Oled monitor

[Moksi]

hey guys i noticed that these new monitors are not fully on the market yet
But im thinking about getting one for the arcade cabinet
as this monitor has better quality producing colours than lcd

what you guys think?

[markiej]

yes, better colors, contrast, and (by far) black levels than LCD.  The biggest fear of OLED is burn-in   I'm a little wary of them outside of watching movies/shows at the moment, though some desktop monitors have some trickery to help combat it - I'm not sure they tested for someone accidentally leaving centipede on attract mode for a long weekend.  Also I wonder if there would be a clear difference in brightness for the various common masking done at 4:3 and 3:4.

[Moksi]

thanks they probably will be pricey at first i can wait as its worth it
need an 27 inch

[Osirus23]

OLEDs supposedly have very good response time, too.

[lilshawn]

My pixel2 XL has OLED (P-OLED specifically) and I've used it for 2 years now with zero evidence of burn in. where by I've seen 90% of OLED Samsung phones (which use AMOLED which is samsung marking wankery) suffer some kind of burn-in.

I don't feel I use my phone any different than anybody else. I use it every day and I don't leave it on while plugged in or anything.

I think OLED performance in regards to burn-in highly depends on manufacturer...or perhaps it's AMOLED build specific.

[schmerzkaufen]

Yeah pixel response is perfect (not motion resolution which is the same as lcd, but we can't have everything yet)

IMHO burn-in also depends a lot on usage, let some game with static bright elements run many hours every day on that OLED without all available burn-in prevention programs to support it, and you'll definitely see marks appear too soon for comfort.

Considering the insane price, and small size (only 22" announced for now) I don't think they're worth it. Wait another decade ?

[lilshawn]

plasmas where like 10,000 bucks when they first came out too. eventually you couldn't give them away once LCD took over.

OLED will be the same as soon as the next greatest thing comes along.

[schmerzkaufen]

Indeed, the first mainstream OLED was like in 2013, and the first also-mainstream monitor a year or two ago but it was cancelled for technical issues (probably terrible burn-in)

Apparently besides the burn-in issue OLED shares with plasma that manufacturing in several sizes including the intemerdiary fitting PC monitors, is very costly, so LG who already put all their money into factories tailored to produce 55, 65 and 77 for TVs were not interested. And Samsung who do smartphone OLEDs never trusted the tech enough to go full market.

The 'next best thing' is Micro-LED but it may be well-over a decade before going mainstream, until then we may witness something unexpected; monitor LCDs making a solid comeback (which is kinda happening right now)
Over the - long - years since no new tech came to take over, they've managed to push the response times, bit-by-bit, contrast and colors, introduced HDR and variable refresh, etc and now they're also pushing the refresh rates higher.
Visit tftcentral.co.uk they've written a summary of the current and upcoming products, and there's no denying that ye olde LCD won't die without a rather fierce fight.

[Mr. Peabody]

plasmas where like 10,000 bucks when they first came out too. eventually you couldn't give them away once LCD took over.

OLED will be the same as soon as the next greatest thing comes along.

Ten grand and the picture looked like The Mummy (1999) in transit. However, by the early/-mid-thousands, the cost was down at least three times, and they were usable displays. I love plasma over LCD.

[opt2not]

I just picked up a new LG OLED (C9 panel) and it's fantastic for gaming. Fast response rate, great deep blacks, and it's taken a wide variety of sync signals coming out of my supergun.

I've been running a plasma for the last 8 years, so an upgrade was merited. I'm glad I went with this TV, it's been pretty amazballs.

[schmerzkaufen]

That's a damn good TV...and hot!

But for a cabinet... guess it's ok for replacing those 50" rear-projection ones.

[Zebra]

plasmas where like 10,000 bucks when they first came out too. eventually you couldn't give them away once LCD took over.

OLED will be the same as soon as the next greatest thing comes along.

Ten grand and the picture looked like The Mummy (1999) in transit. However, by the early/-mid-thousands, the cost was down at least three times, and they were usable displays. I love plasma over LCD.

Yeah plasma was (and still is) the superior tech over LCD. It's better in every way except cost. A lot of people (myself included) consider the Pioneer Elite Kuro to be the best flatscreen displays ever made.

I have a 77" LG oled in my living room and I have a 12" Samsung Oled tablet (which I use for mame when traveling). The worst Oleds currently available are significantly better than the best LCDs ever made. I wouldn't worry about burn in if you're an average semi careful user. Burn-in was a potential issue with CRT, plasma and now Oled but how many times have you seen it outside a pro environment like an arcade or airport?

[lilshawn]

Yeah plasma was (and still is) the superior tech over LCD.

! can think of about 4 or 5 things right off the top of my head that make it worse over LCD.

screen burn
power consumption
display "sparkles" due to bad/failing/maladjusted kboards
weight

I mean I get what you are getting at... there ARE certain advantages to plasma (retina burning brightness, high refresh rates, great black levels) but to say it's superior is a bit of a stretch.  LCD tech is literally getting better by the day and much of the main advantages of going with plasma over LCD are almost moot. I'm not saying that LCD is now superior, just saying that everything has advantages and disadvantages over something else...just need to choose which disadvantages you are willing to live with or don't matter to you.

Even LED backlit LCD panels can get pretty good black levels due to the implementing of active baclight controls and more recently lightmasking. (essentially a 2nd layer of a "black and clear" LCD panel masks the back light to improve blacklevel.)

[opt2not]

Don’t forget: heat generation is high, and lifespan is the lowest out of all the flat panel tech. While it may look nicer, a lot of plasmas have problems with high lag as well.

My 7 year old plasma had started showing faults by the 5th year. I’m happy to move onto OLED.
Never gonna buy a plasma again.

[Zebra]

Lag has more to do with the specific processor than the type of flat-screen tech. The image on a CRT could be driven directly while flat screens have to process the image. Some have better processors than others. There is certainly nothing about LCD tech that reduces lag over Oled and plasma.

Plasma benefits from the way it updates frames so it has superior motion resolution to LCD and Oled. This is a huge factor in perceived image quality. For gaming people are always moaning about motion blur on LCDs. It's one of the many areas where it was a huge step backwards from plasma (and CRT).

All display tech aside from LCD has burn-in potential. It was an issue for CRT but I only ever saw it in pro environments like arcades and airports. Same with plasma and now Oled. It's definitely possible with negligent use but most users won't ever see it. The price you pay for not lighting pixels individually on an LCD is massively inferior contrast. Contrast is arguably the most important factor in image quality. Even with all the tricks they use like local dimming on LCDs, the image never looks as good.

I guess the intended use comes into to some extent. If I was buying information screens for airports, where image quality doesn't matter, LCD would be the better choice. If "better" means superior image quality, plasma and Oled are head and shoulders above lcd.

[Mr. Peabody]

My Panasonic TCP42U2, used, with I think channel guide burn in I didn't see at the seller's house*, the picture looked good - and it does seven years later. I can see the back-lighting, and the browser window and task bar burn-in from my use, when the image is blank, yet I don't notice these when watching programs. Arcade games look great - because the color palette is similar to CRT. Rich colors and hues. Pretty good black when displaying a null space. HLSL and png effects look good, though the former is necessary for those wanting a rougher look. Vector games look great because plasma is similar to LCD. Pixels, high definition, brilliant colors, great transparency. $400.

It took me a year or more to get the color scheme right for all things. It really pleases me. I have no intent on replacing it, though have eyed some things.

*wife and kids were out, and I helped him move his new LED LCD from his truck. Super light, but I encouraged his request for assistance.


I agree with opt2not in that the new LCDs I've seen (including the used, re-furbed Samsung on this system) have looked nice, and performed well so far or as much as I've known about their use. Color variation is bizarre, I recall reading, due to difference in source of raw materials, though I imagine each maker has their own color systems, etc....

[opt2not]

Lag has more to do with the specific processor than the type of flat-screen tech. The image on a CRT could be driven directly while flat screens have to process the image. Some have better processors than others. There is certainly nothing about LCD tech that reduces lag over Oled and plasma.

Plasma benefits from the way it updates frames so it has superior motion resolution to LCD and Oled. This is a huge factor in perceived image quality. For gaming people are always moaning about motion blur on LCDs. It's one of the many areas where it was a huge step backwards from plasma (and CRT).

All display tech aside from LCD has burn-in potential. It was an issue for CRT but I only ever saw it in pro environments like arcades and airports. Same with plasma and now Oled. It's definitely possible with negligent use but most users won't ever see it. The price you pay for not lighting pixels individually on an LCD is massively inferior contrast. Contrast is arguably the most important factor in image quality. Even with all the tricks they use like local dimming on LCDs, the image never looks as good.

I guess the intended use comes into to some extent. If I was buying information screens for airports, where image quality doesn't matter, LCD would be the better choice. If "better" means superior image quality, plasma and Oled are head and shoulders above lcd.

LOL what. Superior motion resolution? I call BS on this.

Plasma, regardless of what actual panel have always been slower in motion than LED's. There have been COUNTLESS lag test results comparing plasmas to LED's for the last few years, especially within the retro gaming community, those who are used to CRT lag times. It's quite vastly well known by now that the best gaming monitors you can get are LED based panels, not Plasma...google is your friend here.

My Panasonic Viera was one of the best valued Plasmas when it came out, for price and image quality. It had a great picture for it's time, good smart features, but it lacked the refresh/respawn rate suitable for gaming. Even when you turned on "game mode", which is supposed to do less buffering.
At the time, LED TV's were out, and it was night and day playing games at friend's houses. We were big into Street Fighter 4 at the time, a game that frame timings come down to 1 or 2 frame links.

You're not going to convince me, or the rest of the gaming community that plasmas are "better" for gaming. There is too much data out there to the contrary. You can even buy a lag tester now that will give you finite readings of lag on any display you attach it to.

edit:  Also, I should add, most internal upscalers on plasmas have been proven to be pretty shoddy, so if you're feeding lower resolution signals to Plasmas, youre going to be in for a rude awakening due to poor image quality, unsupported sync levels, or artifacting.

[schmerzkaufen]

You're talking about input lag which is a distinct topic. Zebra's right motion resolution is superior on plasma, IIRC those refresh flashing the whole frame at something like 600Hz subframes evry frame at 60Hz without interpolation. I think that was required to control the brightness anyway, and that turned out very advantageous for motion.

Overall I agree it was a better tech, for the job of displaying most contents, it was the closest thing to compensating for CRT technically-speaking when you think of the required properties to do an equivalent job, but it sure had several downsides.

Burn is the most annoying, today people would also complain about the low brightness output (too dim for HDR), and the power consumption was scary indeed, tho on that topic I've seen a prototype of a low consumption set once at the IFA in Berlin, but that was like in 2013 so it was too late.
If only plasma has had like 5 more years...*sigh*

[Zebra]

Input lag numbers are all over the map even with tv's that use the same tech. You can't use any one TV to make a general judgement about a display tech's potential for lag. You can find LCDs with 70Ms and LCDs with 16ms because it's down to the processor. You always have to search for specific models that are good for gaming with flat screens.

My 77" LG Oled has lower input lag than a Sony 77" Oled. Why, when they use the same Oled panel made by the same company? Because they have different processors.

Assuming you buy one of the lower input lag models, plasma displays are better for both gaming and watching TV /movies (than LCDs). They produce superior colors and noticeably less blur which makes us perceive a more detailed image. That last point is particularly important for gamers because game modes usually turn off motion interpolation.

[lilshawn]

lag depends highly on how much buggery the LVDS procesor does to the frame to get it ready for pushing out to the panel.

this is why lots of manufactures implement a game mode. it looks ugly, but it has no (or minimal) frame processing.

typically the GOOD numbers TV companies stick in your face are game mode numbers.

the great looking pics have crap performance with 250ms of lag.

[opt2not]

Assuming you buy one of the lower input lag models, plasma displays are better for both gaming and watching TV /movies (than LCDs). They produce superior colors and noticeably less blur which makes us perceive a more detailed image. That last point is particularly important for gamers because game modes usually turn off motion interpolation.

And yet, the top TV's that are best for gaming have no mention of plasmas...so again, I call ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---.

https://www.pcmag.com/article/355754/the-best-tvs-for-gaming
LED's and OLED.  Where are the Plasma's, hmm?

https://www.gamesradar.com/best-gaming-tvs/
Again, no Plasma's on the list.

https://www.cnet.com/news/the-best-tvs-for-gaming-with-low-input-lag-in-2019/
No mention of plasma models here either...

https://displaylag.com/best-low-input-lag-tvs-gaming-by-gamers/
...And yet another best-of list that has zero Plasma's listed.

I can continue to post comparison articles from a dozen more sites, but I rest my case.

You have a choice to believe a plethora of sites with comparisons, hard number statistics, and testimonies.  Or you can believe some rando's opinion on a niche forum. 
 

[wp34]

Do they even make plasma TV's anymore?  This seems like a moot debate.

I love my plasma.  They are to TV what vinyl records are to music.

[Osirus23]

They are to TV what vinyl records are to music.

Something measurably and definitively inferior yet praised for reasons purely subjective and emotional?

[Zebra]

Yeah, except for plasma tv's are not inferior to LCD. Comparing CDs to MP3 would be more accurate. Of the four mainstream TV technologies, LCD is the worst in terms of image quality. Its has the worst contrast, blur, pixel response time and color.

It's plus points are that it's cheap and doesn't burn in. But it doesn't burn in because it can't can't control pixels individually which is one of the reasons they produce an inferior image.

[Zebra]

Assuming you buy one of the lower input lag models, plasma displays are better for both gaming and watching TV /movies (than LCDs). They produce superior colors and noticeably less blur which makes us perceive a more detailed image. That last point is particularly important for gamers because game modes usually turn off motion interpolation.

And yet, the top TV's that are best for gaming have no mention of plasmas...so again, I call ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---.

https://www.pcmag.com/article/355754/the-best-tvs-for-gaming
LED's and OLED.  Where are the Plasma's, hmm?

https://www.gamesradar.com/best-gaming-tvs/
Again, no Plasma's on the list.

https://www.cnet.com/news/the-best-tvs-for-gaming-with-low-input-lag-in-2019/
No mention of plasma models here either...

https://displaylag.com/best-low-input-lag-tvs-gaming-by-gamers/
...And yet another best-of list that has zero Plasma's listed.

I can continue to post comparison articles from a dozen more sites, but I rest my case.

You have a choice to believe a plethora of sites with comparisons, hard number statistics, and testimonies.  Or you can believe some rando's opinion on a niche forum. 
 

Surely the point that they don't make Plasma anymore can't be lost on you... It should be obvious why, on sites where they making shopping recommendations for this year, they don't discuss plasma. They don't discuss crt either and yet, no display tech is better for gaming.

For gaming, display technology has been on a downward trajectory since the decline of CRT. Oled is the first ray of sunshine we've had in this space for a while.

[Osirus23]

Surely the point that they don't make Plasma anymore can't be lost on you... It should be obvious why, on sites where they making shopping recommendations for this year, they don't discuss plasma.

Indeed. The last plasma TVs ended sale five years ago. I can't believe a 2019 buyers guide doesn't discuss them!

[opt2not]

This thread is about OLED’s, and what’s the best current options. If I’m going to buy older tech, plasma would be the last thing I’d get. Never on the last 10 years have I heard plasma was great for gaming. So whatever is said about plasmas here isn’t going to convince me. But feel free to start your own love-letter thread about plasma.

Back on topic, OLED TV’s! Greatest current option for gaming!! Hands down.

Black levels are fantastic. Input lag, on-point. Even my C9 Panel LG 65” OLED takes some of the problematic sync rates other TV’s have trouble with. Like the notorious F3 arcade hardware!

[Osirus23]

Did QD ever become a thing or was it abandoned?

[Drnick]

Samsung use QD in their QLED units.  Over here in the UK at least it's usually LG with OLED vs Samsung with QLED,  I looked at both (IMHO the OLED was a better picture) I then went with a Panasonic which is neither OLED or QLED but was 10" Bigger and 300 cheaper   A friend of mine went with the 55" LG OLED and the picture, especially with 4K source is amazing.  I really must set him up with a mame setup using CRT Shader/scanlines etc and see what that plays like

[Moksi]

WOuld like to see some pics of the oled owners with example running mame on it

[Zebra]

WOuld like to see some pics of the oled owners with example running mame on it

They're a mixed bag for mame. On the one hand, they have the best pixel response time and do a great job with shaders and other effects. They look much better than on any LCD and obviously, the contrast is unmatched. On the other hand, they suffer from the same problem as other 4k tvs in that upscaled 240p and 480i content looks horrible. So, you'd still need to invest in a quality upscaler and not one of the cheaper line doublers or deinterlacers. LG oleds do not do a great job with 480p content on their own. Plus, unlike CRT and Plasma, they have an issue with motion blur like lcds. And, unlike with movie and TV content, you can't really use interpolation to solve it in game mode. So it's down to black frame insertion, which some like more than others.

I have a 77" oled in my living room but I still choose to use my CRT arcade monitors for 240p, 480i and 480p games. I use the Oled for anything 720p and above. The PS3 looks particularly amazing on Oled displays. Thanks to that amazing contrast I can see details I never knew were there before.

You won't be able to tell any of that from pictures.

[opt2not]

WOuld like to see some pics of the oled owners with example running mame on it

I rarely run Mame now-a-days. But I can post some images or original hardware, running through a supergun to OSSC if you're interested.

My C9 panel LG 65" has taken every arcade PCB I've thrown at it, including some of the sync timing problem ones like the Taito F3 (Bubble Symphony / Bubble Bobble II, Ray Force, etc...) which outputs a sync signal that is problematic for some TV's to process. 
Mame users might not have this issue since the timings are probably all (inaccurately) crushed into some standard that most displays can handle.

On the other hand, they suffer from the same problem as other 4k tvs in that upscaled 240p and 480i content looks horrible. So, you'd still need to invest in a quality upscaler and not one of the cheaper line doublers or deinterlacers. LG oleds do not do a great job with 480p content on their own.

Definitely get a good upscaler (like the OSSC) for 4k tv's.  Relying on any tv's internal upscaler is a roll of the dice, tbh. 

But as for 480p content, my new 2019 C9 panel has taken all my old consoles at 480p with no issues.  Dreamcast 480p enabled games look amazing. PS2 480p is fantastic as well.
Perhaps the previous LG OLED panels were having issues with 480p, but this new panel has been the tits so far.

Plus, unlike CRT and Plasma, they have an issue with motion blur like lcds.

This is just false. There is no issue with motion blur, these panels are fast enough to have a clean image processed in motion, and there aren't any artifacts or "smear" during fast motions.   Please post a video of these issues you speak of.
Because I'm able to game on mine without noticing any motion blur issues...

[Moksi]

WOuld like to see some pics of the oled owners with example running mame on it

I rarely run Mame now-a-days. But I can post some images or original hardware, running through a supergun to OSSC if you're interested.

My C9 panel LG 65" has taken every arcade PCB I've thrown at it, including some of the sync timing problem ones like the Taito F3 (Bubble Symphony / Bubble Bobble II, Ray Force, etc...) which outputs a sync signal that is problematic for some TV's to process. 
Mame users might not have this issue since the timings are probably all (inaccurately) crushed into some standard that most displays can handle.

YEs im interested in some pictures especially Mame , i bought a little crt sony trinitron month ago to connect older consoles to it
 i made an arcade cab with a 27 inch BenQ RL2755HM  monitor. (connected with a scanline switch)
So since the oled produce better results it will look better , guess have to wait for 27 inch to arrive


 

[schmerzkaufen]

Plus, unlike CRT and Plasma, they have an issue with motion blur like lcds.

This is just false. There is no issue with motion blur, these panels are fast enough to have a clean image processed in motion, and there aren't any artifacts or "smear" during fast motions.   Please post a video of these issues you speak of.
Because I'm able to game on mine without noticing any motion blur issues...

He's not wrong that's just a tech fact, there is more than a single blur-generating characteristic to displays.
It is way too strong to call it an issue though because it isn't one.

OLEDs as they are sold now like LCDs use sample-and-hold to refresh the screen, which unlike Plasma and CRT creates motion persistence. At 60Hz there is no question that the latter two are better in that aspect.

BUT, you're right that it is also true that with perfect pixel response OLEDs are good-enough, leaving LCDs in the dust motion-wise even if they're both sample-and-hold techs.
For most users that's enough a progress in motion perception compared to LCDs, and I agree with them.
And we indeed don't have new Plasma sets to buy now, only used models with indeed often more lag than today's available average, obsolete processing, and no fancy stuff like 4K or HDR.

MicroLED future alternative likely will use sample-and-hold too, but that tech could be sturdy-enough so that manufacturers would quit chickening-out from introducing pro-tier blur reduction like those Sony monitors feature, to the mainstream market.
(The only OLEDs to offer non-sample-and-hold are the high-end Sony broadcast monitors, the LG TVs have strobing but as an inferior method not really fit for gaming)

[Zebra]

Some of the potential issues (with any display tech) seem to bother some people more than others. I know people who are driven mad when they notice blur on an Oled or LCD. I also know plenty who don't notice it at all unless it's specifically pointed out to them. It's the same with input lag to an extent. Some claim they can notice a 10ms difference while others think it's BS and 10ms is not perceivable.

I would encourage anyone to go see it for themselves before investing in a nice Oled. And, if possible take your source material with you to a store. You never really know what will or won't bother you until you see it.

I concur with the view that Oled is the best display tech currently available for HD gaming.

[Zebra]

Here's a video of my 4-year old playing Double Dragon Neon on our 77" LG Oled:




He likes to add his own sound effects. I'm not sure how much you can really tell from a video of a display but games like this (and anything PS3 and later) look fantastic on a large Oled. They play pretty well on the LG models too.

I'll try and get some footage with older low res content and post it tomorrow but these 4k sets suck for anything 240p / 480i or 480p. A problem that will only get worse with 8k...

[Moksi]

Like to see how the old school mame arcade games look on it.

lcd is known to produce these blocky images with those type games

but if the colour results are quiet like an crt this is a good improvement

[Zebra]

Like to see how the old school mame arcade games look on it.

lcd is known to produce these blocky images with those type games

but if the colour results are quiet like an crt this is a good improvement

I'm planning to take some footage when I unpack my mame pc (we're in the process of moving). I can tell you that I don't think these or any other 4k display makes a good mame monitor. The more you upscale a low res image, the more noise and other issues you get. The image will look jaggy even with an XRGB mini or HLSL shaders (although both these things help). It looks noticeably worse, imo, than on my 1080p and 1440p monitors.

Oleds give you better contrast and a faster pixel response time than LCD. Both these things make a noticeable difference but, if the goal is to get the best image for 240p, 480i and 480p games, you can't beat a CRT. If you're looking for a dedicated mame monitor, I'd look elsewhere. If you play newer games (ps3 and later) LG Oleds are among the best currently gaming TV's.

[keilmillerjr]

Like to see how the old school mame arcade games look on it.

lcd is known to produce these blocky images with those type games

but if the colour results are quiet like an crt this is a good improvement

Free crt.

[Moksi]

 i have an benq 27 inch BenQ RL2755HM  for the cab.
and i use a small crt trinitron mostly for some older consoles of course lcd cannot compare with crt.
 what irritates me most now is the contrast of the lcd.
looked at some of the oled vs lcd on google.

oled vs lcd the colours of the oled for sure pop out and refresh rate also better like you said.
its a step in the better direction with the colours just curious
guess i have to wait until some 27 inch monitor becomes available

i like to play old school mame but also the newer arcade games taito sega ring edge
not an crt expert but with newer games doesnt it give trouble displaying those 1080 hd games

if you post some of your pics with hlsl and without , curious how it looks though
when i checked oled vs lcd they compared them mainly in the dark