LG 27” 1440P 480Hz OLED CES 2024

[masneb]

Apparently neither the LG nor the Asus are going to be glossy, was a misunderstanding that turned into hearsay.

Bleh

[Inco^]

480hz only... It's announced at CES this year. TFTcentral has a bunch of news articles.

However, depending on the coating, I'd take the LG over the Asus even if it has BFI.

Not sure why OLED was split into it's own forum as the announcements are all over the place now. Would be better if you could just tag the monitors.

Are you sure the BFI is with 480 Hz refresh rate? According to https://tftcentral.co.uk/news/bfi-black ... g-monitors, for the tested 240 Hz OLED monitor PG34WCDM, the ELMB mode only works at a fixed 120Hz refresh rate.

[tong]

480hz only... It's announced at CES this year. TFTcentral has a bunch of news articles.

However, depending on the coating, I'd take the LG over the Asus even if it has BFI.

Not sure why OLED was split into it's own forum as the announcements are all over the place now. Would be better if you could just tag the monitors.

Are you sure the BFI is with 480 Hz refresh rate? According to https://tftcentral.co.uk/news/bfi-black ... g-monitors, for the tested 240 Hz OLED monitor PG34WCDM, the ELMB mode only works at a fixed 120Hz refresh rate.

There's no reason to NOT implement 240hz BFI on a 480hz capable monitor. You just add black frames between the 480hz.

[Inco^]

480hz only... It's announced at CES this year. TFTcentral has a bunch of news articles.

However, depending on the coating, I'd take the LG over the Asus even if it has BFI.

Not sure why OLED was split into it's own forum as the announcements are all over the place now. Would be better if you could just tag the monitors.

Are you sure the BFI is with 480 Hz refresh rate? According to https://tftcentral.co.uk/news/bfi-black ... g-monitors, for the tested 240 Hz OLED monitor PG34WCDM, the ELMB mode only works at a fixed 120Hz refresh rate.

There's no reason to NOT implement 240hz BFI on a 480hz capable monitor. You just add black frames between the 480hz.

Yes, I get it. I think I misunderstood him, as I thought he might have implied that the monitor would be with 480 Hz refresh rate and with motion blur reduction technology on top of it, at that same refresh rate. Just wanted to make sure what he meant.

[binodynamic]

Yes, this was a feature addition to some WOLEDs!

Were you able to test the 480hz WOLED monitors? Would love to know your thoughts on it.

[Chief Blur Buster]

Yes, this was a feature addition to some WOLEDs!

Were you able to test the 480hz WOLED monitors? Would love to know your thoughts on it.

I got to do pursuit camera

A strobless blur reduction tour de force, if you can spew framerate at it.

A chef's masterpiece for framegen lovers / strobless motion blur reduction lovers.

twitter.com/BlurBusters/status/1745626884447060469

Look Ma, No Strobing!

Sadly, no strobing supported, but that's not a problem for the "strobeless blur reduction" fans in this forums.
Strobing fans will be dissappointed (for now...but keep tuned).

Brute it, framegen it, RTX OFF it, interpolate it, extrapolate it, reproject it, whatever you do, spew framerate out of wazoo at it and it will sing like Mozart or Beethoven at motion clarity. Nothing comes strobelessly and flickerlessly close on the consumer market at these resolutions. Ergonomic flickerfree motion blur reduction is already here today, if you can spray a framerate firehose at it.

Tech Commentary: Everything's perfectly clear up to ~960 pps. Blur Busters Law splits motion blur for leading/trailing edge, so motion looks clear up to about (2xHz) pixels/sec on an OLED. You can even read the street name labels at www.testufo.com/map ... Blur starts to show for faster motionspeeds, so we still need 1000Hz+ OLEDs later. But we're getting close geometrically to retina refresh rate for small direct-view displays (retina refresh rate for 180-degree 16K VR displays isn't until 5-figure refresh rates due to Vicious Cycle Effect). But for direct views, we're about only roughly half an order of magnitude away from retina refresh rate for 30-to-45-degree-FOV displays at 1440p. FOV and resolution has an effect on retina refresh rate, so when we go 4K, the retina Hz goes up. Also, I talk about retina Hz for motion blur, not for stroboscopics (mouse arrow stepping), but you can fix that by intentionally turning on GPU motion blur effect (ha! Then you gotta oversample the Hz by 2x just the ADD back blur, to fix the stroboscopics without going below persistence motionblur retina Hz).

Best I've ever seen outside of the laboratory, in a real bona-fide consumer display. Buy it.

If you're a strobe-hater, game over for LCD. Perceptually nearly CRT motion clarity strobeless, for 480fps material.
(Disclaimer: 60fps still looks bad without BFI injection like Retrotink 4K).

Here's the pursuit masterpiece; looks slightly clearer than LightBoost 100% strobing now! For realz. (But done strobelessly)

480hz-pursuit.jpg (270.21 KiB) Viewed 2380 times

twitter.com/BlurBusters/status/1745626884447060469

[masneb]

With the improvement in panel technology, people really need to start using faster versions of the pursuit camera and then list the speed it was filmed at.

Slower versions, like the default 960, don't separate themselves visibly enough nor are they fast enough to represent a very fast paced game, like Overwatch. Maybe even listing the game each speed represents next to the speed grade as well. I'd personally say 2400 is closer to speed and action of CQB in Overwatch, Genji and Tracer dashes possibly being faster then that.

[Inco^]

Slower versions, like the default 960, don't separate themselves visibly enough nor are they fast enough to represent a very fast paced game, like Overwatch.

Agreed 100%

[tong]

I mean, just apply the Blur busters law to whatever pixel speed you want... No one needs to change their testing methodologies.

[masneb]

If you actually look at 960 and put it into context of real world games, you actually realize how 'slow' it is. Even in games like CS or Valorant we all experience fast action when you do a flick or a 90d flick to something new that pops up.

I mean, just apply the Blur busters law to whatever pixel speed you want... No one needs to change their testing methodologies.

...not sure what this means or how such would apply in lieu of real life testing. You can't just speed up the image on your end to test it better.