How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

High Hz on OLED produce excellent strobeless motion blur reduction with fast GtG pixel response. It is easier to tell apart 60Hz vs 120Hz vs 240Hz on OLED than LCD, and more visible to mainstream. Includes WOLED and QD-OLED displays.
MagicWaist
Posts: 2
Joined: 01 Mar 2023, 20:30

How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by MagicWaist » 01 Mar 2023, 20:57

I've been reading dozens of posts by users complaining about low framerate content on their oleds, making me consider just sticking with a cheap LED that doesn't stutter to hell and back when watching a simple movie. I'm kind of baffled how this is considered acceptable, and is toted as "the greatest new technology". So to make sure I'm not being ignorant, I wanted to see if I could get an expert opinion.

Is there really nothing to be done about low framerate content stutter on oleds? Are manufacturers even looking at this? Do features like black frame insertion help at all, or are you forced to resort to the nasty soap opera experience?

Motion is arguably more than half the experience, so I just can't understand how we've regressed this much.

User avatar
jorimt
Posts: 2481
Joined: 04 Nov 2016, 10:44
Location: USA

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by jorimt » 01 Mar 2023, 21:24

MagicWaist wrote:
01 Mar 2023, 20:57
I've been reading dozens of posts by users complaining about low framerate content on their oleds, making me consider just sticking with a cheap LED that doesn't stutter to hell and back when watching a simple movie. I'm kind of baffled how this is considered acceptable, and is toted as "the greatest new technology". So to make sure I'm not being ignorant, I wanted to see if I could get an expert opinion.

Is there really nothing to be done about low framerate content stutter on oleds?
In layman's terms, OLED exposes the weakness of low framerate content by having virtually instantaneous pixel response times, unlike most modern LCD TVs that have slower pixel reponse times, which create more blur that can "mask" the weakness (lack of frames per second, specifically) of that same low framerate content.

In other words, it's exactly because OLED has less pixel response time blur that this "issue" exists with lower framerate content; it's the limitations of the content that's the issue in this case, not OLED.

As for black frame insertion, no, it doesn't really mitigate this particular form of judder on low framerate content.

Basically, you need a display with slower pixel response times (LCD), artificial motion blur (not really a thing on TVs), or motion interpolation if you want to reduce the inherent judder of low framerate content on sample-and-hold displays.
(jorimt: /jor-uhm-tee/)
Author: Blur Busters "G-SYNC 101" Series

Displays: ASUS PG27AQN, LG 48CX VR: Beyond, Quest 3, Reverb G2, Index OS: Windows 11 Pro Case: Fractal Design Torrent PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-1000 MB: ASUS Z790 Hero CPU: Intel i9-13900k w/Noctua NH-U12A GPU: GIGABYTE RTX 4090 GAMING OC RAM: 32GB G.SKILL Trident Z5 DDR5 6400MHz CL32 SSDs: 2TB WD_BLACK SN850 (OS), 4TB WD_BLACK SN850X (Games) Keyboards: Wooting 60HE, Logitech G915 TKL Mice: Razer Viper Mini SE, Razer Viper 8kHz Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Katana V2 (speakers/amp/DAC), AFUL Performer 8 (IEMs)

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

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 01 Mar 2023, 21:33

MagicWaist wrote:
01 Mar 2023, 20:57
I've been reading dozens of posts by users complaining about low framerate content on their oleds, making me consider just sticking with a cheap LED that doesn't stutter to hell and back when watching a simple movie. I'm kind of baffled how this is considered acceptable, and is toted as "the greatest new technology". So to make sure I'm not being ignorant, I wanted to see if I could get an expert opinion.

Is there really nothing to be done about low framerate content stutter on oleds? Are manufacturers even looking at this? Do features like black frame insertion help at all, or are you forced to resort to the nasty soap opera experience?

Motion is arguably more than half the experience, so I just can't understand how we've regressed this much.
Check this out:

EXPLAINER: Why Does OLED Stutter More At Low Frame Rates? (Fast GtG Pixel Response)

You can fix this partially by simply turning on GPU Motion Blur Effect for low frame rate content. That compensates for the OLED pixel response being too fast for low-framerate content, for stutter-sensitive people. Adding artificial GPU motion blur is usually a no-no for most high-Hz people using triple-digit frame rates, but it's an excellent band-aid for low frame rates on OLEDs.

Also, stroboscopic-sensitive people (who hates the effects in www.blurbusters.com/stroboscopics) can get relief from this GPU motion blur setting available in many games.

Intentional software-based pixel response slowdowns for the win! :D

Most don't realize this is fixable software side.

OLED is heaven for triple digit frame rates though, far better than LCD -- 240fps 240Hz on my new 240Hz OLED looks better than 360fps 360Hz on my 360Hz IPS LCD. But you are right, low frame rates (30fps) stutter more noticeably on OLED than LCD, but for heaven's sake, have people forgotten about the GPU Motion Blur Effect setting!? -- ask yourself that metaphorically.

GPU Blur isn't evil. It's useful in the right situations, such as low two-digit frame rates (20fps-70fps territory) where you're bothered by the edge-flicker of stutter (maximally amplified with instant pixel response), as the edge-flicker of stutter doesn't disappear until your flicker fusion threshold.

You are replacing a hardware limitations (inferior GtG) with a software workaround (intentional extra blur).
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!

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

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by GammaLyrae » 02 Mar 2023, 12:00

Already answered above, but I take the oled every time because the stutter is a content problem. Software (motion blur settings in games) and hardware (motion smoothing aka soap opera effect) solutions exist.

LCDs are slow and hide it, but they're getting faster and will eventually show the same "problem"

User avatar
jorimt
Posts: 2481
Joined: 04 Nov 2016, 10:44
Location: USA

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by jorimt » 02 Mar 2023, 12:29

MagicWaist wrote:
01 Mar 2023, 20:57
GammaLyrae wrote:
02 Mar 2023, 12:00
LCDs are slow and hide it, but they're getting faster and will eventually show the same "problem"
This ^

LCDs are gradually closing the gap with OLED in this respect, especially the latest TN and IPS-type gaming monitors; I've already seen similar low framerate judder complaints from owners of said gaming monitors here and there over the past few years.

Most LCD TVs tend to be playing catch-up however, as the majority of the higher-end models are still using VA-type panels (typically the slowest where pixel response times are concerned).
(jorimt: /jor-uhm-tee/)
Author: Blur Busters "G-SYNC 101" Series

Displays: ASUS PG27AQN, LG 48CX VR: Beyond, Quest 3, Reverb G2, Index OS: Windows 11 Pro Case: Fractal Design Torrent PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-1000 MB: ASUS Z790 Hero CPU: Intel i9-13900k w/Noctua NH-U12A GPU: GIGABYTE RTX 4090 GAMING OC RAM: 32GB G.SKILL Trident Z5 DDR5 6400MHz CL32 SSDs: 2TB WD_BLACK SN850 (OS), 4TB WD_BLACK SN850X (Games) Keyboards: Wooting 60HE, Logitech G915 TKL Mice: Razer Viper Mini SE, Razer Viper 8kHz Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Katana V2 (speakers/amp/DAC), AFUL Performer 8 (IEMs)

MagicWaist
Posts: 2
Joined: 01 Mar 2023, 20:30

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by MagicWaist » 05 Mar 2023, 01:57

jorimt wrote:
02 Mar 2023, 12:29
MagicWaist wrote:
01 Mar 2023, 20:57
GammaLyrae wrote:
02 Mar 2023, 12:00
LCDs are slow and hide it, but they're getting faster and will eventually show the same "problem"
This ^

LCDs are gradually closing the gap with OLED in this respect, especially the latest TN and IPS-type gaming monitors; I've already seen similar low framerate judder complaints from owners of said gaming monitors here and there over the past few years.

Most LCD TVs tend to be playing catch-up however, as the majority of the higher-end models are still using VA-type panels (typically the slowest where pixel response times are concerned).
I have a relatively new ips monitor with quick response times. The stutter is pretty bad. How much worse is it on an oled tv in comparison would you say? I have an oled phone, but i assume you don't notice the stutter as much on such a small screen.

I'm curious, because if it's any worse than my monitor, i can't ever imagine getting an oled tv.

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

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 05 Mar 2023, 03:26

You can fix it via intentionally enabling GPU motion blur effect in the game.

It's a love-hate relationship, but GPU motion blur effect is astoundingly useful in a Right Tool For Right Job context.

Also, slow-GtG emulators are possible via brute refresh rate. For example, people who dislike low framerate stutter but don't want the full GPU blur effect -- a theoretical movie player can use 240Hz displays to simulate a slow GtG, by having a few blended frames between 1/24sec movie frame. Your very adjustable-GtG shader filter.

Long-term, this could be a Special K / SweetFX / Reshade filter.

Left-field suggestion for open source author.
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!

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

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by Futuretech » 05 Mar 2023, 08:05

MagicWaist wrote:
05 Mar 2023, 01:57
I have a relatively new ips monitor with quick response times. The stutter is pretty bad. How much worse is it on an oled tv in comparison would you say? I have an oled phone, but i assume you don't notice the stutter as much on such a small screen.

I'm curious, because if it's any worse than my monitor, i can't ever imagine getting an oled tv.
Remember LCDs are using a moderate-to-higher level of millisecond blur. While there is GtG transitions as low as 0.5ms or (2000Hz)/(500microseconds) these are mostly marketing in truth. Can LCDs hit that low?, YES; Synthetically, YES; in actual everyday use, NO. You've mostly been seeing through artificial-limited motion blur. Your not seeing the true image like a slideshow of fixed-images. Your seeing images smear and blur across the area. As LCD get faster this phenomena is gonna be more and more apparent.

IF anything MagicWaist you coming to this forum-website. Shows your wanting answers for however long you've used LCDs your now realizing it's technological limitations. Your message is "I'm seeing a technological limitation a negative of the technology I use. And I want answers to my questions."

That is good your on the cutting edge most people don't even do as much research as the people found here in this forum. It's akin to the prior decade during the mechanical keyboard revolution of the early-mid 2010s. Or the gaming and multi-button, technological improvement mouse revolution of the post mid-late 2000s and early-mid 2010s and still currently occurring.

There is and was quite a bit of talk of Blue-Phase LCDs in the prior decade 2010s by 2015 that talk ended as higher end LCDs were coming out. But Blue-Phase are microsecond blurring LCDs, I doubt they stay completely in the microsecond always but do operate an order of magnitude lower more so than standard IPS/TN/VA type crystals.

There IS a difference in LCDs using a lower GtG but in reality most of the time despite High-End TN and High/Ultra-high end IPS panels being exclusively very good especially for some people. And a rarity of VA panels being good which is a harder metric to swallow considering how VA panels are much slower.

Remember in LCDs your metrics are rarely if ever in the microsecond period of time. GtG is more of a marketing measurement rather than an actual use case. Yes lower GtG does mean in many cases the panel is overdriven and or enhanced to be much faster. But in reality we've seen with LCDs even as far back as 10 years ago when the high-refresh rate revolution occurred with Samsung and Viewsonic's first 120Hz monitor.

LCDs are anywhere from some rare synthetic registration of microsecond color shift to mostly millisecond and as high as 30-40millisecond. Even for current extreme speed LCD panels there's colors that often run at those ranges. People are so used to low speeds that they've never seen better. It be akin to a person using a higher end CRT running at a solid 90Hz-200Hz, then complaining LCDs are slideshows because it's blurry and it's refresh rate is too low they see the flicker. The opposite is true perhaps your perception of OLED or MicroLED, when we get to that. Is a bit tainted by being so used to LCDs you didn't give yourself a solid working period with OLED.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if you use OLED for a solid number of hours/days/period of time. And all of a sudden your bothered by LCDs.

On top of that I should point out that OLED isn't a holy grail as big as it should be. OLED still needs quite a bit of fixing. It's workable but it's like any other technology it can have weaknesses. MicroLED for example I'm more excited despite more and more companies and people mentioning the Plasma situation. Plasma = We can't miniaturize, which isn't a problem for MicroLED in fact MicroLED has the LCD/OLED situation, the smaller you make it the better it is. While making it bigger like a Plasma cranks up the juice and heat.

MicroLEDs biggest weakness in miniaturization is heat and electrical usage. In fact there are some who are going we need large heatsinks or multiple heatsinks at key points to temper the heat.

I wouldn't be surprised how LET and OLET are doing (Light-Emitting Transistors, MicroLED taken to Transistor level) or (Organic Light-Emitting Transistors, OLED-like taken to the transistor level).

Anyways just recently I skimmed over TFTcentral's 27-inch LG OLED review. And it had mostly green transitions low or lower microsecond to millisecond transitions. But in in a few boxes it had orange level of transitions as high as 14 milliseconds.

So OLED at least synthetically can blur like an LCD. This is actually a good thing and not a bad thing. As strange as that sounds. Because Mark Rehjon i.e. Chief Blur Busters i.e. C.B.B. Has pointed out of monitor emulation technology.

We can take OLED and emulate an LCD and give a sorta comparison. If you have a OLED panel that transitions between 200 microseconds and 5-14 milliseconds for a minority of colors. Hey what do you know you can emulate LCD and cross-technologically process the LCD in some way maybe learn from OLED and put things into the LCD or simply use the OLED as a benchmark for LCDs and get tighter response time measurements.

In other words because the OLED for nearly 90% of it's color transitions is an order of magnitude faster i.e. milliseconds to microseconds. Then the obvious factor would be if you connect both monitors and synchronize them such as running a mirror image through both. The OLED is obviously the superior microsecond device but we can improve LCDs by calculating better the LCD transition time.

Maybe in one calculation the metric is 23-milliseconds of color blur. But using the OLED and measuring against the LCD. Maybe the truer measurement is 22.756-millisecond.

Again OLED is better we just need to improve the technologies limitations and negatives. Which there are such as for example touting energy consumption benefits when it became more apparent that as you increase the size of OLED it consumes more energy and even small phone OLED do use a bit more of a charge of the battery for some images and videos and while dropping energy at black is great in fact black-off is excellent there is still the challenge of things like blooms, haloing, and the use of slightly more energy than LCD.

We've so overengineered LCD that it is technically still capable and we can continue to technologically improve it and cross-technologically improve it. For example imagine a crystal made of a quantum-dot derivative or a perskovite material or some new design that lets us extract even more benefits from LCDs. The gap is closing especially with microLED and if history was better with Surface-Emissive Display and Field-Emissive Display i.e. CRTs in thin-format.

But I've iterated this already two and this will be the third time.

As one member of Hard[OCP] Forums stated in 2021: "LCD is the Communism of technology. No matter how much we try and kill it. It comes back and even has improved itself over time."

LCD isn't over it's not gonna DIE or get KILLED quickly, it's gonna go down kicking and screaming. Because that is what we developed for nearly 60 or 70 years now. It be akin to replacing the 9x19mm Parabellum/Luger cartridge with something better. People are still gonna plop down money to plink or practice or defensive carry 9mm because it's what was emplaced as the major killer app technology. It's what we've been manufacturing and developing for over a century now.

User avatar
jorimt
Posts: 2481
Joined: 04 Nov 2016, 10:44
Location: USA

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by jorimt » 05 Mar 2023, 10:55

MagicWaist wrote:
05 Mar 2023, 01:57
I have a relatively new ips monitor with quick response times. The stutter is pretty bad. How much worse is it on an oled tv in comparison would you say? I have an oled phone, but i assume you don't notice the stutter as much on such a small screen.
Depends, what's the model number?

As for how much "worse" OLED is, I have the currently second-fastest 1440p IPS gaming display (PG279QM, just behind the newer PG27AQN in pixel response times), along with an LG CX OLED, and they're comparable with low framerate content, with the IPS being a little blurrier, but not by much, subjectively.
MagicWaist wrote:
05 Mar 2023, 01:57
I'm curious, because if it's any worse than my monitor, i can't ever imagine getting an oled tv.
Well, then you'll probably have to avoid buying new displays from this point onward, because again, even LCD is going to keep getting "worse" (better) in this respect.
(jorimt: /jor-uhm-tee/)
Author: Blur Busters "G-SYNC 101" Series

Displays: ASUS PG27AQN, LG 48CX VR: Beyond, Quest 3, Reverb G2, Index OS: Windows 11 Pro Case: Fractal Design Torrent PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-1000 MB: ASUS Z790 Hero CPU: Intel i9-13900k w/Noctua NH-U12A GPU: GIGABYTE RTX 4090 GAMING OC RAM: 32GB G.SKILL Trident Z5 DDR5 6400MHz CL32 SSDs: 2TB WD_BLACK SN850 (OS), 4TB WD_BLACK SN850X (Games) Keyboards: Wooting 60HE, Logitech G915 TKL Mice: Razer Viper Mini SE, Razer Viper 8kHz Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Katana V2 (speakers/amp/DAC), AFUL Performer 8 (IEMs)

Klemc
Posts: 26
Joined: 13 Jun 2021, 06:30

Re: How Is OLED Technology Considered "Good"?

Post by Klemc » 05 Mar 2023, 14:42

OLED is good enough to make people that like VA and hate IPS think they will buy a perfect monitor but... it's fragile !
4070-TI (PNY) // B650E-E (Strix) // 7800X3D (AMD) // 2x16 FURY-R. 6000-32 (Kingston)

Post Reply