• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

QD-OLED vs WRGB OLED vs Mini LED TV First Impressions at CES 2022 - Them COLOURS!

ParaSeoul

Member


Timestamps: ===========
0:00 QD-OLED on top
1:30 Caveat #1-All displays were uncalibrated and in Vivid mode
2:24 Caveat #2-Comparision was against 2021 models
3:33 Caveat #3-Content was chosen to flatter QD-OLEDs strengths more
4:08 QD-OLED Advantage #1- More saturated colors at higher luminance levels than WRGB OLEDs
4:29 Advantage #2- Better viewing angles than WRGB OLEDs (Minor since WRGB OLEDs already have great viewing angles)
5:22 Advantage #3-Better reflection handling

Estimated pricing for QD-OLEDs is thought to be in the $8000+ range.
 
Last edited:

elliot5

Member
Sounds like in non vivid mode with calibrated white points it should still be a decent upgrade, but remains to be seen how substantial. I’m excited to see some face offs with the G2 and A95K
 

rofif

Banned
Nice. QD oled will be very expensive for now.
LG already have 96-99% dci p3 coverage.
So qd layer is just a different way of going there and with square rgb pixels to that.
Sounds advantageous but we will see.

Lg originally added white LED because it cheats for higher brightness and white organic led supposedly lives the longest before burn in. So LG wanted to let other pixels go easy while white one works
 

thebigmanjosh

Gold Member
Nice. QD oled will be very expensive for now.
LG already have 96-99% dci p3 coverage.
So qd layer is just a different way of going there and with square rgb pixels to that.
Sounds advantageous but we will see.

Lg originally added white LED because it cheats for higher brightness and white organic led supposedly lives the longest before burn in. So LG wanted to let other pixels go easy while white one works
Color volume will be massively improved. The QD displays also received an award for 99%DCIP3/90%+ Rec2020 which make sense because that white subpixel won't be overpowering the other colors at higher brightness.

I just wanna know how many nits at fullscreen white
Samsung/video says:
  • 100%: 200 nits
  • 10%: 1000 nits
  • <3%: 1500 nits
Which compared to A90J (calibrated):
  • 100%: 180 nits
  • 10%: 840 nits
  • <3%: 800 nits
C1:
  • 100%: 130 nits
  • 10%: 760 nits
  • <3%: 760 nits
Vincent raises a good point in his video. All of the QD comparisons are using vivid mode, so the real number will likely be much lower, and somewhat disappointing when you consider the A90J can hit 1200-1300 in similar modes.
 
Last edited:
Is QD-OLED more resistant to burn in?
Probably not seeing blue led has the worst lifespan.

That's why LG avoids it using white leds with a color filter on top.

The fact it allegedly loses less light in the color conversion would give it an edge, but seeing they're using the worst diodes it probably just evens things out - best case scenario.
 
will this be better than the new macbook screens?
Same advantages and same disadvantages against regular OLED on that front.

IQ will be superior, but there is reason why Apple is not using them on macbooks/ipads. Top brightness will be lower too.
 
Last edited:

Spukc

always chasing the next thrill
Same advantages and same disadvantages against regular OLED on that front.

IQ will be superior, but there is reason why Apple is not using them on macbooks/ipads. Top brightness will be lower too.
Ah no need for me
To care then 🤓
I am blown away by the brightness of my MBP
 
Last edited:

rofif

Banned
Color volume will be massively improved. The QD displays also received an award for 99%DCIP3/90%+ Rec2020 which make sense because that white subpixel won't be overpowering the other colors at higher brightness.


Samsung/video says:
  • 100%: 200 nits
  • 10%: 1000 nits
  • <3%: 1500 nits
Which compared to A90J (calibrated):
  • 100%: 180 nits
  • 10%: 840 nits
  • <3%: 800 nits
C1:
  • 100%: 130 nits
  • 10%: 760 nits
  • <3%: 760 nits
Vincent raises a good point in his video. All of the QD comparisons are using vivid mode, so the real number will likely be much lower, and somewhat disappointing when you consider the A90J can hit 1200-1300 in similar modes.
Sounds great. But judging by the price of A95 which is first qd oled tv, that’s like 8 grand
 

kevm3

Member
So where can we see these tvs at in person? It's kind of worthless looking at these comparisons through current technology
 

rofif

Banned
OLED is dim.
No.
150 nits full screen white.
And up to 750 peak windows.
In sdr I play at locked 40 oled brightness so that’s about 120 nits appropriate for sdr. Even then, full white loading screen makes you squint when some games load. Keep in mind that when you use it as a monitor, it’s huge screen close. So that’s brighter than same 120 on small monitor

And hdr is just great. Looking out a cave, window or in the light is super bright and almost hurting because the contrast is so good. You exit that cave in uncharted and it blows your eyes away.

I find that in real usage scenario relatively low full screen brightness almost never comes into play. It’s always bright objects, lamps, fire, sun etc. And it’s all good there.

Not sure how much brighter I would like it before it got uncomfortable. That said, I play with blinds or in the evening. But I did the same with monitor. Try playing darker game during the day. No amount of brightness will help you. Dark details will get lost. I am not sure why people want brighter screens. If you watch a good movie or game during the day in the sun… wtf
 
Last edited:

dotnotbot

Member
Vincent raises a good point in his video. All of the QD comparisons are using vivid mode, so the real number will likely be much lower, and somewhat disappointing when you consider the A90J can hit 1200-1300 in similar modes.

Question is if those prototype QD-OLED displays from Samsung feature heatsinks. If they're using just vanilla panels then Sony A95K equipped with heatsink (it's already confirmed it will have one) should be noticeably brighter.
 
Last edited:

Hoddi

Member
Point is I’m not investing so much cash, even in OLED to have the kids put their fucking hands on it anyway. Kuro 9th gen is fine until the prices drop.



It’s damn fine in fact for ~12 ish years old tech. Smoke it? Hell naw.

Don't sweat it. I already have an OLED in the living room but I still prefer to play on my old plasma. OLEDs have a great picture but they're significantly worse at handling motion.

It's still a great TV and all but I have no intention to throw out my plasma yet.
 

Kuranghi

Member
Don't sweat it. I already have an OLED in the living room but I still prefer to play on my old plasma. OLEDs have a great picture but they're significantly worse at handling motion.

It's still a great TV and all but I have no intention to throw out my plasma yet.

Lots of people on GAF appear to love that super fast pixel response time of OLEDs and think VA panels with 3/10ms for 80/100% are "useless" and I just don't get it, I can see how its awesome for pixel art and/or any game with constant lateral motion but generally I prefer a bit of smearing/blur to smooth out 30hz and even 60hz sometimes.

When I watch 24hz or 30hz content on my ZD9 (4ms for 80% and 30ms for 100%, response time) it looks so much better than OLED 24hz/30hz motion to me, its not like the frames are all blended together or anything, you still see all the detail its just that wee bit smoother which stops your eyes from adding that stutter.
 
$8k? I mean CES usually does show tech a few years too early, but yikes. LG has time to improve their displays even more I guess.

OLED monitors are the next frontier of interest to me. I can’t believe display processing hasn’t evolved much to enhance gaming either.
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
Point is I’m not investing so much cash, even in OLED to have the kids put their fucking hands on it anyway. Kuro 9th gen is fine until the prices drop.



It’s damn fine in fact for ~12 ish years old tech. Smoke it? Hell naw.

I had a top of the range Panasonic Plasma back in the day, was a fantastic TV but it was also a fucking brute and i dont care what you say it only ever truly shined in a darkened room & during winter, come Summer and bright rooms the picture took a hit when i eventually replaced it with a Sony X93C i immediately noticed a massive difference (i bought it summer time) both in brightness AND resolution, everything became sharper and colours popped, yeah the blacks werent as good but the PQ & Motion where fantastic when i replaced the X93 with an Oled CX it was another fuck me moment, true blacks, incredible HDR and colours that looked insane and as for all this motion bollocks.. it looks damn fine to me and utterly smokes my old TV, hell you can pick them up for next to nothing and it would smoke that old ass Kuro, movies and games will suddenly have details pop that you've never seen before.. as for the kids, my TV is on a fucking tri-pod type stand m8, if the kids get so much as within 10ft of it i'm yelling, the Kuro was the pinnacle of TV tech back in the day, but tech especially TV tech has moved on and i wouldnt trade 4K & HDR for anything.
 

Elios83

Member
Waiting for the prices of the 55" models and Samsung to announce its own QD-OLED TVs.
This is obviously the most interesting TV technology of this year until microLED becomes affordable at human prices and normal screen sizes and it will probably take until 2025.
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
I'll be hanging onto my CX until modular micro LED becomes a non professional footballer TV... hdmi2.1, 4K 120hz, VRR along with an insanely good picture will do me for a load of years, fucking rate my eyeballs are deteriorating i'll prob be too fucking old to see the difference
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
People said that microled was 3-4 years away...were they lying?!

I have a c1 but i never keep a tv for more than 3 years.
3yrs? man i thought i was bad with +5yrs before considering changing.. tbh i go check out the latest TV's at a big Currys near me every once in a while and i just ain't seeing any worthwhile upgrades, sure they're bigger, bit brighter, bit faster but as for the fundamental picture quality, i ain't seeing the leap over OLED that would justify a new telly
 

Elios83

Member
People said that microled was 3-4 years away...were they lying?!

I have a c1 but i never keep a tv for more than 3 years.

Microled is already available this year but the smallest screen size is 89" and the price is around 100K dollars :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Only big companies, institutes and mega rich people can justify that price for a TV.
At the rate Samsung has been able to evolve the tech it will take 4 years to get something under 10K dollars unless there is some major breakthrough in manufacturing technology.
 

GymWolf

Member
3yrs? man i thought i was bad with +5yrs before considering changing.. tbh i go check out the latest TV's at a big Currys near me every once in a while and i just ain't seeing any worthwhile upgrades, sure they're bigger, bit brighter, bit faster but as for the fundamental picture quality, i ain't seeing the leap over OLED that would justify a new telly
I know, but when you are an enthusiast and you break your ass at work for 9 hours a day, sometimes you just want the new shiny thing on the market.

Maybe i'm gonna wait 4 years if after 3 years the improvements are gonna be only about brightness (which i give 2 fucks about since i always watch\play stuff on a dark room where even 100 nits fucking blind me)
 
Last edited:

GymWolf

Member
Nobody knows for sure, but to me affordable means I can buy a 65 inch TV for 2500 euros/dollars. The 2022 TV is 89 inches and will likely cost around 100k dollars, maybe more. There's a long way to go.

Microled is already available this year but the smallest screen size is 89" and the price is around 100K dollars :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Only big companies, institutes and mega rich people can justify that price for a TV.
At the rate Samsung has been able to evolve the tech it will take 4 years to get something under 10K dollars unless there is some major breakthrough in manufacturing technology.
Well fuck me, then i guess that my next tv is still gonna be an oled screen...
 

Elios83

Member
Well fuck me, then i guess that my next tv is still gonna be an oled screen...

QD-OLED seems a good improvement over traditional OLED for brightness and color saturation issues. Burn in will still be a issue

Mini-LED are also great TVs with excellent brightness, HDR and no burn in but the price to pay is a bit of blooming in certain situations.

Microled is best of two worlds but it will take a few years to become consumer friendly so it's useless to wait indeed if you need a new TV right now.
 
Well fuck me, then i guess that my next tv is still gonna be an oled screen...
For me, I can imagine buying a QD-OLED in 3-4 years, and then in another 4-5 years I'll switch to microLED. While we all want the holy grail, I think current WOLEDs are already a solid 8/10, and QD-OLEDs are gonna be a solid 9/10, so it's not like we gonna live with shitty TVs for the next decade.
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
I know, but when you are an enthusiast and you break your ass at work for 9 hours a day, sometimes you just want the new shiny thing on the market.

Maybe i'm gonna wait 4 years if after 3 years the improvements are gonna be only about brightness (which i give w fucks about since i always watch\play stuff on a dark room where even 100 nits fucking blind me)
I hear ya when your busting ur ass putting a roof over everyone's head its nice to occasionally treat oneself and i do like pealing off that clear sticky cover on some new shiny piece of tech but telly wise the only thing I'm seeing that would make me change my LGCX is MicroLED and that's years aware from being affordable, for now i'll scratch that new tech itch with the PSVR2 when it releases
 
Top Bottom