-
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.
[Digital Foundry] New PS5 Pro GPU details emerge - including a 2.35GHz max boost clock
- Thread starter Lunatic_Gamer
- Start date
- News Hardware Platform
MisterXDTV
Member
You just don't know what you are talking about
A95L is the reference TV on any TV Shootout available on tech-sites
BUDGET TV my ass....
Zathalus
Member
The top end model last year from Sony was OLED, a damn good one as well. It won the 2023 and 2024 Value Electronics shootout, for 2024 it basically almost tied with the Samsung S95D, although the Samsung is using a newer panel. All the OLEDs easily beat the latest model LCDs. The Bravia 9 dominated the LCD segment, but lost out against the OLED lineups. Samsung and Panasonic all have flagship OLED TVs as well. Panasonic use LG panels and just recently came out, so missed out on the test.
Results and credentials of judges here:
It’s funny you bring up OLED tvs as being worse at 30fps, this is true due to the nature of OLEDs having extremely fast response times. So at low fps content like 24fps videos or 30fps gaming it appears to stutter due to the individual frame hold time being relatively high vs LCD. For example the old Z9D flagship from Sony had a frame hold time of 11ms vs the 39ms on a LG CX. Due to this, the Z9D would this be superior in terms of visual smoothness at 30fps.
Fast forward to the latest crop of LCD TVs coming out this year and they have the exact same issue. The newer batch of LCDs have much faster response times so the frame hold time is now similar to OLED. For the Bravia 9 this is now 32ms vs 39ms on the LG G4 or 40ms on the Samsung S95D.
So as LCDs panels improve their pixel response time, they become correspondingly worse for 24/30fps content.
Last edited:
MisterXDTV
Member
No they didn't...
They just said they wouldn't release a 2024 flagship OLED model as the 2023 model (A95L) came out very LATE last year because the new Mediatek chip wasn't ready for the usual spring release
So it was carried over to 2024
Year of release means nothing, performance does
A95L is basically the best TV on the market
Last edited:
Zathalus
Member
They did, the A95L is still better in basically everything bar a really bright room. The Bravia 9 is extremely good, but the OLED advantages are still tricky for mini LED to overcome.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Sony held a presser early this year and told people there they were chasing mini LEDs as their flagship, if it would have been because of a chip shortage why say anything?
They seem to have decided that NITs are becoming more important to people (including myself)
Granted I haven't seen that A95L working but I personally prefer all the nits high end mini led can provide.
But all of this is off track and personal preferences
MisterXDTV
Member
Again, what did you expect them to say? They were presenting 2024 models hoping to sell them...
Did you expect them to say:
"Here are our 2024 TVs, but if you want the best, buy the 2023 A95L"
LOL
It's up to customers to know what they are actually buying, not believing in marketing bullshit
There's no test on the internet where the XR90 is better than the A95L
And even the number itself suggests it...
95>90
Last edited:
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
That doesn't make sense. PC has been this way since the dawn of time. That's the reality of the PC market. It's largely DIY driven and the hint is in the name as well. Customizing your PC is a great part of the appeal. On console, it's the opposite. All systems are the same and you simply pick yours up, go home, and plug it in without worrying about specs or anything else because they all behave the same way. NVIDIA doesn't need to market their high-end cards as much as Sony needs to market a new system because PC gamers know by default that there is a hierarchy as it's been this way for over 25 years.
I don't see how the Pro "encroaches" into the PC space when it's a console just like the PS5. Alex doesn't like the Pro because he plainly dislikes consoles and this one is no exception. There's also been a lot of pushback (I would argue even more) from the PlayStation user base. How many times have we heard that the PS5 hasn't been fully utilized and that there's already a Pro out? How many complained that Sony is releasing a new console when they're barely making games for the current one (as if the guys designing hardware were the ones developing games)? On this very site, we got PlayStation gamers lamenting how it's unnecessary, and even a few like Rofif detest it because it makes consoles too much like PC.
Your entire post is comparing the PC to the console market and that's a flawed way to approach things. Just because you do X for PC parts doesn't mean the same applies to consoles.
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Radical_3d
Member
I bought a S95C last year and I can’t afford a Bravia 9, but for everyone that is not gaming in a basement I’d total recommend the new shit of “black as OLED bright as LED” that is storming the market. The TLC still has a little bloom (probably the end user won’t notice it) but the Bravia 9 if you can afford it is state of the art technology. And I didn’t know but now that
Zathalus
says that the response time is improved I see no reason to have anything but that on a bright living room. Well… the price. My S95C could be bought for as little as a bit more than a thousand euros last year for the 65” model. But since this is GAF and it’s full of rich fucks I won’t consider that a factor.Just whatever you choose don’t buy the S95D. The anti-glare coat of this year completely ruins the experience.
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Personal choice here with someone who owns an OLED TV and 2 OLED monitors plus a mini LED TV when I am home in Florida our media room has a wall of sliding glass doors and give me more NITs all day long, I wont see the bloom anyhowI bought a S95C last year and I can’t afford a Bravia 9, but for everyone that is not gaming in a basement I’d total recommend the new shit of “black as OLED bright as LED” that is storming the market. The TLC still has a little bloom (probably the end user won’t notice it) but the Bravia 9 if you can afford it is state of the art technology. And I didn’t know but now that
Just whatever you choose don’t buy the S95D. The anti-glare coat of this year completely ruins the experience.
Now when things are totally dark at night and no lights on, sure the OLED looks great
Radical_3d
Member
Yeah, yeah, but you don’t live in a basement and right now every Northern European is up telling you how important is that black level with their 3 days of sun per year. But in the States weather is nicer and if you live in Florida you basically are a rich southern European. You need those damn nits since you’re Africa tier latitude:
And the reviews says that, if you can afford it, Bravia 9 has blacks that while aren’t technically there are indistinguishable from the OLEDs for the naked human eye.
Guardian Monkey
Member
Bravia 9 and the Sony Oleds both have their use cases.
About that PS5 Pro....
About that PS5 Pro....
PaintTinJr
Member
For film, not gaming - they don't send their OLEDs as master reference screens to their first party devs.
Sony have backed LCD based technology as the long term solution as shown by their MicroLED panels used for virtual reality walls in film/tv making with UE5, like the Mandalorian, etc all used.
Sony being an authority on Plasma, OLED, rear Projection TV allows them to make long term bets, and the bet of LCD based technology being the best from a business and technology perspective is still on track.
Saying the only cutting edge panel technology Sony actually design, develop and manufacturer that ends up in their most expensive (per area) TVs, that are best for their gaming business pillar and share a technology path with their highest end Professional AV business pillar panel product and then saying some TV fully dependent on panel supply from a competitor is their real flagship product is just nonsense.
To Sony OLED panels are exactly where Plasma was, just this time they only stopped R&D and making their own panels and kept a product line of TVs, rather than ditching both the consumer and healthcare monitor product lines they did with Plasma.
Last edited:
Crispy Gamer
Member
Honestly, it's a waste of time to talk about Alex I wish they would just exclude him from console discussions he's a bad actor but at least the others have come around and I don't agree that Oliver was trashing the idea he was literally the only one trying to have a measured conversation because he likes the idea of mid-gen consoles I blame the team around him beating him over the head with constant negativity. I'll give you a perfect example, Oliver stated last year that the PS5 Pro could be awesome and provide benefits for PS6 in terms of backwards compatibility but they didn't expound on that argument because all they wanted to do was think negatively about it. Fast forward to this year, Richard reads a supporter's question about how the Pro could mean better backwards compatibility for the PS6 and suddenly he has a eureka moment and even writes an article about it
MisterXDTV
Member
TVs are TVs
It doesn't matter film or gaming.
Contrast is the most important factor in TVs and OLEDs are unmatchable for any LCD as they have pixel level light control
Both LCD and OLEDs are "sample and hold" displays so the motion will never be at CRT or plasma level...
But OLED has nearly instantaneous pixel response time that is a great advantage for input lag.
The only side effect of that fast response time is that 30 fps games look more "stuttery" and that's why even consoles are now pushing for 60 fps
We can't have CRT and Plasma motion "clarity" today unfortunately
But we have perfect contrast and amazing resolution that's for sure...
Last edited:
Markio128
Gold Member
My thoughts at the moment are that, regardless of the DF videos (good or bad) about the PS5 Pro, I won’t know it’s true value until I have controller in hand.
I thought the PS4 Pro was a decent upgrade on the base PS4, but it didn’t have a feature like PSSR, which I think has the potential to be a lot more transformative than brute power alone. I need to add that I haven’t had a PC for many years, so I’ve never been able to see the benefit of the PC alternative, but the general gist of it is really clever.
I understand that the CPU will need to improve on the PS6, but I’m hoping that improved PSSR tech will mean that they can keep the cost of the console from spiralling too much out of control. And maybe, somewhere in Cerny’s basement, there are tests going on around a CPU equivalent of PSSR - a way to more efficiently calculate AI etc.,
Please bear in mind that I’m not tech savvy, so I could be talking nonsense.
I thought the PS4 Pro was a decent upgrade on the base PS4, but it didn’t have a feature like PSSR, which I think has the potential to be a lot more transformative than brute power alone. I need to add that I haven’t had a PC for many years, so I’ve never been able to see the benefit of the PC alternative, but the general gist of it is really clever.
I understand that the CPU will need to improve on the PS6, but I’m hoping that improved PSSR tech will mean that they can keep the cost of the console from spiralling too much out of control. And maybe, somewhere in Cerny’s basement, there are tests going on around a CPU equivalent of PSSR - a way to more efficiently calculate AI etc.,
Please bear in mind that I’m not tech savvy, so I could be talking nonsense.
PaintTinJr
Member
What is it with you taking other people's opinion and holding it up as facts in our difference of opinions. I can tell you for nothing that Sony's TV team certainly don't subscribe to their opinion over their own when doing their R&D jobs. So a completely pointless link
But the motion issue is only partly because of that on OLED. LCD based pixel technology is significantly less organic sized that OLED, and that plays a large part in why that frame hold time is awful at 30fps gaming on OLED, because it feels even slower by the organic soup like neighbour dot motion - where inevitably the dot uniformity and brightness is at the mercy of them being formed organically - which looks amazing for non-interactive film/TV as a continuous signal, but lacks the clean and discrete delineation of frames that the sterile pixels of LCD based technology accentuate much better for feedback in interactive content like 30fps games on panels, even with higher frame hold times than before - that are getting worse compared to the levels of my ZD9.
PaintTinJr
Member
Well maybe tell the best TV maker in the world that, they've decided years ago that the long play is LCD based having given up on OLED panel R&D after being at the cutting edge themselves of OLED from the beginning, and like Plasma believe the road ahead is blocked technologically for OLED to be better, cheaper and greener in the long run, and support their other business pillars better.
Zathalus
Member
I thought you would appreciate some insight from actually experts in the field but as usual you completely dismiss it out of hand with your own (often faulty) “knowledge”. Even with a link crowning a Sony TV as the best in the world you refuse to engage as it goes against your own world view.
For example, most of this is completely wrong.
Let’s see what our friend ChatGPT has to say:
This comment raises some interesting points about the differences between OLED and LCD technologies, but there are a few inaccuracies and misconceptions mixed in. Let’s break it down and address each part:
1. “LCD based pixel technology is significantly less organic sized than OLED”
• Not entirely accurate:
• The term “organic-sized” is a bit unclear here, but it seems to refer to the physical makeup of OLED pixels being organic (carbon-based) and potentially less precise in uniformity compared to LCDs.
• While it’s true that OLED pixels are made from organic compounds, this doesn’t mean they are inherently less “uniform” or less well-structured than LCD pixels. OLEDs are known for their excellent image quality and pixel-level precision, with each pixel emitting its own light.
2. “Frame hold time is awful at 30fps gaming on OLED”
• True, but it applies to most displays:
• Frame hold time refers to how long each frame is displayed, which is tied to the frame rate. At 30fps, the frame is held for around 33 milliseconds before it changes. This long hold time can make motion feel stuttery, but this isn’t an issue unique to OLED—any display showing 30fps content would have the same issue.
• What makes this more noticeable on OLED is the display’s instantaneous response time. OLEDs can change pixel states very quickly, so they don’t have the natural “blur” that slower technologies like LCD might have. This means that any choppiness or judder in the motion of 30fps content is more noticeable on an OLED display.
3. “Organic soup-like neighbor dot motion”
• Misleading description:
• The phrase “organic soup-like neighbor dot motion” is a bit exaggerated. OLED panels don’t have “soup-like” pixel behavior. In fact, OLED technology is praised for its sharpness and clarity at the pixel level, as each pixel emits its own light without backlight bleed or color leakage.
• While it’s true that OLED pixels are “organic” in the sense of being carbon-based, this doesn’t make them inherently less uniform or cause any significant problems in displaying motion compared to LCD technology. OLED panels are often considered superior in their ability to render smooth gradients and rich colors.
4. “OLED looks amazing for non-interactive film/TV as a continuous signal”
• True:
• OLED does excel in film and TV viewing, especially because of its deep blacks, high contrast, and pixel-level control of brightness. These characteristics enhance the visual quality of non-interactive content, particularly in dark scenes and high dynamic range (HDR) footage. Since film and TV content is often 24fps or 60fps, the slower frame rates that might be noticeable in games don’t create the same issue here.
5. “Lacks the clean and discrete delineation of frames that the sterile pixels of LCD accentuate better for feedback in interactive content like 30fps games”
• Debatable:
• This statement implies that LCDs are better at delineating frames in 30fps content because their pixels are “sterile” and don’t change as quickly as OLED. While it’s true that the slower pixel response of LCDs can create a kind of natural motion blur, this doesn’t necessarily make them better at displaying 30fps games.
• OLED’s fast response time actually offers sharper motion and more accurate pixel transitions, but it can also make the choppiness of 30fps more apparent because there’s less blurring between frames. On LCDs, slower response times can mask some of that judder, but it’s more of a side effect rather than a “clean delineation” of frames.
Conclusion:
There are some truths in the comment, particularly around OLED’s strengths in film/TV content and its fast response time making low frame rates more noticeable. However, the claim about “organic soup-like neighbor dot motion” is exaggerated, and the idea that LCD pixels are better for 30fps content because of their “sterile” nature isn’t quite right.
In short:
• OLED displays tend to show more noticeable judder at lower frame rates like 30fps due to their fast response times and sharp image quality.
• This isn’t because of the “organic” nature of OLED pixels but rather because the lack of motion blur makes frame transitions at lower frame rates stand out.
• LCD displays might soften the perception of judder due to slower pixel response, but this isn’t necessarily a benefit; it’s more of a trade-off in terms of clarity versus smoothness.
PaintTinJr
Member
Hilarious, So now you pass over our entire conversation to something that didn't even read what I said correctly? Nice one. The point it misses is that (large) LCD based panels are sharper at equal resolution than OLED with high frequency content, and that is a function of how the panel processes work to manufacture panels, even if CHATGPT hasn't had that training
to appreciate what it can't see for itself. Discontinuities don't look clumpy, hence why I used the term soup like for a neighbouring dot because they do appear marginally, but noticeably less razor edge sharp than pixel edges on miniLED(LED/LCD), with the oled dots constantly irregular like a natural ultra quality analogue reproduction rather than the overly digital preciseness of miniLED(LED/LCD).But feel free to ignore my response if you are going to parse it to something that failed already on my previous comment
Zathalus
Member
That’s exactly what you said before and it’s still nonsense. OLED is irregular due to natural ultra quality analogue reproduction? Do you think OLEDs are grown in a farm because it has the term organic in it? OLEDs are not irregular nor would anyone call them analogue. Feel perfectly free to post any credible source that backs up what you said though. But I highly doubt you will, because it’s purely made up fiction.
The point it misses is that (large) LCD based panels are sharper at equal resolution than OLED with high frequency content, and that is a function of how the panel processes work to manufacture panels, even if CHATGPT hasn't had that training
But feel free to ignore my response if you are going to parse it to something that failed already on my previous comment
How are you consistently this wrong about technology? And so confidently wrong as well? It’s actually quite remarkable.
PaintTinJr
Member
Do you believe all the dots in OLED panels since their inception have produced the exact same brightness with each panel for the exact same power input like LCD has? And if not, why is that?
ap_puff
Member
huh? The reference screen they use is an HX310 or the newer HX3110.
OLED panels are significantly better at screen uniformity than LEDs though, idk what he's talking about. Just go on RTINGS, they have pictures of all the panels with their gray uniformity test.
Zathalus
Member
OLEDs degrade over time, but the degradation has to do with burn in and with modern panels is something that can take multiple years under regular viewing. General brightness does diminish over many years.
LCDs are not immune to this either, the brightness of an LCD panel drops over time and issues with the LCD crystals and backlights can occur as well. LED backlights also loose brightness over a multiple year time frame. This is not me making anything up, the results are documented here:
Longevity Burn-In Test: Updates And Results From 100 TVs
Our accelerated longevity test has been running for over a year now, and we've already encountered some very interesting results.
www.rtings.com
If you’re referring to panel uniformity, OLEDs easily beat LCDs on that regard.
Last edited:
Crispy Gamer
Member
This will be the only tv that'll get me to leave QD-OLED but unfortunately it'll probably be another decade before it's obtainable at mass consumer price levels. On the other hand, with the advancements in QD-OLED and Mini LED picture quality is almost to the point where it's good enough to me.Do we actually have a time frame for micro led becoming a thing on consumer level. I heard that might be a good idea for a upgrade. I have a qn95c and don't won't to bother with burn in but I know oled is alot better
thebigmanjosh
Member
2024 MY flagship? Sure. Generally? Not really. Best screen tech Sony deploys? Not even close - that belongs to the CLED/micro-LED line.
Most of the camera to living room demo stations at conferences use the Camera -> HX-3110 -> A95L + prod studios use a special version of the A95L in grading rooms that doesn't have power limitations.
MisterXDTV
Member
He simply doesn't know that reference (professional) monitors have nothing to do with LCD TVs that you buy at BestBuy.....
LOL
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
There's plenty for everyone.
PaintTinJr
Member
The missing word for ChatGPT is polarized it would seem. the full initial question was in the spoiler, and my correction of ChatGPT which it acknowledges is in the final responseOLEDs degrade over time, but the degradation has to do with burn in and with modern panels is something that can take multiple years under regular viewing. General brightness does diminish over many years.
LCDs are not immune to this either, the brightness of an LCD panel drops over time and issues with the LCD crystals and backlights can occur as well. LED backlights also loose brightness over a multiple year time frame. This is not me making anything up, the results are documented here:
Longevity Burn-In Test: Updates And Results From 100 TVs
Our accelerated longevity test has been running for over a year now, and we've already encountered some very interesting results.
If you’re referring to panel uniformity, OLEDs easily beat LCDs on that regard.
Zathalus
Member
Why do you ask a question then proceed to ignore the answer?The missing word for ChatGPT is polarized it would seem. the full initial question was in the spoiler, and my correction of ChatGPT which it acknowledges is in the final response
As for the latest information it appears to be basing its answer on the OLED screen using a pentile lattice structure which Samsung pioneered for use on OLED over a decade ago. These types of OLEDs do indeed suffer in perceived sharpness vs LCD. Modern LGs use WRGB and it does not have this problem. Samsung panels use a diamond arrangement and have no issue there either.
Or as ChatGPT points out:
• Subpixel Arrangement:
LG’s WRGB OLED panels use four subpixels per pixel: White, Red, Green, and Blue. This layout is designed to enhance brightness (thanks to the additional white subpixel) while maintaining color accuracy and sharpness.
• In this layout, each pixel has its own set of red, green, blue, and white subpixels, ensuring that there is no need for subpixel sharing like in Pentile matrices. This provides a more uniform and consistent pixel structure.
• Brightness and Efficiency:
The white subpixel in WRGB OLEDs helps increase overall brightness without sacrificing color quality. This is particularly important because OLEDs can sometimes struggle with peak brightness compared to LCDs (especially miniLED). The white subpixel allows LG’s OLEDs to achieve higher brightness levels, making them better suited for HDR content while also improving energy efficiency.
• Sharpness and Pixel Uniformity:
Since WRGB OLEDs have a complete set of subpixels for each pixel (with no subpixel sharing), the potential sharpness issues associated with Pentile layouts do not apply. Text, fine details, and high-frequency content should appear sharp and well-defined. The uniformity of the subpixel layout also means that the display should produce clean, precise images without the slight “softness” that Pentile OLEDs can sometimes exhibit.
3. Pixel Structure Issues in WRGB OLEDs:
• No “Soup-like” or “Irregular” Pixel Arrangement:
Unlike Pentile OLEDs, WRGB OLEDs have a more consistent subpixel arrangement, so there is no “irregular” or “soup-like” pixel behavior. Each pixel is well-defined with its own set of subpixels, leading to better uniformity and sharpness.
• Uniform Pixel Edges:
The lattice structure of WRGB OLEDs is very regular, similar to an LCD in the sense that each pixel is complete and has its own subpixel arrangement. This means that WRGB OLEDs should not suffer from any issues related to “clumpy” or “irregular” pixels, and sharpness should be excellent.
• Sharpness and Resolution:
At a given resolution (e.g., 4K), a WRGB OLED should provide similar, if not better, sharpness compared to an LCD. The higher contrast and perfect black levels of OLED can often enhance the perception of sharpness, especially in high-contrast scenes.
• Brightness and Color Accuracy:
One trade-off with WRGB OLEDs is that the white subpixel can sometimes lead to a slight reduction in color saturation at very high brightness levels, as the white subpixel boosts brightness by adding white light rather than pure RGB colors. However, this is a minor trade-off, and for most content, the combination of WRGB subpixels offers a good balance between brightness and color fidelity.
LCDs, especially those with miniLED backlighting, have very uniform pixel grids and can appear sharp, but they don’t have the pixel-level precision that OLEDs offer. The uniformity of WRGB OLEDs makes them competitive with LCDs in terms of sharpness while outperforming them in contrast and black levels.
LG’s WRGB OLED panels use four subpixels per pixel: White, Red, Green, and Blue. This layout is designed to enhance brightness (thanks to the additional white subpixel) while maintaining color accuracy and sharpness.
• In this layout, each pixel has its own set of red, green, blue, and white subpixels, ensuring that there is no need for subpixel sharing like in Pentile matrices. This provides a more uniform and consistent pixel structure.
• Brightness and Efficiency:
The white subpixel in WRGB OLEDs helps increase overall brightness without sacrificing color quality. This is particularly important because OLEDs can sometimes struggle with peak brightness compared to LCDs (especially miniLED). The white subpixel allows LG’s OLEDs to achieve higher brightness levels, making them better suited for HDR content while also improving energy efficiency.
• Sharpness and Pixel Uniformity:
Since WRGB OLEDs have a complete set of subpixels for each pixel (with no subpixel sharing), the potential sharpness issues associated with Pentile layouts do not apply. Text, fine details, and high-frequency content should appear sharp and well-defined. The uniformity of the subpixel layout also means that the display should produce clean, precise images without the slight “softness” that Pentile OLEDs can sometimes exhibit.
3. Pixel Structure Issues in WRGB OLEDs:
• No “Soup-like” or “Irregular” Pixel Arrangement:
Unlike Pentile OLEDs, WRGB OLEDs have a more consistent subpixel arrangement, so there is no “irregular” or “soup-like” pixel behavior. Each pixel is well-defined with its own set of subpixels, leading to better uniformity and sharpness.
• Uniform Pixel Edges:
The lattice structure of WRGB OLEDs is very regular, similar to an LCD in the sense that each pixel is complete and has its own subpixel arrangement. This means that WRGB OLEDs should not suffer from any issues related to “clumpy” or “irregular” pixels, and sharpness should be excellent.
• Sharpness and Resolution:
At a given resolution (e.g., 4K), a WRGB OLED should provide similar, if not better, sharpness compared to an LCD. The higher contrast and perfect black levels of OLED can often enhance the perception of sharpness, especially in high-contrast scenes.
• Brightness and Color Accuracy:
One trade-off with WRGB OLEDs is that the white subpixel can sometimes lead to a slight reduction in color saturation at very high brightness levels, as the white subpixel boosts brightness by adding white light rather than pure RGB colors. However, this is a minor trade-off, and for most content, the combination of WRGB subpixels offers a good balance between brightness and color fidelity.
LCDs, especially those with miniLED backlighting, have very uniform pixel grids and can appear sharp, but they don’t have the pixel-level precision that OLEDs offer. The uniformity of WRGB OLEDs makes them competitive with LCDs in terms of sharpness while outperforming them in contrast and black levels.
PaintTinJr
Member
The point that leads back to the original point I made is that sharp pixel lattice structure due to pixel structure separation being larger and visible on miniLED(LED/LCD) but not on OLED is a genuine panel technology difference.
Where on OLED the image in motion because of a lack of visible pixel structure is smoother in ChatGPT's words, which was the point I was trying to make - with the wrong words - why IMHO Frame hold time issues at 30 fps are perceivably worse on OLED than miniLED(LED/LCD) because of the frames washing in a smoother way, and perceptibly giving slower feedback (IMO) than the less smooth but razor sharp frame separation seen on LCD based panels because of the marginally perceivable pixel structure washing through your eyes on successive frames, even changing just subtle amounts that you'd only notice a few frames later on an OLED.
It is the first thing my friend always says when we game on my ZD9. "It's like a huge PC monitor!" because the game images are so much crisper than his LG OLED
Zathalus
Member
Well, we will have to disagree then. I have a Bravia 9 85, LG G4, Samsung S95C, and Samsung Odyssey 9 and frankly I don’t see the Bravia 9 having a crisper image at native content. Oh it beats the other TVs in processing and upscaling quite handily but that is a result of Sony being the best in TVs and not due to any advantage of the panel technology itself. The A95L (which I don’t have) has the exact same advantages and that uses a Samsung OLED panel.
Negotiator101
Member
May I ask why you own so many televisions?
Radical_3d
Member
Secretly Vincent Teoh.
SweetTooth
Gold Member
I got Samsung S95B, I sure as hell wished that I shelled more for Sony's equivalent model.
That Sony quality is unmatched
Zathalus
Member
Sure, Bravia for the bright living room, Samsung S95C for the bedroom, Samsung Odyssey 9 for work, and LG G4 as a gaming monitor.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Pretty much it
I know M MisterXDTV said contrast is the most important feature in a TV but that only works for dark environments, the brighter the room the less we perceive contrast
I have a 77" OLED in my media room and when its dark outside and we can turn off the lights and enjoy a movie yeah OLED kicks ass.
When I am consuming anything through the day time full screen brightness is king for me and its not even close as I am not closing up my windows and blinds and not enjoying the Florida sunshine, give me 10k nit TVs that are more affordable
Crispy Gamer
Member
To be fair Sony is pushing the Bravia 9 for gaming
www.playstation.com
How to build the ultimate PlayStation gaming set-up
From the best TVs and sound-systems for gaming, to competition-ready controllers and even a comfy blanket, check out our guide to building the ultimate PlayStation set up at home.
www.playstation.com
MisterXDTV
Member
In a world where HDR is becoming the standard for entertainment, that's not exactly true
HDR10 standard is absolute and it's the range between the deepest black and the brighter white (without clipping of course)
OLEDs achieve 0.0000 nits black, that no commercial LCD can achieve, so it's more impactful by default
LCDs can get brighter but here's the thing:
You need the actual content to support that luminance. Not everything is made to blind you with 5.000 nits, certainly not movies/TV shows but also games...
The video game industry follows the same standards of the movie industry today when grading content
HDR10 in this case as Dolby Vision is proprietary
Last edited:
Crispy Gamer
Member
I honestly don't know anyone with 1 tv anymore lol I have a 65" LG G2 for my sitting room a 55" LG C1 for the living room and 77" S89C(S95C mod) in my game room.
Negotiator101
Member
Caio
Member
So, how does the LG G4 handle gaming? I mean, it's definitely a top-notch TV, but I’m not exactly a tech wizard when it comes to the nitty-gritty details. I’m on the hunt for a new 4K gaming TV, and I’m curious, what are the best picks out there ?
Zathalus
Member
The LG G4 is fantastic. A step up in brightness vs the C9-C3 range and it no longer dims in game mode. 144hz support for PC gaming as well if you want. It will serve you well in anything bar the most brightly lit rooms.
If you do a lot of gaming in a bright room then a mini LED is the best. The Bravia 9 is king of that area, but the recent Hisense and TCL TVs are apparently great as well. Just note that if PC gaming is your thing the Bravia 9 only goes up to 120hz. I use it with my PS5 so no problems on that front.
I have the Samsung S95C as well, and that is great too. The S95D is by all accounts better but it has a different matte panel that not everyone likes, so that is something that can be a problem. It was that or the Bravia 9 for my living room but I didn’t like the way Samsung handled reflections and it only went up to 77 so a no go for me.
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Member
But can you see pixel grid structure on the miniLED when you have your nose up close, or like you can see on pretty much any LCD computer monitor just by looking at an aliased edge? You definitely won't see the pixel structure on the smoother 4K OLED where pixel structure is a soup at such high pixel density unless you get a stuck sub-pixel and even then the error correction to use neighbouring sub-pixels to hide a stuck sub pixel might make it hard to see.
What I would like to see is someone take something unplayable at 30fps on 4K OLED, like HZFW and put it through a framemeister like device capable of adding CRT lines to give the image line structure and see how the experience compared.
I'm pretty sure with line structure in the image - in line with pixel structure in this discussion - motion clarity would improve because it would be more discrete between successive frames and feel more responsive than without.
digdug2
Member
I just got a Hisense 85" U8N... and for the price, it absolutely rocks. Fantastic picture, excellent HDR (10, HLG, DV), and holy shit it gets so bright. In a dark room, like my basement, it lights the entire room up like crazy. The only downside is that it only has two 4K/120Hz ports. Not a huge deal though because you can always get an HDMI switch if you need more ports.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
Ok we've got a whole page's worth of this discussion, I think it's time.
www.neogaf.com
OLED v Mini-LED
I’m planning to buy a new TV during the summer, should I get an OLED one or a Mini LED one? It will be used mostly for movie and tv watching. I’m thinking of getting the new Bravia 8.
digdug2
Member
It's a natural conversation, just let it peter out instead of trying to move it to a topic from 6 months ago.Ok we've got a whole page's worth of this discussion, I think it's time.
OLED v Mini-LED
I’m planning to buy a new TV during the summer, should I get an OLED one or a Mini LED one? It will be used mostly for movie and tv watching. I’m thinking of getting the new Bravia 8.
Edit: removed sarcasm
Last edited:
Xtib81
Member
For a second, I thought I was in the Oled thread. I have an Oled but I gotta say the latest mini led screens have been very tempting. TCL is doing an amazing job at very tempting prices. I'm also curious to see what ink jet printing Oled brings to the table. Maybe next year ?
Last edited: