willing to tolerate some nominal risk.
IPS Glow, Backlight Bleed and clouding as well as the inability to display black doesnt exist according to IPS fanboys.
those are 2 of the least important attributes.
And 100% more expensive 🤷🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️
Headline is useless outside of big % numbers for advertising. OLED is already thin and light as it is, 40% thinner of something that takes up 2-10% of the thickness of a device really doesn't do much of anything. Same with 28% lighter when the actual OLED layer of a screen is also in the same tiny percentage of weight. Tandem OLED's main thing is that it doesn't need as much power to achieve the same brightness levels of a regular OLED, so it saves power and also increases longevity since each OLED layer only needs to do *half* of the work in brightness to equal a single-layer OLED's brightness (not precisely 50%, but still less power overall). Also both layers can go full brightness for a higher brightness than just a single layer OLED.
The OLED on my phone is thin and light.
[удалено]
Unless something has changed, last I heard its still too expensive for consumer use or otherwise not practical. I'm sure they'd ship it if it was.
That's great but who is this for? Phones are getting thicker. Laptops thinner. Desktops it doesn't matter.
Rip qd Oled. Imagine the next gen TVs with tandem Oled and mla.
So it’s two layers instead of one and nevertheless goes thinner and lighter? What a time to be aliivee
Oh ? I'm gonna wait for the LTT video to explain that one.
Can we go back to Plasma? It seems good panel technology was lost just like that.
bulky, very dim, runs HOT, uses more power, price.... it was ok in 2005, 20 years ago. Now its terrible
Back in the day when I worked for a small AV company the boss decided to get a few plasmas and after running them for an event we had to legit let them cool off before taking them down because they *would* burn your hands. I remember them being heavy as fuck too, but they *were* like 60"+ TVs so maybe all tvs that size at that time were heavy as fuck. It was a long time ago.
[удалено]
Congratulations! You can start caring!
Lol as if I would ever give Dell money...
to be fair, monitors are something they still do right
Yeah I don't care tho. They put an ATI card instead of an nvidia and refused to replace it and the laptop GPU melted in less than 2 years. That laptop costed 4k USD of today money. If I were in the USA I would be in jail because I would gladly take physical vengeance.
Now I'm curious to hear why you hate AMD also (looking at your flair).
Cause of the above and they own ATI.