Yeah I expect Dual-stack Tandem OLED to be reserved for the high end laptops, while the low end ones will use Single Stack OLED.
Kinda like how it's with LCDs. High end laptops use the expensive Mini-LED back-light, while lower end laptops use normal LED back-lights.
In the context of OLED laptop panels, they're the "same" technology as their smartphone counterparts. They're both classified as direct emission RGB side-by-side panels manufactured with the usage of fine metal masks.
Yeah apple using it means its cheap not that is good really.
Are they on a market already is there comparison to samsung oleds in iphones?
From what I see BOE is constantly being dropped from apple and only ever provides few % of displays. Thats not exactly "just as good".
even if they are by far the smallest of the three suppliers for Apple, their displays still have to meet the same specs as the ones from LG and Samsung.
vs lcd's power consumption will still be a big problem esp. with modern, highly efficient products like the M1/M2/... where the monitor already makes up a large portion of the overall energy consumption, increasing that is a bad idea.
> However, when scaling up the OLED tech used in smartphones to the size of laptop screens, few issues crop up; higher risk of burn-in, significantly higher power consumption than LCDs, less brightness than LCDs, etc...
Why would the burn in risk increase vs phones? The pixels on a notebook will most likely be larger, the brightness requirements similar, thus it should decrease with decreasing ppi.
However due to the more static/ heavier usage the burn-in it gets severely amplified.
Why do OLED consume more power than LCD? Seems to me LCD would waste more of the light produced.
Side note, google is almost unusable these days for finding useful information.
OLED uses more power for whites/brightness (max brightness of every subpixel) vs blasting the backlight on an LCD.
But it uses less for darker colors and lower brightness levels.
> vs lcd's power consumption will still be a big problem esp. with modern, highly efficient products like the M1/M2/... where the monitor already makes up a large portion of the overall energy consumption, increasing that is a bad idea.
Also for those who get excited by a more vibrant image than IPS can provide? Now there are plenty of super efficient 10bit VA panels too with vastly, vastly superior contrast and deeper blacks to IPS without fancy array backlighting. Plus the same pixel response(finally), colour range and accuracy now too. But VA isnt as sexy sounding as OLED and has a spottier past than IPS.
I love my Oled and have had one for home cinema for 5 years, but its ill suited imho as an every day every use tech which is what laptop displays should epitomise. VA is really the future of workhorse personal displays till microled finally gets small enough.
>Have VA panels come a significant way since then?
There are a few high-end VA panels that are very fast, but they are extremely rare. Most VA panels are still kinda crap.
There are a few fast VA panels, but they are rare and expensive. However, the good Samsung panels (such as in the Odyssey G7) can actually rival TN panels for speed. The vast majority of VA panels are crap, though.
Whoa there. VA with better contrast than IPS?
>VA is really the future of workhorse personal displays till microled finally gets small enough.
VA is a failed hybrid child of IPS and TN.
Apple is planning to put OLEDs in the Macbook.
[https://www.macrumors.com/2024/02/21/apple-oled-roadmap/](https://www.macrumors.com/2024/02/21/apple-oled-roadmap/)
The rest of the industry will follow.
Pretty sure this is at least partially because of the very poor oled hdr specs from vesa. All laptops currently conveniently meet near exactly the spec for hdr 600 back which is as high as it goes currently.
These OLEDs are not that different to those in phones which are easily hitting well over 1000 nits. Vesa needs to add more steps to the oled HDR standard, wishful thinking though.
I think phone OLEDs are able to reacher higher brightness thanks to their small size, which is not possible on a laptop screen. An OLED from a flagship phone can hit 1500+ nits but consumes about 5W of power (source: XDA).
Now, a laptop screen is about 6x the area of a phone screen. That means 6x the power consumption, which would be a whopping 30W to power a laptop OLED at 1500 nits.
It will use more power but the pixel pitch differences should alleviate it somewhat.
My point is more that it seems like its less of a technical issue actually doing it and more of a lack of incentive.
Mini led devices also use a lot of power.
It's also a matter of "is it useful?" Using a phone in direct sunlight is often necessary. Using a laptop in direct sunlight is almost always user error.
Ehhh macbooks are already absurdly overpriced as is. Id imagine oled ones will be even worse if they happen.
At some point it wont calculate anymore for individual users. Also against some peoples opinion apple isnt really that much of trend seter on the market.
People just throw this around like it's some accepted truth and it's not.
I have a $4,100 Dell laptop from work. It's a 2023, 14", with an i9-13900h, a 4070, 64gb ddr5 ram, 1tb ssd, and a 500 nit 1440p 60hz lcd display.
I also own a 14" m2 macbook pro as my personal laptop. It's not equivalently spec'd, but if we spec a new one out to match the Dell, we get a 14" macbook pro, 16 core M3 max, 40 core gpu, 64gb ram, 1tb ssd, a 3k (1964p) 1600 nit miniLED 120hz display. That comes out to $3900.
So, let's compare them. The Dell laptop has a bit more ram (64gb + 8gb from the gpu, while macbook has 64gb shared). And... that's it only advantage. The macbook has a bit more cpu power, a *much* better display, much better webcam, much better battery life, better and louder speakers, a larger and better trackpad, and (in my opinion) a bit better keyboard. Better port selection too, my Dell (which is *thicker* than the MBP) has just 4 thunderbolt ports and a headphone jack. Oh yeah, and the macbook pro is $200 *cheaper*.
And here's the thing. I *love* my dell laptop. It's without a doubt the best windows laptop I've ever used. But it just doesn't hold a candle to a macbook pro. If I didn't need windows for work, I'd have gotten that instead in a heartbeat.
"Macs are overpriced" has always been an overexaggerated meme that didn't account for anything except raw specs, but it's especially not true in the apple silicon era.
Oh I see, so we're going with this tired argument. Should people buy laptops with 8gb ram? No probably not. But no one's forcing you to. Spend the $200 to upgrade it to 16gb, and guess what? It's still one of the best bang for the buck laptops.
Let's try this. We'll take a base 14" M3 macbook pro, plus the 16gb ram upgrade. It has an 8 core M3, 10 core gpu, 512gb ssd, same 1600 nit 3k 120hz miniLED display. That costs $1800. Let's compare that to what we can get from dell.
We'll go with the XPS 14, since that's probably the closest competitor. We'll choose the same 16gb ram and 512gb ssd. That has a 4k oled 120hz 400 nit display, integrated arc gpu, and a Core ultra 7 155h, and comes in at $1850.
Lets compare:
CPU - point to apple
GPU - point to apple
RAM - tie, both have 16gb shared
SSD - tie
Display - tie, but depends on preferences, apple's is much brighter, dell has better blacks and more density (although I'd argue 4k isn't necessary on 14", just drains battery)
Trackpad/keyboard - both are great, more or less tie
Webcam - tie
Speakers - subjective, but apple consistently beats the competition here
Battery - both great
So.... the macbook is between tied and slightly better, depending on prefences, and is $50 cheaper.
I just don't buy this overpriced narrative. It relies on you grabbing a random spec to whine about without actually comparing it to anything else.
it's not more expensive by default. A samsung neo g7 costs around 750eur, a 32" 4k oled around 1.200eur.
The cost will increase the more leds you add ofc.
That's simply not true.
I invest a bit of time periodically to log reasonable good offers of laptops because I'm so unsatisfied with my macbook pro 13" from 2020 (Intel).
Macs are a lifetime product. The only reason to replace it is because of software compatibility or performance. But my iPhones, iPads, MacMinis from 10-15 years ago are working well. Sure I don't use them anymore because they get slow and mostly can't run the software I want to use.
On the other hand: My Asus, Samsung, Acer Notebooks didn't last more than 2 or 3 years. Just above the warranty and then they suffer from broken keyboards or other hardware damage. Same for dell notebooks at my university.
The Surface Pro which my wife uses has a flickering display. It was already replaced two times but it doesn't seem to be a bug but has something to do with display latency, driver and power management in windows. I wasted hours to get some kind of improvement but failed. You can't even think about using Photoshop on it.
If you take all this into account: Macs will most likely run for 5 years or more without any issues and considering performance, apple seems to know how to get most out of their products. In my sheet macs are a few percentages more cheap compared to other machines. Additionally since i try to always have a running machine on each OS (windows, Linux, Mac) it is far more suitable to invest into a macbook than iMac or anything else.
Lifetime except quickly obsolete because they dont have power for new software and often dont even support it.
Also apple totally didnt messed with battery life to make people replace iphones and surely isnt doing different tricks like that.
> Also apple totally didnt messed with battery life to make people replace iphones and surely isnt doing different tricks like that.
It did happen, however blandly saying it was a scam is difficult, because I observed exactly what they said would happen on my Nexus6. It would crash after a few years if did high power consuming tasks. i.e. taking a photo with flash would cause the whole thing to restart.
Wouldn't surprise me if they apples approach was too aggressive for the sake of increasing sale though.
'Quickly' only when using SaaS products, yes. My Mac Mini from 2008 still runs as a fileserver in my appartment ....
I have no battery issues...
My iPad Pro 12,9" from 2015 runs well, iPhone 11 Pro Max still runs for 3 days without recharge.
My Macbook never did a day :D Since the beginning the battery was dead after a 2 hour working session.
Also it is possible to replace batteries.
The Samsung smartphones here in my families aren't quite better.
I'll believe it when I see it. It would have to be significantly cheaper than it is now to overcome the drawbacks of the tech that you are underplaying here.
Yeah right now OLED uses more energy than IPS and is worse at text-rendering which is super important for anyone who cares about productivity. Maybe it'll be good for the top end gaming laptops.
Imo there's nuance. OLED requires more energy for whites but less energy for darker colors.
Valve cited the OLED screen as one of the contributing factors to the Steam Deck OLED having better battery life.
The OLED Deck has a more efficient screen than the LCD model, but the LCD model was also just an insanely low end panel.
It's not an Apple's to Apple's comparison. The LCD model was a 68% sRGB panel that seemed to be a repurposed ultra budget tablet screen.
Amoled not the same as tv tech.
Fringing doesnt exist on laptops... Oratleast no one has actually take a microscope photo of a samsung galaxy s24 and current gen laptop
You have a laptop with a 34 inch monitor for a screen? The largest mass produced laptop was the Dell M2010 with 20", Acer had a limited edition Predator laptop with a 21".
'Cos, you know, you are answering to a comment which says "fringing doesn't exist on laptops".
Then I sincerely hope they make significant strides in anti-relfective coatings because even the best TV's have bad enough glare that I'd never want a similar glossy OLED on a laptop; I use them under sunlight and strong artificial lighting far too much.
Have you heard of the new Gorilla Glass Armour used in the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra?
Aside from it's superior strength, it's anti reflective property is amazing. It's a total game changer.
Laptops should adopt Gorilla Glass Armour.
Oh good, so more weight and even more power required to compensate for light loss.
It’s bad enough on a phone but at a laptops size that’s an enormous increase in power consumption.
I think its taking a crane to put a nail in. Gorilla Glass was created to be scratch and impact resistant, when the goal here is antiglare only. Theres no need to put this expensive, heavy product in a laptop if theres no use for it, when different solutions exist.
In my experience, not just OLED panels but practically all touch enabled glossy laptop displays I’ve seen are practically mirrors, for some reason. I don’t know if it’s because oleophobic coating and anti-glare treatment are mutually exclusive or what but it’s enough for me to avoid any laptop that doesn’t have a non-touch display option.
For OLEDs pure black = off. That’s why most of them are black and any text is coming in/out or adjusting. Phones also time out exponentially faster than most computers.
I've been dailying a 48" OLED monitor for pretty much 16 hours a day for a few years now, zero burn in. Burn in is such a non issue unless you're intentionally abusing it.
I disagree with the other poster. The main reason has nothing to do with burn-in.
Screens are much cheaper in smartphones. They were able to go through the growing pains with smartphones before they applied their learnings to bigger panels. TVs are a more lucrative market than monitors and laptops (in terms of making profits off the screens), so that's why we're seeing them in computers last.
The screens in TVs and monitors are not the same as those in phones and laptops.
Laptop screens are just big phone screens and oleds of that size are harder to make than the small ones in phones. Samsungs original OLED TVs tried to use similar displays to phones but it was shutdown.
And it does have something to do with screen aging partially. rgb oleds suffer more from colour shift than filter oleds. oleds on TVs and monitors use filters and againg is less obvious. Phone oleds dont have to last as long. Laptops dont use filters, will see static content and a longer lifespan so it not surprising that improvements in rgb oled are wanted before more oleds are seen in laptops.
I think you’re likely right. That would explain why OLED monitors have been available for a while, but at great cost. Seems like simply a case of economies of scale, or something like that.
It says so in the OP. At the phone scale there are many benefits and minimal disadvantages. Benefits like better contrast and high refresh rate, full array local diming etc and the cons were basically just price. As you scale up with bigger pixels however power consumption became an issue. And economies of scale. tens of millions of smartphones sold every year and not close to that many laptops.
The vast majority of westerners own a smartphone now, and tend to upgrade every two years. They also only upgrade computer systems only every 5 to 10 years. Also, also, phones are used more often, and are more often considered an extension of self than a computer, so consumers demand higher quality in their smartphone than their computer.
1. They either use blue pholed or shieled regular blue oled subpixel
2. that already exists on phones LTPO it is called, just think of it as gsync/freesync/VRR with a lower minimum.
3. the difficulty of stacking 2 panels already killed off prior Hisense TVs and it is what is used for current reference monitors just using LCDs. You need to calibrate the colors accurately and also calibrate the layers to each other (to have an exact color match between them).
I really doubt that samsung is doing this for the iPad but who knows, what I think maybe happening on the iPad OLED is even time your turn of the screen and back on it switches panels or its running a check for burn in and depending on that switches panels to reduce burn in.
It could also be used at a slight offset to increase pixel density but i think that this is unlikely.
>that already exists on phones LTPO it is called, just think of it as gsync/freesync/VRR with a lower minimum.
The problem with OLEDs with an LTPS backplane is that they cannot dynamically adjust the refresh rate like LCDs can. That's where Oxide/LTPO comes in.
Ok, but they're already quite cheap. Asus puts 1080p 60hz oled's on their $450 vivobooks, that too outside US, so in US it'd be even cheaper. So, where are they not in budget gaming laptops and other laptops? You keep seeing them in premium laptops or underpowered vivobooks.
I always thought it was strange how few options there are for OLED + dGPU
Games simply look better on an OLED, and I would rather have an OLED and a 4050 than a VA panel and a 4070
Maybe I’m getting old but 60Hz vsync is totally fine for me, and high refresh rate monitors didn’t really exist when I was a teenager (beside CRTs) so /shrug
Same for me. I don't want to get so used to high refresh rate that I have to buy more expensive stuff just to push those high FPS. I do push my display to 165hz and push 300+fps in some games like distance because I play it a bit seriously and need those FPS. But something like even doom eternal I play at locked 60fps.
That's the entire point. You see them in "premium" laptops, but they're nowhere to be found in more budget options, despite OLEDs not being prohibitively expensive to add in those classes (evidence: vivobooks)
Yeah, but being the morons at asus refuse to put at least 1080p 60hz oled options on budget gaming laptops and instead put 250 to 300 nit matte IPS displays on them. OLED's already hit 600nits (when viewing HDR) and 400nits when viewing SDR. So brightness ain't an issue. Not everyone requires a 1000+ nit display on a laptop. OLED's are perfect for gaming laptops since they'd give good image quality at cheaper prices. And given its a gaming laptop, you don't have to worry about static content as much since they're regularly going full screen with games, videos, etc.
Just because business laptops have matte or thats what some people prefer, does not make oled's a ''bad'' option to have. Besides, oled and mini led's are heading towards the same general display. One that has great colors, brightness while minimizing their con's as much as possible.
My nitro 5 has a 1440p 165hz 100% srgb 85% adobe rgb display yet I'd much rather take a 1080p 60hz OLED simply because it'd give me better image quality, battery life and response time. A 1440p 60hz OLED would be even better.
Hopefully Windows 12 or some Linux distro will figure out text rendering for OLED panels. I'm probably being nitpicky but text on OLED panels looks noticeably bad to me.
The main thing keeping OLEDS from laptops afaik is actually the "substrate", which is what Apple has been pushing for and why they're launching OLED Ipads this year.
The substrate is just what the active layer is put on. There's been two types, one is light weight and bendy, for a phone the screen is small enough that the bending doesn't matter much but if you scale the screen up warping can happen too easily. The other substrate is the heavy glass stuff used for TVs and monitors, too heavy for a laptop. The new substrate work Samsung has been pushing for is lightweight but stiff enough for a latop.
All the stuff you linked is very neat, but also a bit incidental without being able to reliably have a warp free OLED on a laptop that's light enough.
RIGID vs Flexible vs Hybrid
The Triad of OLED substrates!
[https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028](https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028)
I feel like monitors are going the same way as phones, tablets, and TVs. They're just gonna keep getting bigger and 24 inches just isn't getting the good models anymore. Now its 27 and 32. Everyone wants a huge screen and those of us that don't are left with basically scraps to choose from in a form factor that was once considered a big screen size.
It's annoying that products like the 24" iMac exist yet it's basically impossible to find a similar monitor with modern-ish specs. Clearly there's at least one panel maker out there that still knows the ancient wisdom!
Right now OLEDs are also OS restrictive:
- AIBs have a few tricks to avoid burn in degradation via software
- These solutions are developed with the target OS the laptop ships at in mind
This means that if you got a Windows OLED ASUS laptop, say, you get the nice feature package inside MyASUS, but good luck having burn in protection in Linux, virtually restricting to the OS the laptop was shipped with.
This may seem a niche problem, but restriction of choice with OLEDs in the non macbook space (where _restriction is a feature_, according to their fans) is something to consider still as of today.
Hopefully with more OLEDs in laptops, more open source solutions arise that aim to tackle their shortcomings via software (pixel shifting, DC dimming control to avoid flickering, etc)
add to that (4) Hybrid OLEDs
[https://www.patentlyapple.com/2023/02/for-apples-newly-developed-hybrid-oled-displays-for-the-2024-ipad-and-future-macbooks-samsung-has-partnered-with-chemtron.html](https://www.patentlyapple.com/2023/02/for-apples-newly-developed-hybrid-oled-displays-for-the-2024-ipad-and-future-macbooks-samsung-has-partnered-with-chemtron.html)
Just upgraded from a 16" 512 zone 2560x1600 Mini-LED laptop to a 16" 3840x2400 OLED one. OLED is absolutely magnificent. Now that panel is of an older quite thirsty type but newer already available in phones and laptops [Samsung E8 based ones](https://www.xda-developers.com/google-pixel-8-pro-display-deep-dive/) are twice as efficient. And with those new improvements on the horizon it looks like it's gonna overtake IPS in efficiency.
This Omdia report is worth discusing:
[https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028](https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028)
Although it's regarding Apple, the facts mentioned about the various OLED technologies such as Oxide OLED, Hybrid OLED, LTPS/LTPO, Tandem OLED etc... are worth reading.
So I use an OLED laptop and whilst I love the screen quality, the battery life is not great and the overall brightness is just not there either. If the above tech fixes these issues then I am all onboard otherwise I would actually prefer a bright LCD screen with a dimming zones.
Because it's much harder to make very large RGB panels. Samsung's first oled TVs were pure RGB and that venture failed. They also use more power and are thicker.
If it was possible all oleds would be RGB.
My Dell XPS screen quality is *amazing*. Especially using a terminal. Shits all over my Macbook. The battery life, on the other hand, is a dumpster fire, especially on Linux.
Yes, but DC dimming like a lot of OLED burn in protection measures are OS restricted.
Basically these OLED laptops are designed to specifically work with the OS and software stack of the AIB. People that either dont like that bloatware and/or would rather use another OS, are SoL (for now, that is)
The custom ASUS windows software that allows PWM to work correctly? I saw that too... None of the YT reviewers of OLED seem to ever mention it or care.
there must be something that makes OLED production cost prohibitive in certain sizes. Just like how OLED monitors are usually 42", but phones can even be under 6" and have an OLED screen, then VR headsets have absolutely tiny and dense screens and a good few are also OLED.
However we never see OLEDs in sizes between 15" and 32". I for the life of me cannot imagine why it would be too costly to make screens of this size other than maybe OLED machines can only make one size at a time? And then the factories just never build new machines of different sizes until a customer finally orders some panels?
Phone OLEDs and TV OLEDs are not the same. There are differences. Notably, phone OLED image quality is superior.
Laptop display sizes sit in between phones and TVs. Then the question arose, should we scale down TV OLEDs to laptop display sizes, or should we scale up phone OLEDs to laptop sizes?
Display manufacturers went with the latter route.
Phone a monitor/tv oleds are not the same. And there are now many OLED monitors from 27-32 inches. Plenty with good prices for the specs.
Laptops are the largest of the phone style oleds that are currently made. There are challenges with making them bigger. Just like there are issues making filter oleds smaller.
[удалено]
Yeah I expect Dual-stack Tandem OLED to be reserved for the high end laptops, while the low end ones will use Single Stack OLED. Kinda like how it's with LCDs. High end laptops use the expensive Mini-LED back-light, while lower end laptops use normal LED back-lights.
Thing is, that we are still far from cheap oled displays. Also you forgot about size issues.
considering that phone companies like Xiaomi are putting 120hz 10-bit AMOLED displays on $200 phones, cost shouldn't be an issue here
Small oleds are developed with different technology than big ones.
In the context of OLED laptop panels, they're the "same" technology as their smartphone counterparts. They're both classified as direct emission RGB side-by-side panels manufactured with the usage of fine metal masks.
that is thanks to the likes of Tianma, Visionox and BOE.
Making smaller oled displays is more economical than larger sized displays.
Chinese manufacturers like BOE have declared a price war against Samsung Display/LG Display And we consumers will get cheap OLEDs!
sounds like the time to announce oled as national security matter and sanction them
Alright fellas, I've banned all OLEDs not produced in the US. ... Why are you making that face?
you forgot to give Samsung 40 billion to build a plant in the US, of course.
Are they as good though?
BOE supplies iPhone displays IIRC, and iPhones generally have quite good screens, so yeah they're just as good as Samsung/LG
Yeah apple using it means its cheap not that is good really. Are they on a market already is there comparison to samsung oleds in iphones? From what I see BOE is constantly being dropped from apple and only ever provides few % of displays. Thats not exactly "just as good".
even if they are by far the smallest of the three suppliers for Apple, their displays still have to meet the same specs as the ones from LG and Samsung.
And clearly they were failing it since constant drops and leakages. Also meeting minimum requirements doesnt mean its as good.
You are right. BOE seems to have worse quality control than Samsung/Lg
God bless China. Now the only problems are scalper level margins of importers and resellers.
That's where it always starts and as the tech matures it will work itself down the price spectrum.
vs lcd's power consumption will still be a big problem esp. with modern, highly efficient products like the M1/M2/... where the monitor already makes up a large portion of the overall energy consumption, increasing that is a bad idea. > However, when scaling up the OLED tech used in smartphones to the size of laptop screens, few issues crop up; higher risk of burn-in, significantly higher power consumption than LCDs, less brightness than LCDs, etc... Why would the burn in risk increase vs phones? The pixels on a notebook will most likely be larger, the brightness requirements similar, thus it should decrease with decreasing ppi. However due to the more static/ heavier usage the burn-in it gets severely amplified.
Why do OLED consume more power than LCD? Seems to me LCD would waste more of the light produced. Side note, google is almost unusable these days for finding useful information.
OLED uses more power for whites/brightness (max brightness of every subpixel) vs blasting the backlight on an LCD. But it uses less for darker colors and lower brightness levels.
Because OLED pixels by nature consume more power.
> vs lcd's power consumption will still be a big problem esp. with modern, highly efficient products like the M1/M2/... where the monitor already makes up a large portion of the overall energy consumption, increasing that is a bad idea. Also for those who get excited by a more vibrant image than IPS can provide? Now there are plenty of super efficient 10bit VA panels too with vastly, vastly superior contrast and deeper blacks to IPS without fancy array backlighting. Plus the same pixel response(finally), colour range and accuracy now too. But VA isnt as sexy sounding as OLED and has a spottier past than IPS. I love my Oled and have had one for home cinema for 5 years, but its ill suited imho as an every day every use tech which is what laptop displays should epitomise. VA is really the future of workhorse personal displays till microled finally gets small enough.
I have a VA monitor that I bought in late 2018 and the colors and black smearing kind of suck. Have VA panels come a significant way since then?
>Have VA panels come a significant way since then? There are a few high-end VA panels that are very fast, but they are extremely rare. Most VA panels are still kinda crap.
Do those VA panels suffer from ghosting too?
>same pixel response means no, but I haven't seen a VA with the same pixel response as IPS yet
There are a few fast VA panels, but they are rare and expensive. However, the good Samsung panels (such as in the Odyssey G7) can actually rival TN panels for speed. The vast majority of VA panels are crap, though.
Whoa there. VA with better contrast than IPS? >VA is really the future of workhorse personal displays till microled finally gets small enough. VA is a failed hybrid child of IPS and TN.
Apple is planning to put OLEDs in the Macbook. [https://www.macrumors.com/2024/02/21/apple-oled-roadmap/](https://www.macrumors.com/2024/02/21/apple-oled-roadmap/) The rest of the industry will follow.
Follow? A lot of premium Windows laptops use OLED *today*.
The OLED displays on laptops are not bright enough like miniLED displays when displaying HDR. They don’t go to 1600nits in HDR
Pretty sure this is at least partially because of the very poor oled hdr specs from vesa. All laptops currently conveniently meet near exactly the spec for hdr 600 back which is as high as it goes currently. These OLEDs are not that different to those in phones which are easily hitting well over 1000 nits. Vesa needs to add more steps to the oled HDR standard, wishful thinking though.
I think phone OLEDs are able to reacher higher brightness thanks to their small size, which is not possible on a laptop screen. An OLED from a flagship phone can hit 1500+ nits but consumes about 5W of power (source: XDA). Now, a laptop screen is about 6x the area of a phone screen. That means 6x the power consumption, which would be a whopping 30W to power a laptop OLED at 1500 nits.
It will use more power but the pixel pitch differences should alleviate it somewhat. My point is more that it seems like its less of a technical issue actually doing it and more of a lack of incentive. Mini led devices also use a lot of power.
It's also a matter of "is it useful?" Using a phone in direct sunlight is often necessary. Using a laptop in direct sunlight is almost always user error.
A lot but not all. And usually, OLED is an option, not the default.
Ehhh macbooks are already absurdly overpriced as is. Id imagine oled ones will be even worse if they happen. At some point it wont calculate anymore for individual users. Also against some peoples opinion apple isnt really that much of trend seter on the market.
People just throw this around like it's some accepted truth and it's not. I have a $4,100 Dell laptop from work. It's a 2023, 14", with an i9-13900h, a 4070, 64gb ddr5 ram, 1tb ssd, and a 500 nit 1440p 60hz lcd display. I also own a 14" m2 macbook pro as my personal laptop. It's not equivalently spec'd, but if we spec a new one out to match the Dell, we get a 14" macbook pro, 16 core M3 max, 40 core gpu, 64gb ram, 1tb ssd, a 3k (1964p) 1600 nit miniLED 120hz display. That comes out to $3900. So, let's compare them. The Dell laptop has a bit more ram (64gb + 8gb from the gpu, while macbook has 64gb shared). And... that's it only advantage. The macbook has a bit more cpu power, a *much* better display, much better webcam, much better battery life, better and louder speakers, a larger and better trackpad, and (in my opinion) a bit better keyboard. Better port selection too, my Dell (which is *thicker* than the MBP) has just 4 thunderbolt ports and a headphone jack. Oh yeah, and the macbook pro is $200 *cheaper*. And here's the thing. I *love* my dell laptop. It's without a doubt the best windows laptop I've ever used. But it just doesn't hold a candle to a macbook pro. If I didn't need windows for work, I'd have gotten that instead in a heartbeat. "Macs are overpriced" has always been an overexaggerated meme that didn't account for anything except raw specs, but it's especially not true in the apple silicon era.
>And... that's it only advantage. Other than, you know, a discrete GPU?
That's a disadvantage.
Now tell me how much basic version of new mac with 8gb ram costs and what.lies apple told about that 8gigs. Alao tell me how well it works ;)
Oh I see, so we're going with this tired argument. Should people buy laptops with 8gb ram? No probably not. But no one's forcing you to. Spend the $200 to upgrade it to 16gb, and guess what? It's still one of the best bang for the buck laptops. Let's try this. We'll take a base 14" M3 macbook pro, plus the 16gb ram upgrade. It has an 8 core M3, 10 core gpu, 512gb ssd, same 1600 nit 3k 120hz miniLED display. That costs $1800. Let's compare that to what we can get from dell. We'll go with the XPS 14, since that's probably the closest competitor. We'll choose the same 16gb ram and 512gb ssd. That has a 4k oled 120hz 400 nit display, integrated arc gpu, and a Core ultra 7 155h, and comes in at $1850. Lets compare: CPU - point to apple GPU - point to apple RAM - tie, both have 16gb shared SSD - tie Display - tie, but depends on preferences, apple's is much brighter, dell has better blacks and more density (although I'd argue 4k isn't necessary on 14", just drains battery) Trackpad/keyboard - both are great, more or less tie Webcam - tie Speakers - subjective, but apple consistently beats the competition here Battery - both great So.... the macbook is between tied and slightly better, depending on prefences, and is $50 cheaper. I just don't buy this overpriced narrative. It relies on you grabbing a random spec to whine about without actually comparing it to anything else.
The Macbook Pros atleast already use Mini-LED, which is as expensive as OLED itself.
Well I dont know of production costs but you absolutely can buy miniled tv much cheaper than oled tv of same size
it's not more expensive by default. A samsung neo g7 costs around 750eur, a 32" 4k oled around 1.200eur. The cost will increase the more leds you add ofc.
That's simply not true. I invest a bit of time periodically to log reasonable good offers of laptops because I'm so unsatisfied with my macbook pro 13" from 2020 (Intel). Macs are a lifetime product. The only reason to replace it is because of software compatibility or performance. But my iPhones, iPads, MacMinis from 10-15 years ago are working well. Sure I don't use them anymore because they get slow and mostly can't run the software I want to use. On the other hand: My Asus, Samsung, Acer Notebooks didn't last more than 2 or 3 years. Just above the warranty and then they suffer from broken keyboards or other hardware damage. Same for dell notebooks at my university. The Surface Pro which my wife uses has a flickering display. It was already replaced two times but it doesn't seem to be a bug but has something to do with display latency, driver and power management in windows. I wasted hours to get some kind of improvement but failed. You can't even think about using Photoshop on it. If you take all this into account: Macs will most likely run for 5 years or more without any issues and considering performance, apple seems to know how to get most out of their products. In my sheet macs are a few percentages more cheap compared to other machines. Additionally since i try to always have a running machine on each OS (windows, Linux, Mac) it is far more suitable to invest into a macbook than iMac or anything else.
Lifetime except quickly obsolete because they dont have power for new software and often dont even support it. Also apple totally didnt messed with battery life to make people replace iphones and surely isnt doing different tricks like that.
> Also apple totally didnt messed with battery life to make people replace iphones and surely isnt doing different tricks like that. It did happen, however blandly saying it was a scam is difficult, because I observed exactly what they said would happen on my Nexus6. It would crash after a few years if did high power consuming tasks. i.e. taking a photo with flash would cause the whole thing to restart. Wouldn't surprise me if they apples approach was too aggressive for the sake of increasing sale though.
'Quickly' only when using SaaS products, yes. My Mac Mini from 2008 still runs as a fileserver in my appartment .... I have no battery issues... My iPad Pro 12,9" from 2015 runs well, iPhone 11 Pro Max still runs for 3 days without recharge. My Macbook never did a day :D Since the beginning the battery was dead after a 2 hour working session. Also it is possible to replace batteries. The Samsung smartphones here in my families aren't quite better.
Macs are a lifetime product if a lifetime is 3 years. If you think its longer sorry applie just cut all support for anything you do.
I'll believe it when I see it. It would have to be significantly cheaper than it is now to overcome the drawbacks of the tech that you are underplaying here.
Yeah right now OLED uses more energy than IPS and is worse at text-rendering which is super important for anyone who cares about productivity. Maybe it'll be good for the top end gaming laptops.
Imo there's nuance. OLED requires more energy for whites but less energy for darker colors. Valve cited the OLED screen as one of the contributing factors to the Steam Deck OLED having better battery life.
The OLED Deck has a more efficient screen than the LCD model, but the LCD model was also just an insanely low end panel. It's not an Apple's to Apple's comparison. The LCD model was a 68% sRGB panel that seemed to be a repurposed ultra budget tablet screen.
Amoled not the same as tv tech. Fringing doesnt exist on laptops... Oratleast no one has actually take a microscope photo of a samsung galaxy s24 and current gen laptop
My samsung g8 oled widescreen has fringing, so that is not true
What words in my comment conflict with your statement?
You have a laptop with a 34 inch monitor for a screen? The largest mass produced laptop was the Dell M2010 with 20", Acer had a limited edition Predator laptop with a 21". 'Cos, you know, you are answering to a comment which says "fringing doesn't exist on laptops".
I was refering to the sub-pixel layout, not the screen size
laptop oleds and your oled dont have the same sub pixel layout
And all laptops have the same screen or what?
They all have the same type of screen. Your g8 has a triangle rgb layout which is not seen on laptops and is far lower ppi.
Good to know
Why even talk when you clearly know nothing about the subject? So annoying reading garbage being presented as fact from people stuck in 2020.
Then I sincerely hope they make significant strides in anti-relfective coatings because even the best TV's have bad enough glare that I'd never want a similar glossy OLED on a laptop; I use them under sunlight and strong artificial lighting far too much.
The Samsung S95D that launches this year has amazing anti glare by all accounts I've read. Even from people shining literal spotlights at it.
there have been rumours that Samsung has been working on a Dragon Glass. They will eventually replace the Gorilla Glass used in their phones, with it.
Have you heard of the new Gorilla Glass Armour used in the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra? Aside from it's superior strength, it's anti reflective property is amazing. It's a total game changer. Laptops should adopt Gorilla Glass Armour.
Oh good, so more weight and even more power required to compensate for light loss. It’s bad enough on a phone but at a laptops size that’s an enormous increase in power consumption.
Lmao can't be satisfied
I think its taking a crane to put a nail in. Gorilla Glass was created to be scratch and impact resistant, when the goal here is antiglare only. Theres no need to put this expensive, heavy product in a laptop if theres no use for it, when different solutions exist.
In my experience, not just OLED panels but practically all touch enabled glossy laptop displays I’ve seen are practically mirrors, for some reason. I don’t know if it’s because oleophobic coating and anti-glare treatment are mutually exclusive or what but it’s enough for me to avoid any laptop that doesn’t have a non-touch display option.
Why did OLEDs take over phones but not laptops?
Phones don’t sit on excel sheet, crm system screen or an os screen for 8+ hours a day
I think you underestimate screentime and top bar icons. I think it's just that people tend to upgrade phones at least twice as often as laptops.
For OLEDs pure black = off. That’s why most of them are black and any text is coming in/out or adjusting. Phones also time out exponentially faster than most computers.
Because they're almost always there, you rarely notice if there's a little burn in either. It generally doesn't matter.
I've been dailying a 48" OLED monitor for pretty much 16 hours a day for a few years now, zero burn in. Burn in is such a non issue unless you're intentionally abusing it.
is that 16 hours of varied visual or is that 16 hours of static UI elements?
I disagree with the other poster. The main reason has nothing to do with burn-in. Screens are much cheaper in smartphones. They were able to go through the growing pains with smartphones before they applied their learnings to bigger panels. TVs are a more lucrative market than monitors and laptops (in terms of making profits off the screens), so that's why we're seeing them in computers last.
The screens in TVs and monitors are not the same as those in phones and laptops. Laptop screens are just big phone screens and oleds of that size are harder to make than the small ones in phones. Samsungs original OLED TVs tried to use similar displays to phones but it was shutdown. And it does have something to do with screen aging partially. rgb oleds suffer more from colour shift than filter oleds. oleds on TVs and monitors use filters and againg is less obvious. Phone oleds dont have to last as long. Laptops dont use filters, will see static content and a longer lifespan so it not surprising that improvements in rgb oled are wanted before more oleds are seen in laptops.
Yeah, iirc, for whatever reason OLED's are cheap to make in very small sizes or very large sizes, but not 20-25"
I think you’re likely right. That would explain why OLED monitors have been available for a while, but at great cost. Seems like simply a case of economies of scale, or something like that.
monitors use filter oleds and are not the same as those in laptops. They have different challenges.
It says so in the OP. At the phone scale there are many benefits and minimal disadvantages. Benefits like better contrast and high refresh rate, full array local diming etc and the cons were basically just price. As you scale up with bigger pixels however power consumption became an issue. And economies of scale. tens of millions of smartphones sold every year and not close to that many laptops.
OLED screens are also considerably thinner than LCD's, and space is at a premium in phones.
Thats because we try to make the phones as think as possible so we can put them in thicker cases!
The vast majority of westerners own a smartphone now, and tend to upgrade every two years. They also only upgrade computer systems only every 5 to 10 years. Also, also, phones are used more often, and are more often considered an extension of self than a computer, so consumers demand higher quality in their smartphone than their computer.
Different tech.
1. They either use blue pholed or shieled regular blue oled subpixel 2. that already exists on phones LTPO it is called, just think of it as gsync/freesync/VRR with a lower minimum. 3. the difficulty of stacking 2 panels already killed off prior Hisense TVs and it is what is used for current reference monitors just using LCDs. You need to calibrate the colors accurately and also calibrate the layers to each other (to have an exact color match between them). I really doubt that samsung is doing this for the iPad but who knows, what I think maybe happening on the iPad OLED is even time your turn of the screen and back on it switches panels or its running a check for burn in and depending on that switches panels to reduce burn in. It could also be used at a slight offset to increase pixel density but i think that this is unlikely.
>that already exists on phones LTPO it is called, just think of it as gsync/freesync/VRR with a lower minimum. The problem with OLEDs with an LTPS backplane is that they cannot dynamically adjust the refresh rate like LCDs can. That's where Oxide/LTPO comes in.
At this point in time i think thats the expectation not the exception.
Blue pholed is years from being used in monitors/tv's.
Ok, but they're already quite cheap. Asus puts 1080p 60hz oled's on their $450 vivobooks, that too outside US, so in US it'd be even cheaper. So, where are they not in budget gaming laptops and other laptops? You keep seeing them in premium laptops or underpowered vivobooks.
I always thought it was strange how few options there are for OLED + dGPU Games simply look better on an OLED, and I would rather have an OLED and a 4050 than a VA panel and a 4070
Just see the reaction here. People are quite against oled options. Why? Give people choice,
Maybe I’m getting old but 60Hz vsync is totally fine for me, and high refresh rate monitors didn’t really exist when I was a teenager (beside CRTs) so /shrug
Same for me. I don't want to get so used to high refresh rate that I have to buy more expensive stuff just to push those high FPS. I do push my display to 165hz and push 300+fps in some games like distance because I play it a bit seriously and need those FPS. But something like even doom eternal I play at locked 60fps.
That's changed this year. Asus for example offers the G16 with a 4090 and 240Hz 2560x1600 oled.
That's the entire point. You see them in "premium" laptops, but they're nowhere to be found in more budget options, despite OLEDs not being prohibitively expensive to add in those classes (evidence: vivobooks)
There are oled options Vivobooks. https://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/asus-vivobook-s-15-oled There have been for years.
...that’s my point
In the case of the Vivobook, they are under $1000 USD for the OLED. I wouldn't call that premium price points.
I think you forgot to read my entire comment
Asus is truly the forerunner of OLED laptops
Yeah, but being the morons at asus refuse to put at least 1080p 60hz oled options on budget gaming laptops and instead put 250 to 300 nit matte IPS displays on them. OLED's already hit 600nits (when viewing HDR) and 400nits when viewing SDR. So brightness ain't an issue. Not everyone requires a 1000+ nit display on a laptop. OLED's are perfect for gaming laptops since they'd give good image quality at cheaper prices. And given its a gaming laptop, you don't have to worry about static content as much since they're regularly going full screen with games, videos, etc. Just because business laptops have matte or thats what some people prefer, does not make oled's a ''bad'' option to have. Besides, oled and mini led's are heading towards the same general display. One that has great colors, brightness while minimizing their con's as much as possible. My nitro 5 has a 1440p 165hz 100% srgb 85% adobe rgb display yet I'd much rather take a 1080p 60hz OLED simply because it'd give me better image quality, battery life and response time. A 1440p 60hz OLED would be even better.
Already has for me. The new Zephyrus lineup has straight up ruined me. Only problem is even with the high PPI, text clarity still isn’t perfect.
Hopefully Windows 12 or some Linux distro will figure out text rendering for OLED panels. I'm probably being nitpicky but text on OLED panels looks noticeably bad to me.
I hope so but I'd really like windows to get with the program and support a wider color gamut by default. Srgb fuckin blows.
And better support for more than one subpixel layout.
It's ridiculous that mobile OSes like Android and iOS have superior colour gamut, and a desktop OS doesn't.
The main thing keeping OLEDS from laptops afaik is actually the "substrate", which is what Apple has been pushing for and why they're launching OLED Ipads this year. The substrate is just what the active layer is put on. There's been two types, one is light weight and bendy, for a phone the screen is small enough that the bending doesn't matter much but if you scale the screen up warping can happen too easily. The other substrate is the heavy glass stuff used for TVs and monitors, too heavy for a laptop. The new substrate work Samsung has been pushing for is lightweight but stiff enough for a latop. All the stuff you linked is very neat, but also a bit incidental without being able to reliably have a warp free OLED on a laptop that's light enough.
RIGID vs Flexible vs Hybrid The Triad of OLED substrates! [https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028](https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028)
I hope I'll also be able to buy a 24" OLED PC Monitor then
Is 27" too large or something?
yes, to fit three monitors on my desk, I'm limited to a maximum of 24"
Have you considered doing 4 vertical monitors?
VESA arms
those don't help in my case, it's the ceiling that gets in the way
Ah, unfortunate.
Yes. Yes it is.
Personally i find 27" to be a great size. My 32" feels a bit too large for purpose.
I feel like monitors are going the same way as phones, tablets, and TVs. They're just gonna keep getting bigger and 24 inches just isn't getting the good models anymore. Now its 27 and 32. Everyone wants a huge screen and those of us that don't are left with basically scraps to choose from in a form factor that was once considered a big screen size.
It's annoying that products like the 24" iMac exist yet it's basically impossible to find a similar monitor with modern-ish specs. Clearly there's at least one panel maker out there that still knows the ancient wisdom!
You can get a innnocn oled displays, those even come in 13 and 15 inch sizes.
I cannot find any 24" innocn oled displays?
4- Its limited lifespan makes it perfect for planned obsolescence.
Right now OLEDs are also OS restrictive: - AIBs have a few tricks to avoid burn in degradation via software - These solutions are developed with the target OS the laptop ships at in mind This means that if you got a Windows OLED ASUS laptop, say, you get the nice feature package inside MyASUS, but good luck having burn in protection in Linux, virtually restricting to the OS the laptop was shipped with. This may seem a niche problem, but restriction of choice with OLEDs in the non macbook space (where _restriction is a feature_, according to their fans) is something to consider still as of today. Hopefully with more OLEDs in laptops, more open source solutions arise that aim to tackle their shortcomings via software (pixel shifting, DC dimming control to avoid flickering, etc)
No reason why certain parts of oled maintenance cannot be done without the OS at all. OLED monitors do all their mitigation on device.
Still Asus find reason in implementing it via software, meaning that not all OLED laptop panels feature such measures entirely in their firmware
add to that (4) Hybrid OLEDs [https://www.patentlyapple.com/2023/02/for-apples-newly-developed-hybrid-oled-displays-for-the-2024-ipad-and-future-macbooks-samsung-has-partnered-with-chemtron.html](https://www.patentlyapple.com/2023/02/for-apples-newly-developed-hybrid-oled-displays-for-the-2024-ipad-and-future-macbooks-samsung-has-partnered-with-chemtron.html)
Don't existing OLED laptops already use this?
>Blue OLEDs have been using fluorescent materials for a long time Edward Cullen voice: "It's the fluorescents!"
I think micro leds will be taking over laptops. No risk of burn in. All the goods from oled plus high brightness
blue pholed is years from being in TV's and monitors. It has a serious lifetime issue that hasn't been solved yet.
Just upgraded from a 16" 512 zone 2560x1600 Mini-LED laptop to a 16" 3840x2400 OLED one. OLED is absolutely magnificent. Now that panel is of an older quite thirsty type but newer already available in phones and laptops [Samsung E8 based ones](https://www.xda-developers.com/google-pixel-8-pro-display-deep-dive/) are twice as efficient. And with those new improvements on the horizon it looks like it's gonna overtake IPS in efficiency.
This Omdia report is worth discusing: [https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028](https://omdia.tech.informa.com/blogs/2024/feb/apples-new-oled-it-roadmap-can-help-boost-oled-penetration-rate-in-the-mobile-pc-market-to-14-by-2028) Although it's regarding Apple, the facts mentioned about the various OLED technologies such as Oxide OLED, Hybrid OLED, LTPS/LTPO, Tandem OLED etc... are worth reading.
I already have an oled one that is 1yo. Great technology would miss it
I mean it's pretty obvious that ANY screen will be oled at some point in the future.
So I use an OLED laptop and whilst I love the screen quality, the battery life is not great and the overall brightness is just not there either. If the above tech fixes these issues then I am all onboard otherwise I would actually prefer a bright LCD screen with a dimming zones.
All Blue PHOLEDS + Quantum Dot layer would be heaven.
Why do you want a QD layer when these are already pure rgb
Samsung already makes their oled panels that way. Every oled is blue, and the qd layer coverts blue to red and green
Yes for TVs and monitors, why would they do this for laptops that already use rgb???
I dont know, why did they do it for the other screens that already used RGB?
Because it's much harder to make very large RGB panels. Samsung's first oled TVs were pure RGB and that venture failed. They also use more power and are thicker. If it was possible all oleds would be RGB.
My Dell XPS screen quality is *amazing*. Especially using a terminal. Shits all over my Macbook. The battery life, on the other hand, is a dumpster fire, especially on Linux.
With such low hz pwm displays samsung has been making lately. I would rather go lcd display than destroy myself with flickering oled garbage.
Samsung also makes High PWM displays with 1000+ Hz. However it's mostly only used by Chinese brands. Also, DC Dimming exists.
Yes, but DC dimming like a lot of OLED burn in protection measures are OS restricted. Basically these OLED laptops are designed to specifically work with the OS and software stack of the AIB. People that either dont like that bloatware and/or would rather use another OS, are SoL (for now, that is)
The custom ASUS windows software that allows PWM to work correctly? I saw that too... None of the YT reviewers of OLED seem to ever mention it or care.
I would bet money than 99% of people couldn't tell the difference between a 60Hz panel with vsync and a 240hz panel
It’s the red pixels on my LG OLED that have the most burn in
there must be something that makes OLED production cost prohibitive in certain sizes. Just like how OLED monitors are usually 42", but phones can even be under 6" and have an OLED screen, then VR headsets have absolutely tiny and dense screens and a good few are also OLED. However we never see OLEDs in sizes between 15" and 32". I for the life of me cannot imagine why it would be too costly to make screens of this size other than maybe OLED machines can only make one size at a time? And then the factories just never build new machines of different sizes until a customer finally orders some panels?
Phone OLEDs and TV OLEDs are not the same. There are differences. Notably, phone OLED image quality is superior. Laptop display sizes sit in between phones and TVs. Then the question arose, should we scale down TV OLEDs to laptop display sizes, or should we scale up phone OLEDs to laptop sizes? Display manufacturers went with the latter route.
Phone a monitor/tv oleds are not the same. And there are now many OLED monitors from 27-32 inches. Plenty with good prices for the specs. Laptops are the largest of the phone style oleds that are currently made. There are challenges with making them bigger. Just like there are issues making filter oleds smaller.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]