The volumetric losses getting these products across the ocean must be significant and you’d fully expect the packing Co. subbed out for the job to understand this, or if done in-house to of course have an understanding at how the margins are going to be shit to begin with before even factoring in returns. This is the first time that I’ve read about lemon packaging bricking a new monitor line deployment so it must be a pretty big oversight for Dell of all companies. That truly sucks for the folks who shelled out only to get an RMA or return experience. It’s one thing to get a bad panel (remember hunting for dead pixels?) or be disgusted by a bad IPS glow, VA falloff, or hazy anti-glare coatings but pre-damaged screen faces. Oops.
I buy exclusively Dell monitors and PCs for my department and the packaging has always been great, and IMO getting better as time goes by, at least for laptops. Seems like a giant blunder to screw that up when they already know how to do it right.
Apparently this problem has existed since AW3423DW and Dell has not done anything about it to this day. Maybe there is a reason there is no peel film on it, maybe the outer layer is softer than other screens, who knows, but there ought to be a way to package these to prevent scratches. I've bought many monitors over the years, many Dells also, which I always thought were excellent, but this one was the first one that came pre-scratched.
At least Dell's exchange policy is very good and painless. I already have a replacement on the way and the old one is ready for pickup by courier. Good luck getting that kind of support service from Asus or MSI, or many others.
At least Dell's exchange policy is very good and painless. I already have a replacement on the way and the old one is ready for pickup by courier. Good luck getting that kind of support service from Asus or MSI, or many others.
I’d ask them to please go ahead and open my monitor box prior to shipping it out and to inspect it, then refund me if the problem is present on the replacement. That’d be good customer service.
I was only expecting this in 2nd half of the year.
Optimum gets an early look at the new LG WOLED 32" 4K, with 1080p 480 Hz mode. He reviews gear mostly from the perspective of a competitive esports gamer.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aJLTx12UQM
TLDW:
He really likes it. He says it's perfect for him. He often switches from 4K monitor for video editing, and 1080p TN gaming monitor and this kind of lets him do it all with one monitor.
For 4K uses:
He prefers the coating to the 4k QD-OLED.
And the new WOLED pattern makes it work much more like standard RGB stripe pixels for text rendering.
Mid April for $1400. That price likely kill sales versus 4K QD-OLED, some of which start $1000. I don't think that many people will pay that much more for the 480Hz mode.
Optimum gets an early look at the new LG WOLED 32" 4K, with 1080p 480 Hz mode. He reviews gear mostly from the perspective of a competitive esports gamer.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aJLTx12UQM
TLDW:
He really likes it. He says it's perfect for him. He often switches from 4K monitor for video editing, and 1080p TN gaming monitor and this kind of lets him do it all with one monitor.
For 4K uses:
He prefers the coating to the 4k QD-OLED.
And the new WOLED pattern makes it work much more like standard RGB stripe pixels for text rendering.
Mid April for $1400. That price likely kill sales versus 4K QD-OLED, some of which start $1000. I don't think that many people will pay that much more for the 480Hz mode.
That's weird. I recently bought a cheap Dell gaming monitor, G3223D, and it came impeccably packed with a protective film on the panel and the whole screen wrapped in soft soft foam. It arrived in perfect condition.
It seems odd that Dell would take more care with a cheap screen than a premium Alienware branded OLED.
Wonder if they fixed their OLED rot that leads to dead pixel bonanza around the edges of the screen. Sadly, only time will tell I suppose.
I'm at a little over a year on this C2, with lots of hours, and I don't see any dead pixels yet.
Check around the edges, they always develop there first. But I've also heard the issue may have been resolved with better sealants.
Yeah, you'd said edges, so I did check there. I'm not doing anything exhaustive, but dragging a white window around the edges doesn't show anything.
Well, except that it could use a good wipedown, anyway. I mostly run in dark mode, and the screen has gotten kinda dusty.
Replacement Dell AW3225QF arrived today, same packaging as before and same manufacturing date. Exchange was very smooth as is always the case with Dell. Came without fingerprints this time. There are still marks on the screen, but I am not sure whether they are residue or actual scratches. Light wiping doesn't take them off, but you really need to look for them to see anything. So I've plugged it in and will see if I notice anything during regular use or if they will reduce/go away over a few cleaning sessions as some have mentioned this happens. Monitor cost me nothing (work-related expense, lol), so I'm not too bothered as long as they are not visible during regular use. Dead pixels are a bigger issue to me (see below).
First impressions coming from a 48" CX OLED from 2020 which had developed dozens of dead pixels around the screen perimeter:
1. Adjustment to the smaller screen will take some time, but it is nice to not have to move my head as much. Pixels are so small that they're not visible, unlike on the 48" screen at the distance I was using it at (see screen door effect).
2. Colour reproduction is FANTASTIC, especially in darker scenes, there is no black crush as experienced with LG OLEDs.
3. Text sharpness is as good to my eye as my IPS LCDs (I am rather picky in this regard), I am in fact blown away by how much better the text looks compared to the CX. I also noticed, only when comparing side-by-side to the CX, that the CX reproduced some vertical lines unevenly even when they were the same thickness, very odd and I didn't notice it until I put it next to the AW3225QF.
4. No visible colour fringing. CX was really bad with some colours, for example yellow against white would result in red and green edges on the left and right side of the yellow. No issues as this is a true RGB panel.
5. Not sure about the curve, I think I like it.
6. Checked thoroughly for dead pixels/subpixels with R/G/B/BK/W screens, did not see any, which is a huge deal for me.
7. Going from 120Hz to 240Hz is more noticeable than I expected, it is really smooth and I now understand the obsession with high refresh rates. It's almost CRT-like feeling (yes, I am that old and I was a CRT snob too).
8. I really like the overall design and cable management, Dell has always had good display design and it shows. USB hub functionality is nice to have back also. For some reason, the Asus design of the stand seems very garish to me by comparison, couldn't get behind that one.
9. BIOS and boot-up screens show up, did not on the CX, always had to plug in a second display to adjust settings which was super-annoying. This may be due to me using DP on the Alienware, while I was using HDMI on the CX, not sure.
10. Apparently, this monitor has a fan, but it is silent.
11. Small but noticeable and nice, a dedicated power button!
Overall, I am far more impressed than I thought I would be, especially considering the size downgrade. If I keep it, my kid will be thrilled to get the 48" OLED in her room, lol!
First impressions coming from a 48" CX OLED from 2020 which had developed dozens of dead pixels around the screen perimeter:
1. Adjustment to the smaller screen will take some time, but it is nice to not have to move my head as much. Pixels are so small that they're not visible, unlike on the 48" screen at the distance I was using it at (see screen door effect).
2. Colour reproduction is FANTASTIC, especially in darker scenes, there is no black crush as experienced with LG OLEDs.
3. Text sharpness is as good to my eye as my IPS LCDs (I am rather picky in this regard), I am in fact blown away by how much better the text looks compared to the CX. I also noticed, only when comparing side-by-side to the CX, that the CX reproduced some vertical lines unevenly even when they were the same thickness, very odd and I didn't notice it until I put it next to the AW3225QF.
4. No visible colour fringing. CX was really bad with some colours, for example yellow against white would result in red and green edges on the left and right side of the yellow. No issues as this is a true RGB panel.
5. Not sure about the curve, I think I like it.
6. Checked thoroughly for dead pixels/subpixels with R/G/B/BK/W screens, did not see any, which is a huge deal for me.
7. Going from 120Hz to 240Hz is more noticeable than I expected, it is really smooth and I now understand the obsession with high refresh rates. It's almost CRT-like feeling (yes, I am that old and I was a CRT snob too).
8. I really like the overall design and cable management, Dell has always had good display design and it shows. USB hub functionality is nice to have back also. For some reason, the Asus design of the stand seems very garish to me by comparison, couldn't get behind that one.
9. BIOS and boot-up screens show up, did not on the CX, always had to plug in a second display to adjust settings which was super-annoying. This may be due to me using DP on the Alienware, while I was using HDMI on the CX, not sure.
10. Apparently, this monitor has a fan, but it is silent.
11. Small but noticeable and nice, a dedicated power button!
Overall, I am far more impressed than I thought I would be, especially considering the size downgrade. If I keep it, my kid will be thrilled to get the 48" OLED in her room, lol!
Last edited:
MUB tests the new LG dual mode 4K monitor. HWUB has the UFO test, showing 480Hz mode is clearer than ~500 Hz LCDs unless they use backlight strobing.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jvdng6cqlhI
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jvdng6cqlhI
Anyone gone from a 34 UW to a 49 UW? Very tempted by the Easter sales of the G9 OLED. My Alienware 34" is just over 5 years old - still mostly going strong, but developing the (very) occasional flicker and screen corruption.
Wondering if 49 is actually going to seem TOO wide. The 34 fits the visual field very well.
Wondering if 49 is actually going to seem TOO wide. The 34 fits the visual field very well.
I'm using a regular-width 42" OLED, and IMO it's too big. 32-34" is super comfortable for monitors. Going bigger will mean you'll have to push it much further away from your face if you want to see the whole screen at once.
38" UW is already a bit much for me, I tend to work only on the middle half. Sides are for chat, logging, less important stuff.
Thanks - decided to hold off for now. The AW is still going, and while an additional 7" on either side of what I have now would be nice in some circumstances, it wouldn't be universally useful like the current UW is.
It would also have twice the pixel response and OLED contrast, but I'm also concerned about longevity - burn-in seems less of an issue than some are worried about, but still not a solved problem.
Now if it drops below $900 I may not be able to resist.
It would also have twice the pixel response and OLED contrast, but I'm also concerned about longevity - burn-in seems less of an issue than some are worried about, but still not a solved problem.
Now if it drops below $900 I may not be able to resist.
I have a 45 UW (Corsair) which works well, although I usually do not keep one window full screen. I look at the middle third to half mostly, with other documents on the sides when I need them, or just peeking out a bit so I can click a corner and see more of it. When I do play games, it is not necessarily ideal, as things like a minimap or other indicators can be fairly far out to the side.
My usage at least is entirely different at this size. Mostly I do not maximize anything, I have windows which I place where and at the size I desire, much like a real desk.
Mine is 3440x1440 (with no scaling) at 45 inches, where the the one you are looking at is 5120x1440 at 49 inches though, which means two possibly major differences.
1) The one I have is bigger by about 15% (even though the diagonal is smaller), with a lot more vertical space.
2) The G9 is likely not intended to run without scaling, so the usable area will likely be less, with the alternative of much smaller text but slightly more usable document space.
I did a lot of measuring and consideration of what I was going to do before I bought something that large. The OLED is glorious for text work though, mostly due to the fact that you can get pure greyscale text at very low brightness and still read the display (also important if you are going big, as is the refresh rate so you can track a fast mouse cursor flying across that screen).
Also, the curve can be an issue. Mine bends, but after some trying various curves I decided I much prefer a flat screen for the vast majority of what I do. An OLED does not require a curve for color accuracy, but it is often done anyway, and is something people tend to have an opinion on.
I actually like the curve, and would rather that Samsung kept the 1000R curve of the original G9 than the 1800R it has now - it would be nice to be facing even the edges more straight-on without having to be so far back.
I'll flog this AW3420DW another year or two, unless it croaks. It's probably been on around 10,000 hours at this point.
I'll flog this AW3420DW another year or two, unless it croaks. It's probably been on around 10,000 hours at this point.
Update on AW3225QF: Decided to request an exchange due to the coating damage from shipping (the infamous scratches). Replacement arrived with updated packaging with a peel-off film on the screen in addition to the bubble protector. No shipping damage this time!
My 48in LG C2 is still holding up. At this rate, the C2 has performed so flawlessly, either I get burn in or the set dies. Otherwise I am keeping this until it drops dead. It's by far the best monitor/tv I have ever used for desktop PC stuff. 120fps is fine for my desktop usage in games.
I have no screen door effect at 44inches. Even sitting up close I don't notice it. Then again I don't have supermans eyeballs like so many people do on the internet that talk about fuzzy fonts.
Unless something really jaw dropping hits the scene. I am good for a few years. I sit 44 inches from my screen and use 200% scaling. Everything is smooth. Fonts are really sharp at this scaling %. It is a good setup for me for now. Good luck to everyone!
I have no screen door effect at 44inches. Even sitting up close I don't notice it. Then again I don't have supermans eyeballs like so many people do on the internet that talk about fuzzy fonts.
Unless something really jaw dropping hits the scene. I am good for a few years. I sit 44 inches from my screen and use 200% scaling. Everything is smooth. Fonts are really sharp at this scaling %. It is a good setup for me for now. Good luck to everyone!
I've used my 48" CX for 3.5 years as a monitor until replacing it recently with the AW3225QF, mainly due to ergonomics (too close on my desk, too small a desk for 48") but also due to dead pixel development around the edges. There's probably about 100 of them now. But I checked for burn-in and despite over 4000 hours on the panel that was used as a monitor most of that time, I did not see any burn-in with various tests. But I did take precautions, like a 1 minute screen saver timer, etc.
Oh that's temporary image retention, it happens to LCD too, on some panels.
Temporary Image Retention on TVs
Temporary image retention is when a high-contrast image appears to stay on the screen even after it disappears. This happens when you leave the same channel or video game on the screen for an extended period.
www.rtings.com
Rtings used to test for that but removed it from their newer reviews, it's not a biggie nowadays. Forcing a pixel refresh usually removes it.
Talked to my guy in town today and these are limited availability but I could in theory buy one (or two). Hmmm, time to get out a tape measure.
The alternative to PG32UCDM is the AW3225QF that I have (two of). The difference beyond the curve is that ASUS has some more gamer-centric options, and that Dell support is FAR superior to ASUS', the Dell is also cheaper and with coupons can be had for a significantly lower price than the ASUS.
Yea, I like Dell well enough but sadly that is curved and really don't like curves and two curves side by side would be weird imho
edit - I am thinking now, do monitors, see how they work with my 1080 which is likely fine for everything except PUBG. Maybe can play in 'reduced' 27 inch mode on the 32 inch oled panel and maybe get that card to work harder than it does but for smoother refresh (I think my frames are fine in the 100+ range as is). If it sucks, 4080. If the ups shits the bed, new ups.
Last edited:
Memorial Day sales are rumored to have the 49" G9 OLED drop under $900, perhaps $800. I've been reading reviews, and it sounds like a decidedly mixed bag between Micro LED and OLED. MLED seems to have glorious brightness and vividness, especially in bright outdoor scenes - the reviewers used gaming experiences in Horizon FW and RDR2, where the impact of bright scenes was much greater without the aggressive ABL of OLED. No burn in issues to worry about as well. OLED has those incredible blacks, of course, but also top class motion clarity.
I just want a perfect monitor that doesn't seem to exist. So what's the best compromise? Is the OLED not getting that bright really an issue? Is Mini LED ghosting bad with a lot of overshoot? Which negative is the most noticeable?
I just want a perfect monitor that doesn't seem to exist. So what's the best compromise? Is the OLED not getting that bright really an issue? Is Mini LED ghosting bad with a lot of overshoot? Which negative is the most noticeable?
Marketing seems to have made people too obsessive about brightness.
How bright is your current monitor? You have it on 100% feeling like it's not bright enough?
No, we're still a long ways off from that point. We don't even have consumer-grade microLED TVs yet.
Mine is plenty bright enough, but it's not OLED. Most reviews do consider OLED contrast to be the winning factor, but some complain about how excessive ABL mutes the pop of bright scenes, particularly in HDR.
I'm sure you're right about the marketing. I'm more interested in motion clarity than anything, really. Just waiting on the sale now.
Any recommendations for a 27" monitor specifically to pair with an Xbox Series X? My son wants something with a higher refresh than the TV (60Hz), and the desk where this will go in his room will only fit a 27" (probably, can check exact measurements.
But how bright? My LCD won't even get as bright as an OLED and I turn it down from there.
My point is if you are already using a brightness lower than what an OLED can produce, don't worry about LCD marking that paints OLED as not bright enough.
Yeah, I'll certainly be trying an OLED as soon as the G9 sales hit again, or something better than that comes up. I over-research things sometimes, and monitors are one of the few bits of kit I tend to keep fairly long so I do a lot of reading. The root of my questions is this review:
In fact, I just bought the Neo G9 last month after almost 3 years of OLED gaming, and in 120hz it literally looked like there was motion blur enabled in all games on it. I had to use the 240hz mode which engages the "Faster" overdrive preset which cannot be changed and while now it almost matches the OLED in motion clarity, there is a lot of overshoot in darker regions which is noticeable. Motion clarity goes to the OLED by a long shot. MiniLED is terrible in this respect.
Now we come to the meat of both monitors. The HDR experience. I am a single player gamer for the most part and have been using OLEDs for HDR for the past 3 years and the Neo G9's HDR blew me away simply because of the peak brightness.
People on this and other sub-reddits keep talking about per-pixel illumination on the OLED and why it just doesn't need as high a brightness but this is flat out wrong in my experience. In games like Horizon Zero Dawn, Forza Horizon 5, RDR2, Plague Tale Requirem, most of the game takes place in a bright environment and its here that the MiniLED technology can comfortably push above 1,000 nits even in a 50% window size. This gives rise to an incredible contrast as while the blacks don't get as deep as an OLED, they get dark enough, but its literally almost thrice as bright and you can see specular highlights in the clouds and brighter spots which are just not visible on the OLED due to the ABL. The Neo G9 just punches you in the face with its bright screen in high APL scenes where the OLED's ABL kicks in so hard that you completely lose the HDR effect.
Just yesterday, I was replaying RDR2 and in one of the scenes, Arthur promises Abigail that he would take Jack fishing and goes to sleep. When he wakes up, there is a bright flash of sunlight on the MiniLED which makes you squint before normalising just like real life. On the OLED, this effect was ruined as the ABL kicked in so hard, it looked like a normal white screen and this normalisation wasn't nearly as stark.
In Horizon Zero Dawn and Forza Horizon 5, the MiniLED pushes the brightness of the sky to 1,000 nits and the ground is relatively dimmer at around 600 nits resulting in an incredibly cinematic photo. With my AW3423DW side by side, the Neo G9 makes those same scenes look like SDR on that OLED because the ABL kicks in and caps the brightness of the sky at 400 nits and the ground is even dimmer than that. Yes, the image is richer due to the infinite contrast on the OLED as blacks are a bit raised on the MiniLED, but to me the MiniLED image overall looks like HDR than the OLED.
The OLED pushes way ahead when it comes to darker games like Elden Ring and Resident Evil and Metro because now almost 50% of the screen is dark with small bright highlights which looks amazing and smokes the MiniLED.
Even when it comes to OLED, I feel that at least when it comes to monitors, WOLED is far superior to QD-OLED. I find my LG C1 to give a better HDR experience than the AW3423DW, as it reaches 750 nits in the 10% window and the QD-OLED is almost half as bright at 420 nits. Conversely, the image on the AW is more saturated due to the quantum dot layer while the LG looks a bit lifeless. But I still like the LG more as the higher peak brightness pushes out an incredible contrast.
But the good HDR experience on the MiniLED comes at the cost of motion clarity. The overshoot is just bad IMO and I only tolerate it for the better HDR. But then the OLED also has burn-in issues.
So at the end, neither OLED or MiniLED are perfect. I use both on a daily basis and while using one, I miss the advantages of the other. Brightness on the OLED and motion clarity on the MiniLED are deal breakers for both sides. It depends on you and the games you play as to which is more important.
Now we come to the meat of both monitors. The HDR experience. I am a single player gamer for the most part and have been using OLEDs for HDR for the past 3 years and the Neo G9's HDR blew me away simply because of the peak brightness.
People on this and other sub-reddits keep talking about per-pixel illumination on the OLED and why it just doesn't need as high a brightness but this is flat out wrong in my experience. In games like Horizon Zero Dawn, Forza Horizon 5, RDR2, Plague Tale Requirem, most of the game takes place in a bright environment and its here that the MiniLED technology can comfortably push above 1,000 nits even in a 50% window size. This gives rise to an incredible contrast as while the blacks don't get as deep as an OLED, they get dark enough, but its literally almost thrice as bright and you can see specular highlights in the clouds and brighter spots which are just not visible on the OLED due to the ABL. The Neo G9 just punches you in the face with its bright screen in high APL scenes where the OLED's ABL kicks in so hard that you completely lose the HDR effect.
Just yesterday, I was replaying RDR2 and in one of the scenes, Arthur promises Abigail that he would take Jack fishing and goes to sleep. When he wakes up, there is a bright flash of sunlight on the MiniLED which makes you squint before normalising just like real life. On the OLED, this effect was ruined as the ABL kicked in so hard, it looked like a normal white screen and this normalisation wasn't nearly as stark.
In Horizon Zero Dawn and Forza Horizon 5, the MiniLED pushes the brightness of the sky to 1,000 nits and the ground is relatively dimmer at around 600 nits resulting in an incredibly cinematic photo. With my AW3423DW side by side, the Neo G9 makes those same scenes look like SDR on that OLED because the ABL kicks in and caps the brightness of the sky at 400 nits and the ground is even dimmer than that. Yes, the image is richer due to the infinite contrast on the OLED as blacks are a bit raised on the MiniLED, but to me the MiniLED image overall looks like HDR than the OLED.
The OLED pushes way ahead when it comes to darker games like Elden Ring and Resident Evil and Metro because now almost 50% of the screen is dark with small bright highlights which looks amazing and smokes the MiniLED.
Even when it comes to OLED, I feel that at least when it comes to monitors, WOLED is far superior to QD-OLED. I find my LG C1 to give a better HDR experience than the AW3423DW, as it reaches 750 nits in the 10% window and the QD-OLED is almost half as bright at 420 nits. Conversely, the image on the AW is more saturated due to the quantum dot layer while the LG looks a bit lifeless. But I still like the LG more as the higher peak brightness pushes out an incredible contrast.
But the good HDR experience on the MiniLED comes at the cost of motion clarity. The overshoot is just bad IMO and I only tolerate it for the better HDR. But then the OLED also has burn-in issues.
So at the end, neither OLED or MiniLED are perfect. I use both on a daily basis and while using one, I miss the advantages of the other. Brightness on the OLED and motion clarity on the MiniLED are deal breakers for both sides. It depends on you and the games you play as to which is more important.
G9 is no longer being made.
Try G4 which is the 2024 model, though it won't be on sale until towards the end of the year.
Try G4 which is the 2024 model, though it won't be on sale until towards the end of the year.
Where are you seeing that? At 2024 CES, Samsung announced the G95SD, which isn't even out yet. The G4 is a 27" panel which I'm not interested in at all.
LG's New 2024 OLED TVs Arrive Next Month Starting at $1,500
They're the successors to our favorite high-end TVs of 2023, promising slightly brighter images this year.
After G9, it went to GX, then G1, G2, etc.
Same for the C series.
(Triple-checks the thread title) - Those are TVs...LG's New 2024 OLED TVs Arrive Next Month Starting at $1,500
They're the successors to our favorite high-end TVs of 2023, promising slightly brighter images this year.www.cnet.com
After G9, it went to GX, then G1, G2, etc.
Same for the C series.
Samsung 2024 Monitor lineup
The G9 appears to still very much be the flagship.