[TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Breaking news in the gaming monitor industry! Press releases, new monitors, rumors. IPS, OLED, 144Hz, G-SYNC, Ultrawides, etc. Submit news you see online!
Post Reply
Futuretech
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Oct 2020, 23:52

[TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by Futuretech » 07 Apr 2023, 10:53

TFTCentral Monitor Oled Panel Roadmap Updates March 2023

Higher resolutions and refresh rate including 4K 240Hz and up to 480Hz, it's gonna be a while but the companies are listening to consumers and paying attention to make changes and fortify OLED.

As mentioned in the 480Hz section it posses a (hypothetical) 720Hz LCD display capacity for motion persistence.
27″ with 1440p and 480Hz refresh rate – building on the excellent motion clarity of the current 240Hz OLED options, LG.Display plan to push this further with a 480Hz refresh rate panel option. It has the same 27″ (actually 26.5″) screen size and 2560 x 1440 resolution but the refresh rate is doubled. For games and content where you can drive 480fps, this should offer amazing motion clarity, which should be equivalent to a (currently hypothetical) 720Hz LCD panel in clarity. These refresh rates should also be easy for OLED panels to keep up with, thanks to their near-instant response times.
1000/720 = 1.39ms or about 0.61ms faster than the FW900 CRT or any CRT that used the SMPTC(2millisecond phosphors), as far as I'm aware the Ultra-Fast SMPTC 2,000FPS/2,000Hz(500 microsecond) phosphors were going to be used in the future. I'm sure a Hypothetical Sony GDM-FW1000 would have used it.

This is actually perfectly normal remember OLED = Microsecond mostly, semi-Millisecond device.

As mentioned in various reviews the response time actuation of the the pixels is 100,000Hz(10microseconds), the Grey-to-Grey time is between 10,000Hz(0.01) or (100 microsecond) and 33,333.33Hz(0.03) or (30 microsecond) for current panels. And the Color-to-Color transitions can be as fast as 200microseconds to an average of about 600microseconds to as high as 800microseconds for most colors sub-76% as for the remaining 24% of colors at a certain point that number can go upwards to 5 milliseconds.

As Mr.Rehjon(CBB) replied to me OLED displays can operate in an asynchronous way for response times, pixel changes etc.etc.

On top of that there is a new display Standard that Chief Blur Buster(Mr.Mark Rehjon) should investigate at least being mentioned in this article.
Dynamic Frequency and Resolution (DFR) – choose between resolution or refresh rate!

One of the most interesting developments planned is the new “DFR” (Dynamic Frequency and Resolution) technology. This allows you to choose whether you want to prioritise resolution of refresh rate, giving great flexibility for different gaming scenarios and offering you the best of both worlds. The planned new 31.5″ 4K 240Hz panel will be the first to feature DFR.

For graphics focused games and for those who want to prioritise detail and resolution, you can run in the native 4K @ 240Hz mode, which is already very fast anyway. But there is also the option to switch to a 1080p resolution (1920 x 1080) and run the same panel at 480Hz instead! So for games focused on speed, frame rates and competitive Esports, this could be a really useful option.

DFR allows
4K at 240Hz….OR
1080p at 480Hz

More information about this will be available in the future, but we will be interested to see how this would work with screen scaling – could you run the 1080p @ 480Hz in a smaller window size for instance to simulate a smaller monitor? And also if there are any midway options like 1440p @ 360Hz also possible? Right now, the prospect of 4K @ 240Hz or 1080p @ 480Hz from the same 31.5″ panel is definitely very interesting.

LG.Display plan to increase the brightness of these future panels, with target specs of 1300 nits peak brightness (HDR) and 275 nits (100% APL) suggested.

This new panel is expected around Q3 2024.
Future Samsung QD-OLED Plans

We have less detail at the moment on Samsung’s QD-OLED plans or any dates unfortunately, but we do have some headlines. Here are some of the new panel options planned from Samsung – more info as we get it:

34″ ultrawide with 3440 x 1440 and 240Hz refresh rate – building on their existing 175Hz panel option in this space, Samsung are intending to increase the refresh rate to 240Hz in a new panel. This would compete directly with LG.Display’s scheduled alternative and allow them to remain competitive in the 34″ ultrawide OLED panel space.
31.5″ with 3840 x 2160 “4K” resolution and 240Hz – a direct competitor to the panels LG.Display are planning from their technology
27″ with 3840 x 2160 “4K” resolution and 240Hz – again directly competing with an option LG.Display are currently considering. Could Samsung get this high density option to market first?
27″ with 2560 x 1440 resolution and 360Hz – this would be an alternative to LG.Display’s existing WOLED option of this size and resolution, but with an increased refresh rate of 360Hz above LG.Display’s current 240Hz option.

More details on Samsung’s QD-OLED plans if and when we get it.
DFR is most likely a byproduct of 8K, I bet someone said instead of 8K which is a long way away. Why don't we harness the bandwidth of 8K and cut it in half to 4K and on top of that pump up the refresh rate. It's a simple technology and simple thing but I'm betting it posses a lot more intelligence due to AI upscaling and things like Nvidia, Intel, and AMDs implementations of artificial properties for image quality.

It's a shame OLED is a fixed-resolution display unlike CRTs even if CRTs possessed a native resolution but I see that as we advance with AI and other processing technologies we can go into smaller resolutions with less negatives in display as there is still plenty of people wanting to play at various resolutions or watch content that is housed in a smaller resolution.

I just hope that as we advance OLED that the life of the panel is extended and we experience like LCDs at first there was some burn-in and some issues but as time went on there's people with 10-15-20+ year old LCDs and they still work perfectly fine.

There are too many people who are like I used OLED since 2018-2019 and nothing. And then there are others who are like I bought OLED recently and it is messed up.

I'm more wanting MicroLED as that seems the future. But if OLED fixes it's life-span, burn-in issues I can see lots of people ditching LCD and going OLED route. The only other issue is the brightness, HDR thing which people have stated it's improved a bit but there is a vocal minority wanting better HDR, Brightness and whatnot even if the technology doesn't allow those levels and we still have to wait for better OLED.

GammaLyrae
Posts: 116
Joined: 28 Mar 2018, 01:44

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by GammaLyrae » 07 Apr 2023, 12:51

The 480hz oled panel intrigues me. It's very impractical to hit those framerates in anything but esports games right now (csgo, apex, rocket league, r6siege, etc)

I know the Chief said he was assisting with bfi for upcoming oled panels in a way we're not going to see in this year's 240hz models, but a future panel entirely. If it's the 480hz one... A 480hz panel that can do 2ms~ Mprt at sensible refresh rates (60, 120, 240) with options to increase to 4ms or even 8ms for certain resolutions to trade out for higher brightness would be welcome. Especially since practical testing by rtings shows that lg's WRGB layout is more durable and resilient to burn in than Samsung's QOLED, a crucial leg up if we're evaluating it for full time desktop pc use (vs a TV with more varied content)

A 480hz ceiling for dlss 3 and other frame interpolation technologies would be pretty solid for most motion clarity enthusiasts that favor the brute force method vs strobing.

I like 0.1ms-1ms mprt, but I'd accept slower phosphor crt equivalents on modern displays, resolutions, and aspect ratios.
Last edited by GammaLyrae on 10 Apr 2023, 15:25, edited 1 time in total.

thatoneguy
Posts: 181
Joined: 06 Aug 2015, 17:16

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by thatoneguy » 09 Apr 2023, 07:21

Futuretech wrote:
07 Apr 2023, 10:53

1000/720 = 1.39ms or about 0.61ms faster than the FW900 CRT or any CRT that used the SMPTC(2millisecond phosphors), as far as I'm aware the Ultra-Fast SMPTC 2,000FPS/2,000Hz(500 microsecond) phosphors were going to be used in the future. I'm sure a Hypothetical Sony GDM-FW1000 would have used it.
That is 720hz LCD which means 1.39 + 1-2ms of response time blur
So 480hz OLED is not faster than the FW900

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 09 Apr 2023, 17:08

I see some forum replies from people who has not seen the world's best blur-reducing LCDs;
Futuretech wrote:
07 Apr 2023, 10:53
1000/720 = 1.39ms or about 0.61ms faster than the FW900 CRT or any CRT that used the SMPTC(2millisecond phosphors), as far as I'm aware the Ultra-Fast SMPTC 2,000FPS/2,000Hz(500 microsecond) phosphors were going to be used in the future. I'm sure a Hypothetical Sony GDM-FW1000 would have used it.
Apples vs bananas.

GtG and MPRT are two different pixel response benchmarks. See GtG vs MPRT.

GtG being faster than CRT will never have less blur than CRT. You need to fix MPRT too.
thatoneguy wrote:
09 Apr 2023, 07:21
That is 720hz LCD which means 1.39 + 1-2ms of response time blur
So 480hz OLED is not faster than the FW900
Apples vs bananas.

GtG and MPRT are two different pixel response benchmarks. See GtG vs MPRT.

GtG being faster than CRT will never have less blur than CRT. You need to fix MPRT too.

_____

You may wish to study more about the difference between GtG and MPRT. You can have less motion blur than a CRT with a strobe backlight LCD, such as a well-tuned Quest 2 VR headset, or a well-tuned ViewSonic XG2431 (using 100Hz QFT).

The majority of strobe backlights (I'd even say 99%) of strobe backlights are crap. But a few can beat a CRT in motion resolution now. The best strobe-backlight LCDs have 10x less motion blur than even a 240Hz OLED at the moment; the Oculus Quest 2 LCD strobes at 0.3ms MPRT with a perfect "GtG completely hidden from eyes" record.

You can still have less motion blur than a CRT, even if GtG is slower than a CRT, because of the complete-hiding of GtG in total darkness, leaving behind pure MPRT only. When GtG is hidden from the visibility equation, you only need to focus on MPRT, and MPRT is equal to pulsewidth.

The reason why some LCDs can have less motion blur than a CRT tube, if well calibrated with gigantic refresh rate headroom (e.g. 100Hz strobed refresh rate on a 360Hz LCD).
- MPRT is pixel visibility time (and is controlled by backlight)
- GtG is pixel transition time (and is controlled by panel)

If factory LCD GtG is 0.5ms but real-world LCD GtG is 5ms, you can still hide it with a large 7ms blanking interval.

A 360Hz LCD can refresh a "100Hz refresh cycle" in 1/360sec (2.77ms), allowing (1/100sec) - (1/360sec) = 7.23 milliseconds of total darkness to finish LCD GtG completely unseen by human eyes.

That's why if you want a LCD that has less motion blur than a CRT, you need to severely underclock its refresh rate, combined with some strobe tricks + QFT, etc.

See? That's why some strobed LCD will still be far beyond some desktop OLEDs for a while, until OLEDs support subrefresh rolling-scan BFI (e.g. flashing in brief flashes).

The VR vendors use the refresh rate headroom trick. The panel inside the Quest 2 is actually capable of well beyond 120Hz, but they redirect that headroom to crosstalk-free strobe operation instead.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

thatoneguy
Posts: 181
Joined: 06 Aug 2015, 17:16

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by thatoneguy » 10 Apr 2023, 05:05

Chief, I'm pretty sure we all kow that by now :roll:
We were talking about Sample-and-Hold matching FW900
480fps@480hz OLED doesn't match FW900 since 480hz is about 2.08ms + about 0.6ms of pixel response time or so(no matter what people say about OLED being 0 response time it's bullshit since it's a lot slower in response time compared to CRT) so that is blurrier than 2ms FW900.

Futuretech
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Oct 2020, 23:52

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by Futuretech » 10 Apr 2023, 17:54

thatoneguy wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 05:05
Chief, I'm pretty sure we all kow that by now :roll:
We were talking about Sample-and-Hold matching FW900
480fps@480hz OLED doesn't match FW900 since 480hz is about 2.08ms + about 0.6ms of pixel response time or so(no matter what people say about OLED being 0 response time it's bullshit since it's a lot slower in response time compared to CRT) so that is blurrier than 2ms FW900.
FW900 posses 2ms or 3ms, at a certain point Sony cheapened out the FW900 to 3ms phosphors. If they made a (hypothetical) FW1000 it would come with Ultra-Fast 0.5ms(2000Hz) phosphors, SMPTC-E variant; unfortunately that didn't pan out, LCD killed CRTs as well as Plasma a few years later.

OLED as far as models from 2018-Current(As of the time of this post ~2023) are between 0.2-0.5/0.6-0.8/up to 5 milliseconds.

Microsecond mostly to Millisecond sometimes display wise. So 0.2ms (200μs) best case, average of 0.5ms-0.6ms(500μs-600μs), and up to 0.8ms(800μs) for up to ~76% of it's Color-to-Color transitions. At the ~24% mark or so up to 5ms or 2.5 times the persistent 2ms of the FW900. Just recently a OLED display that I can't recall scored a terrible 14ms orange transition in a particular percentage area. For OLED panels that are around they are green across the board meeting or exceeding LCD and crappier CRT and it's response time being in the 0.2-0.8 up to 5ms. But this one panel hits 14ms in certain transitions or orange level.

Now some are how can the OLED suck because the FW900 is an impulse-decay system. OLED requires two things Black Frame Insertion(BFI) or drop the color-to-color negatives it posses in the millisecond down to Microsecond(sub-ms) for 100% of it's Color-to-Color transitions to avoid smearing/ghosting and brute force the Sample & Hold at or past 500Hz to 1000Hz and beyond. Either BFI is being hinted as incoming or Mr.Rehjon is correct ONLY through brute force will the manufacturers push the envelope. I'd rather go BFI route keep it for gaming or entertainment and return back to Sample & Hold Mode for desktop duty to avoid any flicker or any transient properties OLED displays.

OLED as Mr.Rehjon replied to me is an, "Asynchronous Display".

Grey-to-Grey the most commonly used marketing bullshit term for response times of LCDs(LCDs CAN hit microsecond properties but as with marketing terms of current E-Sports panels but this number is a small percentage transition. LCDs can easily hit double-digit areas) is actually a valid metric in OLED in fact OLED can be used as a display tester to compare and contrast Grey-to-Grey modes.

Current 2018-2023 as of the reviews around the internet show 0.1ms(100μs) to 0.33ms(30μs) GtG response times of 10,000Hz up to 33,333.3Hz.

Color-to-Color: Current panels that do not respond past 5ms about ~76% of it's transitions are sub-ms or μs response times. Best, average, and worst is 0.2ms up to 0.8ms with average of 0.5ms-0.6ms these are the most common transitory numbers and are capable by the OLED. As for worst case that number hits up to 5ms. Again an OLED or two panel type can hit nearly 14ms or 71Hz.

So Color-to-Color Microsecond mostly to some millisecond is 5,000Hz best case and worst case up to 200Hz response periods. In said orange level panels nearing 71Hz.

On/Off as Mr.Rehjon mentioned with LCD the electric fire nature of digital panels compared to ADC electron gun means the LCD/OLED panels fires more consistently. The electron gun sweeps at sub-10 microsecond the electron gun is faster.

On/Off for OLED is 100,000Hz(10μs) or 0.01ms. So OLED posses a quick period of actuation perhaps more consistent and responsive than the CRT especially considering some are 15+ years old nearing 20 years now.

As we can see 1000/480 = 2.08 + 0.2 to 0.8 to 5ms

Using current OLED panels data. 2.28ms best, average 2.58ms-2.68ms up to 7.08ms worst and if panels hit upwards of 14ms in scenarios then 16.08ms

FW900: 2ms or 3ms depending on phosphors 333.33Hz or 500Hz.

OLED:(Hypothetical calculation using current understanding): 2.28ms-2.58ms-2.68ms-7.08ms-16.08ms or 62Hz-141Hz-373Hz-388Hz-439Hz.

So a 62Hz up to 439Hz panel technology. It's response time is 41Hz slower than 480 or about ~9% slower.

We need either BFI high refresh rate tuned to a low response time to cut into the Sample & Hold time. OR somehow push the CtC response time down to sub-millisecond, down to microsecond, to cut into the millisecond window time. And push refresh rates 500Hz or beyond.

So no 480Hz OLED still doesn't surpass FW900 consistent 2ms. I have no idea on the milli, micro, nano fire of the electron gun and it's response times as well as latency periods.

But the FW900s persistent 2ms or 3ms maintains a higher reduction in motion properties.

OLED is nothing currently more than an Ultra-fast LCD. It probably doesn't beat high-end BFI panel LCD but it's fast nature can impress people.

But knowing how much speed junkies we have some of you OLED still still needs more technology.

I hope OLED is improved over the course of this period of time. OLED has improved in the marketing ranges and even though monitor sales are down. OLED climbed 0.6% in the market research of monitors in fact OLED went up compared to LCD.

As for MicroLED which I'm more interested in albeit I'm not harping on OLED. I hope microLED does come out with full bravado and force. I hope OLED pushes enough buttons unto MicroLED developers that the first series of MicroLED are speed demons.

Excuse my long post I had to comment on it. I hope my arithmetic skills are good as I'm terrible at math. But [thatoneguy] is correct, FW900 still retains a higher tier than OLED at least with some LCDs they can produce less blur. But OLED is something people want they want to avoid TN/IPS/VA they want the better OLED panel even if OLED does come with it's own rabbit hole.

Either Mr.Rehjon is right on brute force or we get lucky and get BFI. Either way OLED is WAY better than most LCDs barring a few champion E-Sport or ultra-high end LCDs that are basically CRT performance in accuracy and colors. I just hope we get improvements like I said I'm bullish on MicroLED but also bullish on OLED for those that want to finally move away from CRT.

Unfortunately, not yet. But we are close.

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 10 Apr 2023, 19:50

Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
Chief, I'm pretty sure we all kow that by now :roll:
We were talking about Sample-and-Hold matching FW900
480fps@480hz OLED doesn't match FW900 since 480hz is about 2.08ms + about 0.6ms of pixel response time or so(no matter what people say about OLED being 0 response time it's bullshit since it's a lot slower in response time compared to CRT) so that is blurrier than 2ms FW900.
I agree. Sample-and-hold competitive to a CRT tube will definitely require quadruple digit frame rate, at quadruple digit refresh rate, combined with an ultrafast GtG that is a tiny fraction of a refresh cycle.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
FW900 posses 2ms or 3ms, at a certain point Sony cheapened out the FW900 to 3ms phosphors. If they made a (hypothetical) FW1000 it would come with Ultra-Fast 0.5ms(2000Hz) phosphors, SMPTC-E variant; unfortunately that didn't pan out, LCD killed CRTs as well as Plasma a few years later.
FW900 is a low bar, but remember phosphor fade measurement standard varies a lot. A CRT phosphor fades gradually. FW900 takes more than 1 second to completely fade to black, but FW900 takes less than 3ms to fade to 10% intensity. So I don't know what measurement standard you are using to quote the 2-3ms, as phosphor is not a squarewave behavior.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
OLED as far as models from 2018-Current(As of the time of this post ~2023) are between 0.2-0.5/0.6-0.8/up to 5 milliseconds.
OLED GtG is not the weak link, OLED MPRT is the weak link.

Remember, OLED GtG can be interrupted by another OLED GtG. Which means the OLED GtG of 0.2ms at 240Hz can actually speed up to ~0.1ms at 1000Hz -- with no change to the OLED formulation (just a faster backplane). So citing OLED GtG for a specific refresh rate, does not mean the OLED has the same GtG at some future refresh rate.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
OLED as Mr.Rehjon replied to me is an, "Asynchronous Display".
I never said that. Please copy and paste or cite. You may be confusing "asynchronous" with "variable refresh rate compatible" or "sample and hold".

While technically, all sample and hold displays (whether be LCD, OLED, or other), are more asynchronous capable in terms of how you can use software-based frametime to control motionblur -- and allow the GPU to vary frametimes -- I never used the word "asynchronous" -- so it is probably a mis-spin of something I said in the past. Perhaps you may wish to quote what I said earlier -- so I can clarify.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
Grey-to-Grey the most commonly used marketing bullshit term for response times of LCDs
Both LCD and OLED GtG is equally bullshit or not bullshit -- there is no difference in the bullshit factor for OLED GtG versus LCD GtG. For example, there are side effects from trying to make OLED GtG too fast, creating some dark-ghosting effects on an OLED because of over-aggressive OLED overdrive algorithms. Some complaints on [H]ardForum about that, for example.

Both LCD and OLED GtG are not bullshit when they are measured properly, in an apples vs apples manner. The biggest problem is VESA's artifical 10% to 90% cutoff. This artifical problem applies to both LCD and OLED.

Image
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
Current 2018-2023 as of the reviews around the internet show 0.1ms(100μs) to 0.33ms(30μs) GtG response times of 10,000Hz up to 33,333.3Hz.
You cannot map GtG to refresh rates.

You can have superior 1000Hz displays with 1.1ms GtG than inferior 2000Hz displays with 0.495ms GtG, because of the way GtG90% is cut off, if the visibility below GtG10% and GtG90% is worse.

I remember when LCD GtG was 33ms-50ms on 60Hz displays. Today, some displays still have 50ms GtG (e.g. VA LCDs on dark colors) if you try to measure to GtG99.9% instead of GtG90% threshold.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
On/Off as Mr.Rehjon mentioned with LCD the electric fire nature of digital panels compared to ADC electron gun means the LCD/OLED panels fires more consistently. The electron gun sweeps at sub-10 microsecond the electron gun is faster.
I am concerned when people mis-quote my name incorrectly; you've mis-quoted my name yet again in a mis-phrased mis-context. Please, for the foreseeable future, link only to my posts/articles, and not claim "I said X"
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
On/Off for OLED is 100,000Hz(10μs) or 0.01ms.
1. While faster GtG generally helps motion clarity -- it is not always assured. GtG ms never maps directly to Hz. You can have situations where GtG slower than a Hz, and still have better motion clarity than a display with GtG faster than a Hz, simply because of the shape of the goddamn curve. Thus, due to the curve shapes (of both LCD curves and OLED curves), it's best not to quote the myth.

2. OLED GtG is actually closer to 0.1ms-0.5ms if you GtG-heatmap the entire OLED GtG heatmap, it is more glassfloor (i.e. consistent) than an LCD. However, it's not perfectly flat, and if you were correct, you're only talking about a monochrome image between the two OLED colors that the manufacturer GtG-measured. Other OLED pixel color combinations are often 10x slower, even if vastly far faster than LCD.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
So OLED posses a quick period of actuation perhaps more consistent and responsive than the CRT especially considering some are 15+ years old nearing 20 years now.
This discussion is useless and academic without enough refresh rate to lower MPRT.

The only way to lower the MPRT of sample and hold is more framerate at more refreshrate. We need massive amounts more -- 240Hz OLED is not enough to match a FW900 CRT.

You have to consider the SHAPE of the phosphor curve for CRT, and the SHAPE of the OLED GtG curves (of all color combinations, some OLED GtG's are 10x slower than others), versus the SHAPE of the LCD GtG curves.

Math for a specific GtG is meaningless "forum fightback the other user" material, when you're not acknowledging the curves.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
FW900: 2ms or 3ms depending on phosphors 333.33Hz or 500Hz.
This was already mythbusted -- GtG doesnt map to Hz.
GtG is only to a percentage threshold.
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
Either Mr.Rehjon is right on brute force or we get lucky and get BFI. Either way OLED is WAY better than most LCDs barring a few champion E-Sport or ultra-high end LCDs that are basically CRT performance in accuracy and colors. I just hope we get improvements like I said I'm bullish on MicroLED but also bullish on OLED for those that want to finally move away from CRT.
I'm bullish on OLED and MicroLED, yep.

And yes, for motion quality of nonstrobed performance, OLED beats the majority of LCDs
Futuretech wrote:
10 Apr 2023, 17:54
Unfortunately, not yet. But we are close.
Yes, that I can agree.

We are somewhat close, yes. We'll probably have sample and hold matching FW900 CRT motion clarity if given brute-framerates (1000fps). Software-based BFI can also piggyback on the brute refresh rate, if the hardware-based BFI isn't going to arrive.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

thatoneguy
Posts: 181
Joined: 06 Aug 2015, 17:16

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by thatoneguy » 11 Apr 2023, 07:30

Chief, you accidentally quoted Futuretech's post as my username(thatoneguy)
You're making me look bad lol

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: [TFT Central] Monitor OLED Panel Roadmap Updates

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 11 Apr 2023, 22:20

thatoneguy wrote:
11 Apr 2023, 07:30
Chief, you accidentally quoted Futuretech's post as my username(thatoneguy)
You're making me look bad lol
Oh! Thanks for the heads up. Fixed the [QUOTE] tags.
Future version of forum will likely have a WYSIWYG editor option, although that might attract less experienced forum members.
thatoneguy wrote:
11 Apr 2023, 07:30
You missed a couple
Fixed! Such an ancient [QUOTE] system.
Modern BBs now allow you to switch between WYSIWYG modes and BB modes.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

Post Reply