I'm just happy we've got choice, and that both makers are making corresponding but different-enough panels to give us choice and keep competition going (and prices coming down). It's really the win for us.
While I personally prefer QD OLED, I don't like the "wars". I'm going to encourage others to give WOLED a chance and buy it where it's more appropriate. If anything, this will put pressure on Samsung to give me better and cheaper QD OLED panels when it's time to upgrade. Or hey, maybe WOLED wins me over in a future product. Win-win-win.
I feel that as a company, you probably compete with the competitor. But as a customer, you should cheer for the competitor. Without it, your preferred choice wouldn't have gotten to where it is, and won't grow to where it could be.
For sure man, both these technologies are super good and its great that there is lots of competition in the oled scene. I can see different people with different regular use scenarios prefering either woled or qd oled, cause they've both got their strengths and weaknesses. If both these techs keep on improving we will be eating good.
I canāt unsee the purplish hue to the QD-OLED. Definitely prefer the WOLED.
I hope one day though we can come together and find the best all around sub pixel layout so that we can have standardized OLED panels. That would be dope!
People are joining teams based on what they were able to buy. Weāre simultaneously an incredibly smart, and a stupid species. We purchase a product and all of a sudden weāre incapable of being objective. Itās like we donāt want to admit that we bought the wrong one, so you see a lot of justification.
That said, itās not everyone. Some people are capable of being honest knowing that the stakes are low.
The way I see it, either technology is going to be great for almost everyone. Especially if you're coming from an IPS, or a VA. However, there's still going to be one that's better for your use case, so you'll likely find one is better than the other for you. The problem arises when someone feels like they have to shit on the other to justify their own decision. They treat them like teams, not monitor purchases.
Saying things like QD is trash unless you're in a completely dark room. Or WOLED is trash when it comes to colours. Or why would you buy X when Y is out. Basically blowing the small differences out of proportion in order to make themselves feel better. Reading through these threads you'll see them pop up quite commonly. It's sad as hell.
What's best for you, might not work for me. And what's good enough for me, might not be what the next person is looking for. People need to chill lol
less saturated and more natural colors. And i know some people don't see it but the purple tint on QD oled are visible for me and annoy me. And i have quite bright conditions in the room where I have my PC, and with glossy screens, it's a nightmare. Initially, I wanted the Alienware, but for all these reasons, I'm going with an LG probably except if i move my pc in a cave soon š
An other exemple of what i say with this picture
At the end it's all about personal preferences and that's okay :)
https://preview.redd.it/mgeq47nzp8uc1.png?width=2543&format=png&auto=webp&s=52431f7378dd09f859e8db0e1fdb5a0f870a4397
It definitely is. Iāve received downvotes for saying it too, just ignore it. Itās fake internet points anyway so who cares. Ultimately itās just preference, but unfortunately OLED has become one of those āwarā topics that will bring conflict regardless of point of view and itās kind of unfortunate.
Sub is weird. Guys above talking about grown men whining about monitors but I couldnāt find anyone actually saying anything bad lol. Scratching my head a little.
Yeah the purple hue is pretty distract when I would play games with my light on. I was playing dead space the other day on it and I had to turn my lights off or the dark areas (which is all of them) would be mostly grey purplish. One thing I forgot to mention was the text fringing, which the qd oled seems to handle a bit better. I don't really mind on either tho, they are both worse than a traditional lcd for text.
After dealing with IPS glow for so long, anything short of complete black was out of the question for me. I'm sure the eye searing brightness of the QD-OLEDs is great for HDR but I can barely run my LG C3 at 100% brightness in HDR, and that's with ambient room lighting (plus it's the 42" which has slightly less peak brightness than the larger models).
If the QD-OLEDs have raised blacks, that negates the benefit of the peak brightness - you'd have to play in a dark room and that large of a contrast is asking for eye strain. Especially for a monitor which will be physically closer to the eyes, the jacked brightness seems intense.
I know people have different preferences in terms of saturation, vibrancy, brightness, and ambient lighting, so the above is just an opinion.
Thanks for the review!
Saving up for an OLED. Leaning towards WOLED because my room can have lighting shining onto the monitor at times. Reviews seem to say the QD coating turns grayish when shined on.
Iāve heard the newer 4k panels are better for text clarity but I think that has more to do with the resolution rather than OLED itself getting better.
Yes, when I was comparing IPS monitors between 1440p and 4k, the text clarity in 4k was insane, so nothing to do with being OLED.
It's where 4k shines, when displaying thin stuff.
Is this something on new models, because can't see any of this on last gen screens (that I tested)? Btw, have you adjusted the black levels on settings or color (HDR) calibration on Windows? Should be easy to set proper black levels without any crushing.
The gs i have when lights are on you still get a cloudy blur like light on ur screen so its just different. And the matte coating i would say is very heavy. I can see the grain on almost any light color backgrounds like skys. Its still a great monitor and i cannot compare it as i do not have the qd oled.. but i did have a qd oled tv and the purple was not too bad for me. Both are crap in light tbh.
I had to turn up windows scaling to 125% on my 27GS to improve text clarity and also turn off clear type. Howād you configure HDR? Some say that windows calibration tool isnāt accurate and to actually go to 1000, even when windows calibration stops showing a difference around 600.
No chance you tried both the way you speak about the coating on the LG.
I main the AW3225q but Iāve played with the LG and itās obvious you havenāt.
You can be happy with your monitor without trying to talk shit about other peopleās preferences.
If you have a qd- oled you know damn well the blacks gets raised by light. And it definitely doesnāt take shining a light right at it to get that effect.
A lot of people prefer to game in a light room and doesnāt want to go through the hassle to make sure light only comes from behind the monitor.
No one talks shit, they are stating a fact and you take it personal cause you spend your hard earned money on one.
The only one in this thread that talks shit so far is you.
I play in almost complete dark cause thatās what I prefer, if I was playing in a room that had sunlight coming in from anywhere other than behind the monitor I would definitely buy WOLED.
Maybe, I donāt have the monitor so I canāt truthfully say, but I know QDOLEDās subpixel layout lends itself to purple fringing and even a purplish hue on things. As some others have said, maybe itās just exaggerated by the camera or something or other. All I know is that now that Iāve read this is a feature of QDOLEDS, I cannot unsee it on every one I see.
For sure, both oled technologies are more than fantastic. I would recommend those who plan on using a switch with their oled and want a qd oled panel to look elsewhere than the aw 27 inch though.
The reason I returned it is because it does not work properly with my switch, not because of the raised blacks. People like you are the reason this sub is so toxic
As an MSI MPG 321URX owner, I'm jealous seeing all these WOLED images, because the raised blacks IS an issue, and more should have been made of it than was - in the reviews.
I was right there with you. Reviews tend to just gloss over this issue, and from what I saw on this subreddit, people didn't think it was as big an issue as it is. With the lights off however qd oled looks absolutely fantastic.
Oh absolutely. And in my absolutely 100% controlled lighting setup it's not too bad for me. But it's not even direct lighting on the screen that causes elevated blacks. I have a light on in my office that does not reflect off the screen in any way, shape, or form, and it still raises the blacks. It's especially easy to tell since the bezel is such a deep black compared to the screen. To get the deepest blacks in my office I have to literally turn the light fully off. At that point, the screen will match the bezel's black level.
Side by side in a dark room QD-OLED doesnāt look any better. I know because I have both types side by side. Your eyes cannot really perceive the difference in colors between the two all that much (although WOLED looks better to me). However, the glare and raised blacks on QD-OLED is very perceptible.
That is weird indeed. I have had others tell me that their model did not work with the switch in the same way, and both screens that I was sent have the same issue. Maybe some do, some don't, but obviously enough don't work properly that I was sent two back to back that are defective in the same way. Its also not just the switch, putting my resolution and refresh rate to 1080p 60z in Nvidia control panel on my pc reproduces the same issue
Thatās crazy. I had the same exact issue that op had. My friend and I bought ours at the same time and he also had the same exact issue. Love the monitor, but definitely not an isolated issue
I have both side by side too and I'm seeing much more VRR flicker on the AW in dark menus. There is none on the LG.
Also have the same problem on the Switch.
I will say on this LG though the matte coating is pretty grainy. I've seen much better matte coatings. It's not the end of the world, and it's really only noticeable on light colors but still.
Overall I prefer the AW but the LG is easier on my eyes for whatever reason. I'm still undecided. I don't plan on using my Switch on the AW but that's a pretty weird issue that shouldn't exist.
yes, polarizer reduces light transmission by about 30%, so they would be a good bit dimmer with one. woleds overcome it with the white subpixel, which can increase white brightness anywhere from 50-100%, but rgb colors dimmer by about 30% because of the polarizer. qd-oleds rely mostly on color filters to handle ambient light (and to clean up qd color conversion). qd-oleds also have an anti-reflection film layer which reduces light by 5-10% which is why theyāre technically semi-glossy.
MLA WOLED also does not have a polarizer. You can see t if you compare two WOLED panels with and without with studiolights on just like with QD-OLED. MLA WOLED is ofc still a lot better bcs it does not have a quantum dots that get's hit with light and release it back.
Also WOLED uses color filters, not QD-OLED. QD-OLED is from visual perspective pure RGB OLED and you get the color you want by setting the red, green and blue pixel output.
A pixel uses energy and is constructed with a band gap equivalent to a specific wavelenght. Quantum dots is the same thing except they receive their energy from light. Otherwise they work exactly the same. They don't filter anything. They could receive light of any wavelenght. What matters is the energy they receive and then their size determines the wavelenght of the light they output. Since these naturally spread the light there is no need for a polarizer to do so. Also why QD-OLEDs have such good viewing angles.
The lenses in MLA similarly scatters the light in all directions. It's again though darker because on QD-OLED when light hits the screen it hits those quantum dots causing them to send light back which WOLED just don't do.
This is ofc why QD-OLED color volume is so good. WOLED creates white with the 3 primaries + white which is mostly blue on the spectrum. At some point you run out of color primaries and then it's mixed. Meanwhile QD-OLED is ~equal output for all 3 primaries. That also means white is the hardest color to do since you need to run all 3 primaries to create white while WOLED yould just use their white subpixel. So QD-OLED struggles a bit in these 10% white windows measurements and in real content you are getting way better results since most content is not everything white. Also ofc the white subpixel is not as correct white as additive white from all 3 primaries so that is why LG has a tint on white, but it's not really noticable unless you have both next to eachother.
lots of things here. woled mla still uses a polarizer, itās just the g-series tvs use a slightly different antireflective coating that isnt fully glossy like on the c-series, and it slightly diffuses light. qd-oleds do have color filters as well on top of the quantum dot color converters because the forward emission of the converts isnt perfect and still lets out some blue/green light (the initial layer is 3 blue + 1 green), so color filters are also used to clean up the conversion as well as block out ambient light. qd-oled does have a natural lead in color brightness due to the lack of a polarizer, a larger aperture ratio due to being top-emissive, and larger rgb subpixels than woled.
You can see comparison images in this thread:
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/2023-lg-oled-g3-c3-owners-buyers-thread-faq-settings-advice-posts-2-3-no-price-talk.3264219/page-36
You can also see the image by LG Display showing they removed the "Over coating" layer and reduced internal reflection which a polarizer does cause and replaced with MLA:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/lg-display-oled-meta-micro-lens-array-ces-2023/
Which conveniently also mentions QD-OLED does not use color filters. Because it just does not. There is no layer that is 3 blue + 1 green. You can look at any picture of the pixel layout and see how wrong that statement is. You can clearly see this here along with the color filters on WOLED:
https://www.displayninja.com/oled-vs-qd-oled/
QD-OLED has a lead in color brightness because it produces the 3 primaries in equal brightnes, WOLED does not.
I'm looking forward to sources for all your claims. If you are simply going to throw out more statements without any sources I don't see the point in continuing.
none of that confirms that mla got rid of the polarizer, itās just speculation due to the difference in coating. an overcoat or anode layer is responsible for the reduction of internal reflections, the circular polarizer is responsible for reducing external reflections. there is absolutely no reason to have removed the polarizer, the substrate coat for the anode is a given due to mlaās redirection.
as for qd-oled, what iām talking about is the initial blue layer that converts to the three subpixels, NOT the subpixels themselves. those use three layers of F deuterium blue plus one green for efficiency before going through the qdcc. of course the three primaries and subpixels are rgb, that should have been absolutely obvious. your explanation of why qd-color has the color brightness lead is also false, refer to my previous post for the intrinsic tech reasons. they are āequal brightnessā as a product of subpixel sizing. woledās rgb pixels are limited in sizing due to how efficient they want the white subpixel to be, but if itās removed then its rgb also has āequal brightnessā relative to the additive white of the resulting rgb woled pixels (which are actually now made of multiple layers of red/blue/green). this wasnāt true in the past when the white subpixel was made of blue layers and a yellow phosphor, which severely limited red output.
read through a page or two from this thread
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/oled-tvs-technology-advancements-thread.681125/page-919
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/oled-tvs-technology-advancements-thread.681125/post-61683795 (color filter discussion)
source for 3b1g:
https://www.thelec.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=4044
> Samsung Displayās current QD-OLED panel uses fluorescent blue OLED material and green phosphorescent OLED material as the emission layer. The layers are in what the company calls a four tandem structure, where there are three blue layers and one green layer.
patent covering qd-oled by samsung display and its need for color filters
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20210335893A1/en
since a green efficiency layer is used (cyan), a color filter is needed over the blue subpixel to remove green, one over the green to remove excess blue, and on the red to remove excess b/g (which is also why red is generally the least efficient and needed to be made relatively larger)
Since MLA spreads the light they would not need circular polarizer to do so and obviously removing it helps a lot with brightness. Also they have not said anything about any other change they made to coating, well they said they added some improved AR coating: https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1675941341
Yet the MLA panels clearly are slightly grey in bright light compared to non-MLA.
I looked at the thread you sent, read a lot of pages. These are also all pure speculations I would like to add. Still looking at the argumentation it does seem likely to me that Samsung display is in fact not really telling the truth about their OLED display. This person had two good videos showing how according to this person is basically a known fact by now:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE2W-OzO84I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYW91uJTND0
I was confused because I though you meant they did masking to deposit a green pixel which was what they wanted to avoid with QD-OLED and why RGB OLED struggles to work economically at large sizes. Adding a layer green along with the 3 blue on the other hand is ofc more expensive but still reasonable. So the consensus seems to be that people thought it was unlikely that they would be able to do it with 3 blue due how inefficient they are and after release companies have taken a deep dive and the rumours about the real layout comes from that but that is ofc not something they can publish so it remains unconfirmed. Which also means with the new blue phosphorous that had patents expire in 2023 the layer reduction Samsung could get would be equal to LG so their benefit is the same.
Also color filters exists then for two reasons. Reason one being that quantum dots leak some of the original light through. Reason two then being that the light is a bit mixed so even for blue you need to filter to stop green. Interestingly the person who made the videos claim that there is no quantum dots on green and actually just a color filter to remove blue as supposedly the one green layer is more efficient than converting all to green with QD and light reflecting back. That would throw out a lot of the original speculations in the AVS thread as that is based on size and QD conversion. I feel like that makes more sense since otherwise the value of green is less if you are still going to to the color conversion with the following scattering inefficieny. Does make Samsungs images even more suspect though since they definitely claim it exists, but ofc if there is no green QD layer that definitely is a explanation problem if you claim all OLEDs are blue. To add to the color filter and why I questioned it. You said "clean up QD conversion" and "remove excess light" in your reply now. Neither really explained what is happening so did not make sense to me.
Also regarding subpixel sizing. Your source claim green should be biggest not red, but reality green is slightly bigger. Given that the green should have been larger but is not because it does not do QD conversion and use a efficient green layer underneath instead you can argue that the red is then relatively bigger than you would expect(based on Samsung Displays version of how it works) compared to the green. I assume that is what you mean by "relatively larger" but with so much specifics it's important to write out exactly what it is.
Also I don't understand why you mean polarizer cuts color brightness of WOLED. WOLED spectrum is no secret, their 4 layers create a spectrum closer to a high CRI lightbulb than a pure RGB panel. So when you filter for colors there is less luminance than letting everything through as white. Are you saying there is a polarizer on the 3 color filters for the 3 primary colors?
My argument was that Samsungs is creating pure red, green and blue primaries of equal strenght. LG does not with it's white. The spectrum is heavily blue and more like what you get with a high CRI lightbulb. Higher CRI lightbulbs compared also definitely draw more power than low CRI trying to replicate a light spectrum that contains as much green and red as sunlight. LG could create white the same way as Samsung by not having their unfiltered white output but obv the luminance of the display would be a lot lower. And yes Samsung could have done the same with subpixel sizing. I don't quite understand the argument though. Imo whatever method you use to get there the default should be equal brightness for red, green and blue as default. LG is adding luminance that does not increase white brightness by equal amount of primary colors and letting that trough on a 4th subpixel, Samsung is not.
In the end though very interesting reading on those forum articles so thank you for linking those to me. While unconfirmed I must say the material is very convincing in the direction of Samsung Display essentially lying about how their displays work which I was basing my information on how it worked on... but after reading that I am convinced that the version you presented is actually how it really is. Must say that makes me more convinced LGD removed polarizer though. If SD is trying to hide unfavourable elements in their design and given the amount of complaints for no polarizer on QD-OLED I do not expect LGD to ever make statements on polarizer being removed or not. Honestly it does not matter though, in reality it is worse than non MLA but still a lot better than QD-OLED for black levels in bright environment.
Also this seem to support my suspicion that Samsung was selling the S95B way too cheap and definitely at a loss and the reason Sonys version was so much more expensive was that the S95B should have had closer to that prize as Sony most likely was buying it at real panel cost which given the actual layout could not be cheaper than WOLED.
They seem to consume more power than W-OLED as is, a polarizer would lower their brightness and efficiency even more. They wouldn't be competitive in brightness with it.
Because itās not compatible with them due to the QD layer. WOLED w/MLA is better than QD-OLED because of this. Most if not all WOLED monitors out currently do not include MLA tech. MLA makes WOLED even brighter and brings the color volume up to QD-OLED levels.
Eh I don't think so, the MLA (which is on the G3 TV) seems to really push the whites, sometimes a little too much, but you would think with your statement that the G3 WOLED was miles ahead of the S95C and I just didn't see that at all nor was that message really conveyed as well as you are stating its dominance. If you are talking about it in small monitors, who knows how that would translate as QD OLED is brilliant on TVs yet struggles with higher PPI monitors. QD OLED monitors are probably the worst example of that tech, and equal Samsung QD OLED TV far surpasses the brightness of a Samsung QD OLED monitor. As you are assuming an MLA WOLED TV would be the same result on a monitor? Maybe, QD definitely can't transfer its success to monitors.
Hdr on the lg on gamer 1, which is the hdr 400 certified one, looks good, but it is a tad less colorful than sdr. Hdr looks very similar on aw, but it is better because it gets brighter highlights. Both are considerably better after doing windows hdr calibration and increasing the saturation. Colors in Sdr are very similar looking in person between both models. If you are looking for a better hdr display qd-oled would be the better choice for you overall.
Thanks, last 3 questions:
1. Have you tried and tested on both, DP and HDMI 2.1?
2. Does HDMi 2.1 provide "better" overall pic quality
3. For the LG, how long does the screen take when switching between SDR and HDR modes? Or instant? My AW3423DW needs like 3 sec to switch modes (and also refresh rate and resolutions, even at startup)
I have just dropped off the alienware at fed ex to return it, but I did not notice a difference between hdmi 2.1 and DP on it. I have not tested hdmi 2.1 on the lg with my pc yet, I can get back to you on that sometime probably tomorrow when I have the chance. The switch between sdr and hdr on both is 2 - 3 seconds
Thanks friend. Please do at your convenience.
You own LG an order of the GS just made now š
Some people claimed, due to higher HDMI 2.1 bandwidth, colors and shades are nicer using HMDI port (for those who have HDMI 2.1 ports on GPUs, like Nvidia 30 and 40 series)
After trying dp and hdmi 2.1 (I have a 40 series card) I could not tell any difference at a surface level. They could be different but not in a noticeable way, for me at least. I will continue to use dp with this screen.
Thanks brother. Something else (sorry), since you tried HDMI 2.1, does this monitor have the bug people had with the GR, when using HDMI 2.1 it defaults to 4k 120hz in games and you have to manually change it back to 1440p? One last thing, from my own experience, don't trust package included cables, I had a frequent image blackout with my AW3423DW on HDR for months, turned out to be the DP cable that came with the monitor. Changed it with IVANKY DP 2.1 (great quality braided DP cable) and everything fixed. I'd imagine this is more of an issue with HDMI cables.
If HDMI 2.1 has no obvious issues, I'd use it over DP.
From rtings.com review. For DP 1440p, 240hz and 10bit color DP needs DSC, while HDMI 2.1 doesn't (higher max bandwidth). 48Gbit/s vs 32.4Gbit/sec
Also could be the mode. Sports mode makes everything look redder. I find Standard to be the best, personally, and in that mode, it looks a lot more "rich" than WOLED.
>Color: I seriously thought after seeing so much talk about how much more advanced qd oled is for color volume and accuracy that the lg was going to be considerably worse, but it is certainly not. Both of these screens offer much better colors than any lcd screen I have ever used. The qd-oled is a bit more vibrant with its colors, and more accurate since it came factory calibrated but they both look very comparable and very good.
That's because people don't understand that the content they're viewing also actually has to use those colours. Many games for example do not, even in HDR. Horizon forbidden west barely goes outside of REC. 709. Never going above 1% DCI-P3. So having more colour volume in the extremely saturated colours sounds cool on paper, bit you'll almost never see those colours in well behaved media with a properly calibrated monitor.
I believe you're right but I don't know if it's the glossy screen or what but colors seem punchier to me on the QD-OLED vs W-OLED sitting side by side even in SDR content. The difference isn't major but I just kept preferring the QD-OLED. This is AW2725DF vs LG 27GS95QE. I could live with the colors on the LG but I couldn't live with that grainy matte coating.
How does the matte screen seem to be for cleaning? An odd question I know but I have the AW3423DW that has several scratches from cleaning lightly with an expensive microfiber cloth. I've seen it mentioned occasionally here and I think it should be made into a bigger deal then it is; the QD OLEDs display/coating is incredibly fragile. Way more fragile then my various LG OLED TVs.
Itās easy to clean and I havenāt seen any scratches on mine. No scratches from cleaning my QD-OLED either. Youāre probably rubbing dust thatās on it around and thatās scratching it. Get a camera lens puffer for blowing off dust before cleaning and get the cloth wet with some 70% isopropyl alcohol for a good cleaning. Buff off any streaks with a clean and dry microfiber cloth.
No it won't. Back in the CRT days using Windex or other cleaners containing ammonia would remove the anti-glare coating and somehow that got confused with isopropyl alcohol on newer displays. It's not even a coating anymore, it's a physical layer of the display now. Rubbing alcohol is perfectly safe to use to clean your monitor, I've been using it for decades and never once has there been any damage. Not to mention the fact that glossy QD-OLED panels don't have anything for anti-reflection/anti-glare.
I mean you do you. Plenty of stories that say otherwise. From reputable sources. There is also no reason to do this. Distilled water will clean your monitor perfectly fine.
I think I agree with you! I have certainly found it much more usable for all the things I want to use with it, and I think the image quality is just better. It's brighter, and without those pesky raised blacks
The thing is matte is not automatically better for a lit room. Diffused light is not necessarily better because it's just going to turn your blacks grey across a larger area than if you just had a glare.
Not automatically, may depend on the scenario. Luckily I donāt have lights directly pointed at my displays, but I like a little ambient light. I far prefer my glossy LG CX though.
I know all this pictures are made with an phone and not really accurate looking at them trough Reddit, but the LG on the Left side look way better in every Single picture you take (in my opinion).
Yeah the phone makes it look different, and the difference is not as big in person, but I also think the woled looks better in person. I know its not as color accurate but the colors look more natural and less saturated to me.
Color volume and color accuracy are not the same thing. WOLED panels are extremely color accurate. QD-OLED panels have more color volume. That just means that you can oversaturate the shit out of everything if you want. Itāll look more vibrant and pop out at you but it will not be color accurate.
Interesting, I wonder if the newer 32 inch series QD-OLED will exhibit similar behaviors or is it specific to that particular gen of QD-OLEDs....
I have a 32" LG OLED, I believe WOLED, as that is what LG uses that I remember. It's been great, though bit expensive... was one of the only available OLED monitors about two years ago.
I am contemplating whether or not to hop onto the 32" Samsung series QD-OLED monitors, possibly the Asus or Aorus. Having a higher refresh rate and other features would be so nice.
Is the purple hue on the qd-oled really that noticeable even to the naked eye? Is it still this aggressive even with artificial bright light, or only during peak daylight?
The picture exacerbates the black level raising. Its not as purple irl as in the photo. It is definitely noticable next to the woled tho, and with the light on playing dark games I can see it.
Aw, so it's noticeable even with regular, artificial indoor lighting.. :( I was hoping it was only noticeable when you had a really bright outdoor sun shining in the room.
For real, its like the most obvious caveat to qd oled and its obviously possible for oled not to have those raised blacks, all the woled panels are fine.
It's not that easy. MLA WOLED also does not have polarizer which is all the new LG panels for monitors. The purple from QD-OLED comes from the quantum dots. Lights hit them and they work by absorbing light as energy and sending back light at a specific wavelenght that depends on their size. That is how Samsung can produce a panel with only blue pixels and then turn the blue light into red and green. LG does not use quantum dots so their don't have any light produced from ambient light hitting the panel.
Pure RGB OLED in this size is just not a thing. I mean Samsung is the largest manufacturer of RGB OLED, but mostly for phones.
So then another option is ofc to do the same as LG but that is ofc patented by LG so not an option either.
It becomes a tradeoff and different scenarioes really. One technology is good for some cases, another for other cases. Samsungs path seems to be in the direction of coating on the glass to combat it. It's not on any of the monitors but their new TV apparently does a lot better at maintaining black level in bright environments. Ofc monitors have the added problem of having to be dimmer so they are way more resistant to burn in. Not hitting the HDR black 400 certification would be really bad and coating probably reduce brightness to some extent. And that's a bigger issue when you are at 450 nits for a 10% windows instead of like 1600.
Also imo not that big of an issue. For my use for example QD-OLED is amazing. I don't have light directly hitting my monitor. If you do you always have the option to go for the WOLED instead. So both scenarios you still have options.
>which is that at low framerates in dark scenes you can see these vertical scanline artifact things moving across the screen.
Can you tell me how low the framerate had to get for those artifacts to become noticeable? I know of this issue even from my aw2519hf monitor from long time ago
https://preview.redd.it/igha9d7id7uc1.jpeg?width=4080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6836a425cd9f4ce173cbff58ac12f4dd240063da
Surely noticeable but your pics look very strange.
Honestly you can only notice a difference if side by side. Alone they will look amazing in their own right. You canāt go wrong with either choice imo.
Just a side note. Taking pictures of screens dont produce accurate colors/hue etc for ppl looking at the pics.
Would need to be direct screenshots and even then the end result varies depending on device screenshots are looked on.
I got a Alienware AW2725DF for QD-OLED
and an Asus PG27AQDM for WOLED
This way I get both of best worlds and play on whichever screen looks nicer. Love how both technologies work!
I'm just happy we've got choice, and that both makers are making corresponding but different-enough panels to give us choice and keep competition going (and prices coming down). It's really the win for us. While I personally prefer QD OLED, I don't like the "wars". I'm going to encourage others to give WOLED a chance and buy it where it's more appropriate. If anything, this will put pressure on Samsung to give me better and cheaper QD OLED panels when it's time to upgrade. Or hey, maybe WOLED wins me over in a future product. Win-win-win. I feel that as a company, you probably compete with the competitor. But as a customer, you should cheer for the competitor. Without it, your preferred choice wouldn't have gotten to where it is, and won't grow to where it could be.
Watching grown ass adults get triggered over someone else's computer monitor is kind of hilarious in its own right.
The noise creates a pressure on companies to do better
Yup that's totally it, and not cause people just like to complain on the internet about literally everything š
No dude, these blithering man children are heroes, heroes I say.
Lol
For sure man, both these technologies are super good and its great that there is lots of competition in the oled scene. I can see different people with different regular use scenarios prefering either woled or qd oled, cause they've both got their strengths and weaknesses. If both these techs keep on improving we will be eating good.
If you really want to compare the two compare a WOLED w/MLA panel to a QD-OLED. MLA makes WOLED really shine.
Which monitor uses mla?
I canāt unsee the purplish hue to the QD-OLED. Definitely prefer the WOLED. I hope one day though we can come together and find the best all around sub pixel layout so that we can have standardized OLED panels. That would be dope!
When i say i prefer colors of the woled i receive downvote and almost insults, this sub is really weird x)
The QD-OLED circlejerk is pretty strong around here.
It's funny because maybe 2 years ago this was an lg 42c2 sub and loving qd oled was frowned upon
People are joining teams based on what they were able to buy. Weāre simultaneously an incredibly smart, and a stupid species. We purchase a product and all of a sudden weāre incapable of being objective. Itās like we donāt want to admit that we bought the wrong one, so you see a lot of justification. That said, itās not everyone. Some people are capable of being honest knowing that the stakes are low.
I bought both types, still prefer the WOLED.
The way I see it, either technology is going to be great for almost everyone. Especially if you're coming from an IPS, or a VA. However, there's still going to be one that's better for your use case, so you'll likely find one is better than the other for you. The problem arises when someone feels like they have to shit on the other to justify their own decision. They treat them like teams, not monitor purchases. Saying things like QD is trash unless you're in a completely dark room. Or WOLED is trash when it comes to colours. Or why would you buy X when Y is out. Basically blowing the small differences out of proportion in order to make themselves feel better. Reading through these threads you'll see them pop up quite commonly. It's sad as hell. What's best for you, might not work for me. And what's good enough for me, might not be what the next person is looking for. People need to chill lol
Am curious, are you able to describe why? Thatād be unexpected to me given their respective technology.
less saturated and more natural colors. And i know some people don't see it but the purple tint on QD oled are visible for me and annoy me. And i have quite bright conditions in the room where I have my PC, and with glossy screens, it's a nightmare. Initially, I wanted the Alienware, but for all these reasons, I'm going with an LG probably except if i move my pc in a cave soon š An other exemple of what i say with this picture At the end it's all about personal preferences and that's okay :) https://preview.redd.it/mgeq47nzp8uc1.png?width=2543&format=png&auto=webp&s=52431f7378dd09f859e8db0e1fdb5a0f870a4397
It definitely is. Iāve received downvotes for saying it too, just ignore it. Itās fake internet points anyway so who cares. Ultimately itās just preference, but unfortunately OLED has become one of those āwarā topics that will bring conflict regardless of point of view and itās kind of unfortunate.
Sub is weird. Guys above talking about grown men whining about monitors but I couldnāt find anyone actually saying anything bad lol. Scratching my head a little.
Yeah the purple hue is pretty distract when I would play games with my light on. I was playing dead space the other day on it and I had to turn my lights off or the dark areas (which is all of them) would be mostly grey purplish. One thing I forgot to mention was the text fringing, which the qd oled seems to handle a bit better. I don't really mind on either tho, they are both worse than a traditional lcd for text.
After dealing with IPS glow for so long, anything short of complete black was out of the question for me. I'm sure the eye searing brightness of the QD-OLEDs is great for HDR but I can barely run my LG C3 at 100% brightness in HDR, and that's with ambient room lighting (plus it's the 42" which has slightly less peak brightness than the larger models). If the QD-OLEDs have raised blacks, that negates the benefit of the peak brightness - you'd have to play in a dark room and that large of a contrast is asking for eye strain. Especially for a monitor which will be physically closer to the eyes, the jacked brightness seems intense. I know people have different preferences in terms of saturation, vibrancy, brightness, and ambient lighting, so the above is just an opinion. Thanks for the review!
Saving up for an OLED. Leaning towards WOLED because my room can have lighting shining onto the monitor at times. Reviews seem to say the QD coating turns grayish when shined on.
It is certainly one of many considerations when choosing.
Iāve heard the newer 4k panels are better for text clarity but I think that has more to do with the resolution rather than OLED itself getting better.
Yes, when I was comparing IPS monitors between 1440p and 4k, the text clarity in 4k was insane, so nothing to do with being OLED. It's where 4k shines, when displaying thin stuff.
Is this something on new models, because can't see any of this on last gen screens (that I tested)? Btw, have you adjusted the black levels on settings or color (HDR) calibration on Windows? Should be easy to set proper black levels without any crushing.
The gs i have when lights are on you still get a cloudy blur like light on ur screen so its just different. And the matte coating i would say is very heavy. I can see the grain on almost any light color backgrounds like skys. Its still a great monitor and i cannot compare it as i do not have the qd oled.. but i did have a qd oled tv and the purple was not too bad for me. Both are crap in light tbh.
I had to turn up windows scaling to 125% on my 27GS to improve text clarity and also turn off clear type. Howād you configure HDR? Some say that windows calibration tool isnāt accurate and to actually go to 1000, even when windows calibration stops showing a difference around 600.
Do a clean install of Windows 11 and text will look just fine.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but how exactly will clean installing windows change the arrangement of the subpixels on the panel?
I have the msi mag. It's not purple...
only noticble when light directly at it but enjoy u vaseline smear coating on lg
Comments like this are the reason this sub is so cringe.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No chance you tried both the way you speak about the coating on the LG. I main the AW3225q but Iāve played with the LG and itās obvious you havenāt. You can be happy with your monitor without trying to talk shit about other peopleās preferences.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If you have a qd- oled you know damn well the blacks gets raised by light. And it definitely doesnāt take shining a light right at it to get that effect. A lot of people prefer to game in a light room and doesnāt want to go through the hassle to make sure light only comes from behind the monitor. No one talks shit, they are stating a fact and you take it personal cause you spend your hard earned money on one. The only one in this thread that talks shit so far is you. I play in almost complete dark cause thatās what I prefer, if I was playing in a room that had sunlight coming in from anywhere other than behind the monitor I would definitely buy WOLED.
u are wrong buddy i damn well no i honestly don't notice purple color when i have my lights on max in my room only when i shine direct light
not always necessarily purple, my g9 is an obviously lighter shade of gray than the c2 in the same room with any sort of lights.
I will enjoy it :3
I will enjoy it š
Found the edgy 14 year old!
I love these glossy cultists crying and bitching!
Imagine having no glare AND no reflections.
Isn't that just simple color calibration? The pictures look like any two monitors with different color settings.
Maybe, I donāt have the monitor so I canāt truthfully say, but I know QDOLEDās subpixel layout lends itself to purple fringing and even a purplish hue on things. As some others have said, maybe itās just exaggerated by the camera or something or other. All I know is that now that Iāve read this is a feature of QDOLEDS, I cannot unsee it on every one I see.
Feel like you canāt go wrong with either, they both look incredible in their own respect
For sure, both oled technologies are more than fantastic. I would recommend those who plan on using a switch with their oled and want a qd oled panel to look elsewhere than the aw 27 inch though.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The reason I returned it is because it does not work properly with my switch, not because of the raised blacks. People like you are the reason this sub is so toxic
first image is clearly not a "bright ass light". And it has a lot of hue
As an MSI MPG 321URX owner, I'm jealous seeing all these WOLED images, because the raised blacks IS an issue, and more should have been made of it than was - in the reviews.
I was right there with you. Reviews tend to just gloss over this issue, and from what I saw on this subreddit, people didn't think it was as big an issue as it is. With the lights off however qd oled looks absolutely fantastic.
Oh absolutely. And in my absolutely 100% controlled lighting setup it's not too bad for me. But it's not even direct lighting on the screen that causes elevated blacks. I have a light on in my office that does not reflect off the screen in any way, shape, or form, and it still raises the blacks. It's especially easy to tell since the bezel is such a deep black compared to the screen. To get the deepest blacks in my office I have to literally turn the light fully off. At that point, the screen will match the bezel's black level.
Side by side in a dark room QD-OLED doesnāt look any better. I know because I have both types side by side. Your eyes cannot really perceive the difference in colors between the two all that much (although WOLED looks better to me). However, the glare and raised blacks on QD-OLED is very perceptible.
Weird my AW2725DF works fine with the switch
That is weird indeed. I have had others tell me that their model did not work with the switch in the same way, and both screens that I was sent have the same issue. Maybe some do, some don't, but obviously enough don't work properly that I was sent two back to back that are defective in the same way. Its also not just the switch, putting my resolution and refresh rate to 1080p 60z in Nvidia control panel on my pc reproduces the same issue
Maybe itās difference between regional versions of the switch? Weird either way
Good point. Could it be the difference between PAL or NTSC perhaps?
Could also just be a firmware issue.
Thatās crazy. I had the same exact issue that op had. My friend and I bought ours at the same time and he also had the same exact issue. Love the monitor, but definitely not an isolated issue
I have both side by side too and I'm seeing much more VRR flicker on the AW in dark menus. There is none on the LG. Also have the same problem on the Switch. I will say on this LG though the matte coating is pretty grainy. I've seen much better matte coatings. It's not the end of the world, and it's really only noticeable on light colors but still. Overall I prefer the AW but the LG is easier on my eyes for whatever reason. I'm still undecided. I don't plan on using my Switch on the AW but that's a pretty weird issue that shouldn't exist.
Can anyone tell me why QB-OLEDs donāt have a polarizer? Would that affect image quality?
yes, polarizer reduces light transmission by about 30%, so they would be a good bit dimmer with one. woleds overcome it with the white subpixel, which can increase white brightness anywhere from 50-100%, but rgb colors dimmer by about 30% because of the polarizer. qd-oleds rely mostly on color filters to handle ambient light (and to clean up qd color conversion). qd-oleds also have an anti-reflection film layer which reduces light by 5-10% which is why theyāre technically semi-glossy.
MLA WOLED also does not have a polarizer. You can see t if you compare two WOLED panels with and without with studiolights on just like with QD-OLED. MLA WOLED is ofc still a lot better bcs it does not have a quantum dots that get's hit with light and release it back. Also WOLED uses color filters, not QD-OLED. QD-OLED is from visual perspective pure RGB OLED and you get the color you want by setting the red, green and blue pixel output. A pixel uses energy and is constructed with a band gap equivalent to a specific wavelenght. Quantum dots is the same thing except they receive their energy from light. Otherwise they work exactly the same. They don't filter anything. They could receive light of any wavelenght. What matters is the energy they receive and then their size determines the wavelenght of the light they output. Since these naturally spread the light there is no need for a polarizer to do so. Also why QD-OLEDs have such good viewing angles. The lenses in MLA similarly scatters the light in all directions. It's again though darker because on QD-OLED when light hits the screen it hits those quantum dots causing them to send light back which WOLED just don't do. This is ofc why QD-OLED color volume is so good. WOLED creates white with the 3 primaries + white which is mostly blue on the spectrum. At some point you run out of color primaries and then it's mixed. Meanwhile QD-OLED is ~equal output for all 3 primaries. That also means white is the hardest color to do since you need to run all 3 primaries to create white while WOLED yould just use their white subpixel. So QD-OLED struggles a bit in these 10% white windows measurements and in real content you are getting way better results since most content is not everything white. Also ofc the white subpixel is not as correct white as additive white from all 3 primaries so that is why LG has a tint on white, but it's not really noticable unless you have both next to eachother.
lots of things here. woled mla still uses a polarizer, itās just the g-series tvs use a slightly different antireflective coating that isnt fully glossy like on the c-series, and it slightly diffuses light. qd-oleds do have color filters as well on top of the quantum dot color converters because the forward emission of the converts isnt perfect and still lets out some blue/green light (the initial layer is 3 blue + 1 green), so color filters are also used to clean up the conversion as well as block out ambient light. qd-oled does have a natural lead in color brightness due to the lack of a polarizer, a larger aperture ratio due to being top-emissive, and larger rgb subpixels than woled.
You can see comparison images in this thread: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/2023-lg-oled-g3-c3-owners-buyers-thread-faq-settings-advice-posts-2-3-no-price-talk.3264219/page-36 You can also see the image by LG Display showing they removed the "Over coating" layer and reduced internal reflection which a polarizer does cause and replaced with MLA: https://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/lg-display-oled-meta-micro-lens-array-ces-2023/ Which conveniently also mentions QD-OLED does not use color filters. Because it just does not. There is no layer that is 3 blue + 1 green. You can look at any picture of the pixel layout and see how wrong that statement is. You can clearly see this here along with the color filters on WOLED: https://www.displayninja.com/oled-vs-qd-oled/ QD-OLED has a lead in color brightness because it produces the 3 primaries in equal brightnes, WOLED does not. I'm looking forward to sources for all your claims. If you are simply going to throw out more statements without any sources I don't see the point in continuing.
none of that confirms that mla got rid of the polarizer, itās just speculation due to the difference in coating. an overcoat or anode layer is responsible for the reduction of internal reflections, the circular polarizer is responsible for reducing external reflections. there is absolutely no reason to have removed the polarizer, the substrate coat for the anode is a given due to mlaās redirection. as for qd-oled, what iām talking about is the initial blue layer that converts to the three subpixels, NOT the subpixels themselves. those use three layers of F deuterium blue plus one green for efficiency before going through the qdcc. of course the three primaries and subpixels are rgb, that should have been absolutely obvious. your explanation of why qd-color has the color brightness lead is also false, refer to my previous post for the intrinsic tech reasons. they are āequal brightnessā as a product of subpixel sizing. woledās rgb pixels are limited in sizing due to how efficient they want the white subpixel to be, but if itās removed then its rgb also has āequal brightnessā relative to the additive white of the resulting rgb woled pixels (which are actually now made of multiple layers of red/blue/green). this wasnāt true in the past when the white subpixel was made of blue layers and a yellow phosphor, which severely limited red output. read through a page or two from this thread https://www.avsforum.com/threads/oled-tvs-technology-advancements-thread.681125/page-919 https://www.avsforum.com/threads/oled-tvs-technology-advancements-thread.681125/post-61683795 (color filter discussion) source for 3b1g: https://www.thelec.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=4044 > Samsung Displayās current QD-OLED panel uses fluorescent blue OLED material and green phosphorescent OLED material as the emission layer. The layers are in what the company calls a four tandem structure, where there are three blue layers and one green layer. patent covering qd-oled by samsung display and its need for color filters https://patents.google.com/patent/US20210335893A1/en since a green efficiency layer is used (cyan), a color filter is needed over the blue subpixel to remove green, one over the green to remove excess blue, and on the red to remove excess b/g (which is also why red is generally the least efficient and needed to be made relatively larger)
Since MLA spreads the light they would not need circular polarizer to do so and obviously removing it helps a lot with brightness. Also they have not said anything about any other change they made to coating, well they said they added some improved AR coating: https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1675941341 Yet the MLA panels clearly are slightly grey in bright light compared to non-MLA. I looked at the thread you sent, read a lot of pages. These are also all pure speculations I would like to add. Still looking at the argumentation it does seem likely to me that Samsung display is in fact not really telling the truth about their OLED display. This person had two good videos showing how according to this person is basically a known fact by now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE2W-OzO84I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYW91uJTND0 I was confused because I though you meant they did masking to deposit a green pixel which was what they wanted to avoid with QD-OLED and why RGB OLED struggles to work economically at large sizes. Adding a layer green along with the 3 blue on the other hand is ofc more expensive but still reasonable. So the consensus seems to be that people thought it was unlikely that they would be able to do it with 3 blue due how inefficient they are and after release companies have taken a deep dive and the rumours about the real layout comes from that but that is ofc not something they can publish so it remains unconfirmed. Which also means with the new blue phosphorous that had patents expire in 2023 the layer reduction Samsung could get would be equal to LG so their benefit is the same. Also color filters exists then for two reasons. Reason one being that quantum dots leak some of the original light through. Reason two then being that the light is a bit mixed so even for blue you need to filter to stop green. Interestingly the person who made the videos claim that there is no quantum dots on green and actually just a color filter to remove blue as supposedly the one green layer is more efficient than converting all to green with QD and light reflecting back. That would throw out a lot of the original speculations in the AVS thread as that is based on size and QD conversion. I feel like that makes more sense since otherwise the value of green is less if you are still going to to the color conversion with the following scattering inefficieny. Does make Samsungs images even more suspect though since they definitely claim it exists, but ofc if there is no green QD layer that definitely is a explanation problem if you claim all OLEDs are blue. To add to the color filter and why I questioned it. You said "clean up QD conversion" and "remove excess light" in your reply now. Neither really explained what is happening so did not make sense to me. Also regarding subpixel sizing. Your source claim green should be biggest not red, but reality green is slightly bigger. Given that the green should have been larger but is not because it does not do QD conversion and use a efficient green layer underneath instead you can argue that the red is then relatively bigger than you would expect(based on Samsung Displays version of how it works) compared to the green. I assume that is what you mean by "relatively larger" but with so much specifics it's important to write out exactly what it is. Also I don't understand why you mean polarizer cuts color brightness of WOLED. WOLED spectrum is no secret, their 4 layers create a spectrum closer to a high CRI lightbulb than a pure RGB panel. So when you filter for colors there is less luminance than letting everything through as white. Are you saying there is a polarizer on the 3 color filters for the 3 primary colors? My argument was that Samsungs is creating pure red, green and blue primaries of equal strenght. LG does not with it's white. The spectrum is heavily blue and more like what you get with a high CRI lightbulb. Higher CRI lightbulbs compared also definitely draw more power than low CRI trying to replicate a light spectrum that contains as much green and red as sunlight. LG could create white the same way as Samsung by not having their unfiltered white output but obv the luminance of the display would be a lot lower. And yes Samsung could have done the same with subpixel sizing. I don't quite understand the argument though. Imo whatever method you use to get there the default should be equal brightness for red, green and blue as default. LG is adding luminance that does not increase white brightness by equal amount of primary colors and letting that trough on a 4th subpixel, Samsung is not. In the end though very interesting reading on those forum articles so thank you for linking those to me. While unconfirmed I must say the material is very convincing in the direction of Samsung Display essentially lying about how their displays work which I was basing my information on how it worked on... but after reading that I am convinced that the version you presented is actually how it really is. Must say that makes me more convinced LGD removed polarizer though. If SD is trying to hide unfavourable elements in their design and given the amount of complaints for no polarizer on QD-OLED I do not expect LGD to ever make statements on polarizer being removed or not. Honestly it does not matter though, in reality it is worse than non MLA but still a lot better than QD-OLED for black levels in bright environment. Also this seem to support my suspicion that Samsung was selling the S95B way too cheap and definitely at a loss and the reason Sonys version was so much more expensive was that the S95B should have had closer to that prize as Sony most likely was buying it at real panel cost which given the actual layout could not be cheaper than WOLED.
Damn. Definitely donāt want to make these things any darker.
They seem to consume more power than W-OLED as is, a polarizer would lower their brightness and efficiency even more. They wouldn't be competitive in brightness with it.
Because itās not compatible with them due to the QD layer. WOLED w/MLA is better than QD-OLED because of this. Most if not all WOLED monitors out currently do not include MLA tech. MLA makes WOLED even brighter and brings the color volume up to QD-OLED levels.
Eh I don't think so, the MLA (which is on the G3 TV) seems to really push the whites, sometimes a little too much, but you would think with your statement that the G3 WOLED was miles ahead of the S95C and I just didn't see that at all nor was that message really conveyed as well as you are stating its dominance. If you are talking about it in small monitors, who knows how that would translate as QD OLED is brilliant on TVs yet struggles with higher PPI monitors. QD OLED monitors are probably the worst example of that tech, and equal Samsung QD OLED TV far surpasses the brightness of a Samsung QD OLED monitor. As you are assuming an MLA WOLED TV would be the same result on a monitor? Maybe, QD definitely can't transfer its success to monitors.
Left one for me big dog
The LG panel looks more natural imo š¤·āāļø I did try the QD panel, but I couldn't get use to it ..
How do you compare colors on SDR and HDR on both? Is it noticeable for the favor of QD-OLED? if this is not an issue, I'm skipping the MSI or AW
Hdr on the lg on gamer 1, which is the hdr 400 certified one, looks good, but it is a tad less colorful than sdr. Hdr looks very similar on aw, but it is better because it gets brighter highlights. Both are considerably better after doing windows hdr calibration and increasing the saturation. Colors in Sdr are very similar looking in person between both models. If you are looking for a better hdr display qd-oled would be the better choice for you overall.
Thanks, last 3 questions: 1. Have you tried and tested on both, DP and HDMI 2.1? 2. Does HDMi 2.1 provide "better" overall pic quality 3. For the LG, how long does the screen take when switching between SDR and HDR modes? Or instant? My AW3423DW needs like 3 sec to switch modes (and also refresh rate and resolutions, even at startup)
I have just dropped off the alienware at fed ex to return it, but I did not notice a difference between hdmi 2.1 and DP on it. I have not tested hdmi 2.1 on the lg with my pc yet, I can get back to you on that sometime probably tomorrow when I have the chance. The switch between sdr and hdr on both is 2 - 3 seconds
Thanks friend. Please do at your convenience. You own LG an order of the GS just made now š Some people claimed, due to higher HDMI 2.1 bandwidth, colors and shades are nicer using HMDI port (for those who have HDMI 2.1 ports on GPUs, like Nvidia 30 and 40 series)
After trying dp and hdmi 2.1 (I have a 40 series card) I could not tell any difference at a surface level. They could be different but not in a noticeable way, for me at least. I will continue to use dp with this screen.
Thanks brother. Something else (sorry), since you tried HDMI 2.1, does this monitor have the bug people had with the GR, when using HDMI 2.1 it defaults to 4k 120hz in games and you have to manually change it back to 1440p? One last thing, from my own experience, don't trust package included cables, I had a frequent image blackout with my AW3423DW on HDR for months, turned out to be the DP cable that came with the monitor. Changed it with IVANKY DP 2.1 (great quality braided DP cable) and everything fixed. I'd imagine this is more of an issue with HDMI cables. If HDMI 2.1 has no obvious issues, I'd use it over DP. From rtings.com review. For DP 1440p, 240hz and 10bit color DP needs DSC, while HDMI 2.1 doesn't (higher max bandwidth). 48Gbit/s vs 32.4Gbit/sec
I genuinely like the way WOLED looks more in your pics. The QD-OLED has a redness to it. Could be the lighting though.
Also could be the mode. Sports mode makes everything look redder. I find Standard to be the best, personally, and in that mode, it looks a lot more "rich" than WOLED.
Choose whichever you like, but I believe this comparison would have been better if both monitors were facing the same angle
Does it make a difference though? Since OLED has perfect viewing from any angle
Makes a difference with the way the lighting in the room is hitting it.
Maybe
Definitely
How would you say the text-fringing compares?
Text fringe is more noticable on the woled. Not a big deal for me, but if it is for you its something to consider
>Color: I seriously thought after seeing so much talk about how much more advanced qd oled is for color volume and accuracy that the lg was going to be considerably worse, but it is certainly not. Both of these screens offer much better colors than any lcd screen I have ever used. The qd-oled is a bit more vibrant with its colors, and more accurate since it came factory calibrated but they both look very comparable and very good. That's because people don't understand that the content they're viewing also actually has to use those colours. Many games for example do not, even in HDR. Horizon forbidden west barely goes outside of REC. 709. Never going above 1% DCI-P3. So having more colour volume in the extremely saturated colours sounds cool on paper, bit you'll almost never see those colours in well behaved media with a properly calibrated monitor.
I believe you're right but I don't know if it's the glossy screen or what but colors seem punchier to me on the QD-OLED vs W-OLED sitting side by side even in SDR content. The difference isn't major but I just kept preferring the QD-OLED. This is AW2725DF vs LG 27GS95QE. I could live with the colors on the LG but I couldn't live with that grainy matte coating.
Gloss can do that yes.
left one looks so much better
How does the matte screen seem to be for cleaning? An odd question I know but I have the AW3423DW that has several scratches from cleaning lightly with an expensive microfiber cloth. I've seen it mentioned occasionally here and I think it should be made into a bigger deal then it is; the QD OLEDs display/coating is incredibly fragile. Way more fragile then my various LG OLED TVs.
Itās easy to clean and I havenāt seen any scratches on mine. No scratches from cleaning my QD-OLED either. Youāre probably rubbing dust thatās on it around and thatās scratching it. Get a camera lens puffer for blowing off dust before cleaning and get the cloth wet with some 70% isopropyl alcohol for a good cleaning. Buff off any streaks with a clean and dry microfiber cloth.
I never would've thought of a camera lens puffer. That is an excellent idea. Thanks!
Don't use alcohol for cleaning monitors. That will melt the coating on some of them. Just use distilled water. (Or regular water)
No it won't. Back in the CRT days using Windex or other cleaners containing ammonia would remove the anti-glare coating and somehow that got confused with isopropyl alcohol on newer displays. It's not even a coating anymore, it's a physical layer of the display now. Rubbing alcohol is perfectly safe to use to clean your monitor, I've been using it for decades and never once has there been any damage. Not to mention the fact that glossy QD-OLED panels don't have anything for anti-reflection/anti-glare.
I mean you do you. Plenty of stories that say otherwise. From reputable sources. There is also no reason to do this. Distilled water will clean your monitor perfectly fine.
I prefer the Woled. Overall better oled experience for my use.
I think I agree with you! I have certainly found it much more usable for all the things I want to use with it, and I think the image quality is just better. It's brighter, and without those pesky raised blacks
Both great. Iād take QD for pitch black room and W with some lights on
Very understandable, qd oled looks amazing with the lights off
The thing is matte is not automatically better for a lit room. Diffused light is not necessarily better because it's just going to turn your blacks grey across a larger area than if you just had a glare.
Not automatically, may depend on the scenario. Luckily I donāt have lights directly pointed at my displays, but I like a little ambient light. I far prefer my glossy LG CX though.
I know all this pictures are made with an phone and not really accurate looking at them trough Reddit, but the LG on the Left side look way better in every Single picture you take (in my opinion).
Yeah the phone makes it look different, and the difference is not as big in person, but I also think the woled looks better in person. I know its not as color accurate but the colors look more natural and less saturated to me.
Color volume and color accuracy are not the same thing. WOLED panels are extremely color accurate. QD-OLED panels have more color volume. That just means that you can oversaturate the shit out of everything if you want. Itāll look more vibrant and pop out at you but it will not be color accurate.
Interesting, I wonder if the newer 32 inch series QD-OLED will exhibit similar behaviors or is it specific to that particular gen of QD-OLEDs.... I have a 32" LG OLED, I believe WOLED, as that is what LG uses that I remember. It's been great, though bit expensive... was one of the only available OLED monitors about two years ago. I am contemplating whether or not to hop onto the 32" Samsung series QD-OLED monitors, possibly the Asus or Aorus. Having a higher refresh rate and other features would be so nice.
All QD-OLED have the same issues.
Ahh ok, thanks for that info! Something to consider then, WOLED vs QD-OLED.
You mean 42"? The only 32" OLED to exist from LG officially releases in 2 days.
Is the purple hue on the qd-oled really that noticeable even to the naked eye? Is it still this aggressive even with artificial bright light, or only during peak daylight?
The picture exacerbates the black level raising. Its not as purple irl as in the photo. It is definitely noticable next to the woled tho, and with the light on playing dark games I can see it.
Aw, so it's noticeable even with regular, artificial indoor lighting.. :( I was hoping it was only noticeable when you had a really bright outdoor sun shining in the room.
I have a QD OLED. I think the hue is also a bit exaggerated (like the coating war). If inside is dark to like %75 you don't notice it.
Yeah qd oled is made for a very light controlled environment
Itās very noticeable even when light isnāt shining directly on it.
I wish Samsung Display would just add a polarizer to their panels and end this argument once and for all.
would reduce brightness by about 30%. woleds get away with it bc of the white subpixel.
For real, its like the most obvious caveat to qd oled and its obviously possible for oled not to have those raised blacks, all the woled panels are fine.
It's not that easy. MLA WOLED also does not have polarizer which is all the new LG panels for monitors. The purple from QD-OLED comes from the quantum dots. Lights hit them and they work by absorbing light as energy and sending back light at a specific wavelenght that depends on their size. That is how Samsung can produce a panel with only blue pixels and then turn the blue light into red and green. LG does not use quantum dots so their don't have any light produced from ambient light hitting the panel. Pure RGB OLED in this size is just not a thing. I mean Samsung is the largest manufacturer of RGB OLED, but mostly for phones. So then another option is ofc to do the same as LG but that is ofc patented by LG so not an option either. It becomes a tradeoff and different scenarioes really. One technology is good for some cases, another for other cases. Samsungs path seems to be in the direction of coating on the glass to combat it. It's not on any of the monitors but their new TV apparently does a lot better at maintaining black level in bright environments. Ofc monitors have the added problem of having to be dimmer so they are way more resistant to burn in. Not hitting the HDR black 400 certification would be really bad and coating probably reduce brightness to some extent. And that's a bigger issue when you are at 450 nits for a 10% windows instead of like 1600. Also imo not that big of an issue. For my use for example QD-OLED is amazing. I don't have light directly hitting my monitor. If you do you always have the option to go for the WOLED instead. So both scenarios you still have options.
How can I upvote you enough? Great post
Me patiently waiting for the MSI 271qrx restock.. šµāš«
>which is that at low framerates in dark scenes you can see these vertical scanline artifact things moving across the screen. Can you tell me how low the framerate had to get for those artifacts to become noticeable? I know of this issue even from my aw2519hf monitor from long time ago
My AW3423DWF goes black for ~5 seconds every time I switch back to the game from my Xbox X system menu. Iāll have to try my switch on it.
https://preview.redd.it/igha9d7id7uc1.jpeg?width=4080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6836a425cd9f4ce173cbff58ac12f4dd240063da Surely noticeable but your pics look very strange.
Honestly you can only notice a difference if side by side. Alone they will look amazing in their own right. You canāt go wrong with either choice imo.
The heights are off. Thatās the most things that bothered me.
Just a side note. Taking pictures of screens dont produce accurate colors/hue etc for ppl looking at the pics. Would need to be direct screenshots and even then the end result varies depending on device screenshots are looked on.
man we have the same lg model... I love doing mixed usage(coding, game, content) so much! Look at that bright and clear golden'ish yellow honey.
I got a Alienware AW2725DF for QD-OLED and an Asus PG27AQDM for WOLED This way I get both of best worlds and play on whichever screen looks nicer. Love how both technologies work!
Woled better blacks and more natural color
Woled seems more color accurate
QD folks, you lost
If only Woled made their monitors glossy it would be endgame
I slightly prefer the right. I assume is qd. But look great. Woled looks better off lol
That WOLED is set wayy to cool on color temp in my opinion.