LG Teases UltraGear 4K UHD IPS Monitor with HDMI 2.1

Zarathustra said:
Unless it has unforseen problems, this might just be the one that makes me go OLED.
Click to expand...
Biggest thing with OLED is potential burn in from static images being on the screen too long. Other than that. . .pretty much all good. I thought IPS was incredible and then when I got my LG C9 it was a whole new world.
 
Peter_Brosdahl said:
Biggest thing with OLED is potential burn in from static images being on the screen too long. Other than that. . .pretty much all good. I thought IPS was incredible and then when I got my LG C9 it was a whole new world.
Click to expand...

I have been concerned about this, but every time I bring it up with actual owners of LG OLED sets who use them on the desktop, I have been told its a complete and utter non-issue on modern screens.

I have no personal experience to speak of though.
 
I’ve had a 55” C7 for a while now. It’s our main screen for watching TV and PS4. I guess going on 4 years old.

Well a few weeks ago the kid had a sleepover and they left the TV on the PS login screen when they passed out. Pretty much a solid red screen with the login in the center for ... hours - god knows how long, at max brightness and no power saving.

Yeah, it got some burn in. I can only see the faint outline of the login on a solid red screen; it isn’t present in any other color, including white. I can’t see it in any moving images. It does bother me that I know it’s there, but unless I changed the color of the PS background back to red, I never see it.

But even after that - the screen still looks incredible, and I absolutely would get another. So I won’t lie and say it’s impossible. It is a drawback for OLED. I could see if you were a shop or something and just left the screen on CNN chyron or something all day, or left it as a monitor with the start menu on all day without letting it sleep - yeah could be an issue. I went years of standard gaming with static HUD elements and what not with no issues though.
 
Zarathustra said:
I have been concerned about this, but every time I bring it up with actual owners of LG OLED sets who use them on the desktop, I have been told its a complete and utter non-issue on modern screens.

I have no personal experience to speak of though.
Click to expand...
I admit that I don't take risks when I do sessions on the C9. I usually disable MSI AB and I keep track of how time I spend playing something with static OSD items. Probably overkill but I don't want to take the chance. The good news is that this tech has been out long enough in the wild reports should start popping up around the internet if it really is an issue.
 
Know what I would appreciate? Some modern 16:10 solutions. After 1920x1200 back around 2010, I always intended to move to 2560x1600 at some point (I had been using 30" and 32" 1600p monitors at work, which is where I grew fond of them). In the end I winded up on 2560x1440 because 1600p monitors don't really exist anymore. Certainly not any with HDR and high refresh rates and VRR. I don't even see 16:10 that much in the professional sector anymore. The only places I really see 16:10 crop up are with some random-@ss laptop models that have screens like 3840x2400, as well as 2560x1600. 1600x1200 was the last non-widescreen resolution I was on. Ever since I left CRTs permanently and made the jump to widescreen formats, I've been on 16:10, starting with 1680x1050. I don't like being on 16:9 on PC. It feels weird, feels a wee bit too restrictive vertically. I wish 1920x1200, 2560x1600, and 3840x2400 were was common as 1080p, 1440p, and 2160p. Ah well, a man can dream.
 
Last edited:
DrezKill said:
Know what I would appreciate? Some modern 16:10 solutions. After 1920x1200 back around 2010, I always intended to move to 2560x1600 at some point (I had been using 30" and 32" 1600p monitors at work, which is where I grew fond of them). In the end I winded up on 2560x1440 because 1600p monitors don't really exist anymore. Certainly not any with HDR and high refresh rates and VRR. I don't even see 16:10 that much in the professional sector anymore. The only places I really see 16:10 crop up are with some random-@ss laptop models that have screens like 3840x2400, as well as 2560x1600. 1600x1200 was the last non-widescreen resolution I was on. Ever since I left CRTs permanently and made the jump to widescreen formats, I've been on 16:10, starting with 1680x1050. I don't like being on 16:9 on PC. It feels weird, feels a wee bit too restrictive vertically. I wish 1920x1200, 2560x1600, and 3840x2400 were was common as 1080p, 1440p, and 2160p. Ah well, a man can dream.
Click to expand...
I don't understand this train of thought. You get the same height on a 27" 16:9 as you do a 25" 16:10, but more horizontal space.
 
Brian_B said:
I’ve had a 55” C7 for a while now. It’s our main screen for watching TV and PS4. I guess going on 4 years old.

Well a few weeks ago the kid had a sleepover and they left the TV on the PS login screen when they passed out. Pretty much a solid red screen with the login in the center for ... hours - god knows how long, at max brightness and no power saving.

Yeah, it got some burn in. I can only see the faint outline of the login on a solid red screen; it isn’t present in any other color, including white. I can’t see it in any moving images. It does bother me that I know it’s there, but unless I changed the color of the PS background back to red, I never see it.

But even after that - the screen still looks incredible, and I absolutely would get another. So I won’t lie and say it’s impossible. It is a drawback for OLED. I could see if you were a shop or something and just left the screen on CNN chyron or something all day, or left it as a monitor with the start menu on all day without letting it sleep - yeah could be an issue. I went years of standard gaming with static HUD elements and what not with no issues though.
Click to expand...
Peter_Brosdahl said:
I admit that I don't take risks when I do sessions on the C9. I usually disable MSI AB and I keep track of how time I spend playing something with static OSD items. Probably overkill but I don't want to take the chance. The good news is that this tech has been out long enough in the wild reports should start popping up around the internet if it really is an issue.
Click to expand...

I'm not too concerned about games and video content. I'll play the same game for ~40 hours at a time, but when I move on to the next one, and they are rarely particularly high brightness or contrast.

My main concern is that most of what my desktop gets used for is not entertainment or media consumption. I do a lot of work, with the desktop visible for hours at a time. I'd imagine menu bars and start menus can start getting burned in.
 
Armenius said:
I don't understand this train of thought. You get the same height on a 27" 16:9 as you do a 25" 16:10, but more horizontal space.
Click to expand...
Just wish I had more vertical space to go with that extra horizontal space. That's actually a negative for me, that my 27" 16:9 display has basically the same vertical dimensions as my previous 24" 16:10 display. My primary display grew wider, but didn't get taller. I think that's also why my 27" didn't feel as big as I expected when I first got it. The jump from 16:10 22" to 16:10 24" felt bigger than the jump from 16:10 24" to 16:9 27". I think 27" 16:10 would have made a bigger impact on me. Ah well, no biggie. But yeah, if I could just have the same exact monitor I got now, same width but with the extra vertical space, that would have been awesome. I've grown really accustomed to 16:10. Shiat, I wouldn't mind seeing it with HDTVs as well.

Always been a pet peeve of mine when a PC game doesn't truly support 16:10, just displays letterboxed 16:9. Yeah game devs, I like having a 16:10 monitor but pretending it is a 16:9 display, and just wasting the extra space. That's a real hoot.
 
DrezKill said:
Just wish I had more vertical space to go with that extra horizontal space. That's actually a negative for me, that my 27" 16:9 display has basically the same vertical dimensions as my previous 24" 16:10 display. My primary display grew wider, but didn't get taller. I think that's also why my 27" didn't feel as big as I expected when I first got it. The jump from 16:10 22" to 16:10 24" felt bigger than the jump from 16:10 24" to 16:9 27". I think 27" 16:10 would have made a bigger impact on me. Ah well, no biggie. But yeah, if I could just have the same exact monitor I got now, same width but with the extra vertical space, that would have been awesome. I've grown really accustomed to 16:10. Shiat, I wouldn't mind seeing it with HDTVs as well.

Always been a pet peeve of mine when a PC game doesn't truly support 16:10, just displays letterboxed 16:9. Yeah game devs, I like having a 16:10 monitor but pretending it is a 16:9 display, and just wasting the extra space. That's a real hoot.
Click to expand...

I too like 16:10. My 2560x1600 Dell U3011 was awesome. As was my 24" 1920x1200 Dell 2405FPW

I don't know why you'd want it on a TV though. POretty much all Movie and TV content available to consumers is formatted in 16:9. A 16:10 TV would spend most of its life letterboxed.
 
Dell started putting 16:10 panels in their XPS line last year, and they're putting them in their Latitude line this year.

I'm enjoying the 15" on my XPS15, I'd definitely missed 1920x1200 myself too!
 
Zarathustra said:
I don't know why you'd want it on a TV though. POretty much all Movie and TV content available to consumers is formatted in 16:9. A 16:10 TV would spend most of its life letterboxed.
Click to expand...
Well I mean I'd want videos to start coming in full 16:10 format. But yes I agree, a 16:10 TV would go to waste most of its life displaying only letterboxed content.

My 24" was a Dell U2410 (RIP), and my brother has a Dell U2412. LG panels in both. I heard a lot of praise for the 2405FPW, awesome that you have a U3011!

LazyGamer said:
Dell started putting 16:10 panels in their XPS line last year, and they're putting them in their Latitude line this year.

I'm enjoying the 15" on my XPS15, I'd definitely missed 1920x1200 myself too!
Click to expand...
Ahhh very good!

Yeah 1200p was f*cking awesome. I longed for 1600p for so many years. I also enjoyed 2400p when I used nVidia DSR on my 1200p display. When I move to 4K, that's what I want, 3840x2400, not 3840x2160.
 
DrezKill said:
Just wish I had more vertical space to go with that extra horizontal space. That's actually a negative for me, that my 27" 16:9 display has basically the same vertical dimensions as my previous 24" 16:10 display. My primary display grew wider, but didn't get taller. I think that's also why my 27" didn't feel as big as I expected when I first got it. The jump from 16:10 22" to 16:10 24" felt bigger than the jump from 16:10 24" to 16:9 27". I think 27" 16:10 would have made a bigger impact on me. Ah well, no biggie. But yeah, if I could just have the same exact monitor I got now, same width but with the extra vertical space, that would have been awesome. I've grown really accustomed to 16:10. Shiat, I wouldn't mind seeing it with HDTVs as well.

Always been a pet peeve of mine when a PC game doesn't truly support 16:10, just displays letterboxed 16:9. Yeah game devs, I like having a 16:10 monitor but pretending it is a 16:9 display, and just wasting the extra space. That's a real hoot.
Click to expand...
Well aspect ratio is horizontal to vertical dimensions, which is why we use the "widescreen" terminology instead of "shortscreen." Meaning the vertical pitch is going to be fixed. Since we measure displays along the diagonal the length of the hypotenuse is going to get longer as the aspect ratio increases. Meaning a 25" 16:10 screen is the same size as a 27" 16:9. You would have to compare a 29.2" 16:9 screen against a 27" 16:10 to get an apples-to-apples comparison.
 
Denpepe said:
Have a look here if you haven't already for burn in test results Real Life OLED Burn-In Test on 6 TVs - RTINGS.com

I'm still contemplating my choices, my bad eyesight would make it seem bigger would be better, but too big is also not good, my 40 inch samsung TV is nice for TV use and console, but for PC when I sit closer it is too big.
Click to expand...
Yep, I'm an avid rtings reader. This was one of the first articles I read before I got my C9. I keep hoping they'd update it again since it's been well over a year now.
 
I'm always flapping about my first IPS 4K display that I got years ago and it changed my expectations forever in terms of anything I'd expect from a display afterward. At the time I got it on sale for $1100.
www.displayspecifications.com

31" LG 31MU97 - Specifications

Specifications of LG 31MU97. Display: 31 in, AH-IPS, W-LED, 4096 x 2160 pixels, Viewing angles (H/V): 178 ° / 178 °, Brightness: 450 cd/m², Static contrast: 1000 : 1, Dynamic contrast: 1000000 : 1, Refresh rate: 56 Hz - 61 Hz, sRGB: 100 %, Adobe RGB: 99.5 %, Dimensions: 736.7 x 407.5 x 52.4 mm...
www.displayspecifications.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top