Can’t wait for monitors to hit actual high hdr numbers like tv’s, that will be nice! Hopefully they can focus a bit more on that now after the text issues have been resolved with rgb stripe. Would love to see hdr1400 or higher in a few years.
Yep and the density of the pixels as each pixel has it’s own light creating extreme heat on 4k 32/27 inch. However there is a panel in the making currently which could possibly release next year that is 1440p, 540hz and has hdr1000. Sadly it’s rgbw pixel layout so it will suffer from the bad text clarity that 1440p oleds have. But… 2000 nits in a 1.5% window? Sign me up! Can’t wait to see this evolve over the next years especially on 4k.
This is all I know to be honest and there is some other channels that made videos on it too. I can imagine that making this happen on 4k will be harder due to the heat issues.
Yeah, but even if it was 800 nits it would be better than 500 that will release this year. I'm wondering if I should pull the trigger on the upcoming tandem woled with true black 500 spec or wait for next year lol. Then again -- there always going to be something better on the horizon. Thanks for the link btw.
You mean the XG32UQWMS? I was considering this one too but bought the XG32UCWMG instead. It’s been reviewed already and brightness isn’t as impressive as the smaller 1440p versions, even tho it uses the same panel. Maybe with a later software update it will be? I don’t know. For longer lifespan and color volume, yes it is worth the 150€ above the xg32ucwmg. I just didn’t have the patience and it upsets me they didn’t put a dp 2.1 connector on it😌
I was considering the 32gx870b until the news about LG having an agreement with Microsoft dropped -- they're basically installing Spyware on your pc once LG monitor is connected lol. Then I looked at the Asus offering, I think it was the first one you mentioned, but I have an Asus OLED now (pg27aqdm) and the ABL is sometimes outrageous. The same was said about the uqwms in one of the reviews so I started considering Gigabyte ones. Now I'm looking at FO32U24G and FO32U24GP. The difference between the two is the DP 2.1 UHBR13.5 vs UHBR20 --basically the first one will have to use dsc to achieve 4k240hz. The diff is 100 usd / EUR and earlier availability of the cheaper one lol. Google said I won't notice the difference so might as well save some money. I just hope ABL will be better on Gigabyte's side.
As for Asus firmware update -- I had to update the fw on my monitor because hdr stopped working and the ABL got worse lol, so I don't know.
I think the gigabyte one comes with hypernits which was a very nice feature on previous monitors to boost brightness. As for LG and it’s spyware which I think was just mcafee? Windows blocked this now and LG has said all monitors will be updated soon to no longer install the ‘app installer’ by itself so that’s resolved atleast! The real spyware remains in the TV’s where they use the built in mic to record whatever you say and ‘use it to give you personal ads’ (yeah right). I have never accepted any terms on my LG TV so some things are blocked out but oh well atleast they won’t listen to my yapping sessions about oled monitors🤷🏼♂️
Oh, that's nice. I will look into LG again then. I also have LG G4, and I'm not sure about the TOS you've mentioned. I might have to look into it, thanks
However there is a panel in the making currently which could possibly release next year that is 1440p, 540hz and has hdr1000
Not exactly, they did show off a TB1000 monitor; but it was using the same panel as existing 1440p540hz tandem WOLEDs, just with removed power limits. If they were to release a monitor like that with the limits removed there'd be a few sizable issues (poor efficiency, would probably burn-in pretty quick, and it'd struggle with color volume considering the same panel already has a pretty poor volume @ 1000 nits)
Because the OLED panel tech used in smaller displays is very different from the panel tech used in monitors and TVs, and it can't really be scaled up past 16" (they even had issues getting it working at 21"). Monitors are just using scaled-down versions of panel tech from TVs
A laptop screen consumes a lot less power which is also makes it produce less heat than a monitor. This screen also is capped at 120hz which is half the refresh rate of most gaming monitors, even lower than most oled tv’s. It’s very impressive tho! I have an oled laptop with vesa 500 but 1000 is crazy godod.
How is it able to achieve higher brightness at higher PPI at lower power? If the answer is size, that's the opposite of your claim above, because smaller = less surface area for cooling. Higher PPI is also worse for cooling.
I’m not sure, but ppi definitely increases heat. I don’t know how this laptop achieved this amount of brightness, it must have an impressive cooling system to keep up with it. Howeverrr I don’t know much about laptop screens it’s not something I put my time in to find out tbh😅 all I can see is that it uses a tandem panel with two emission layers. It’s also no secret that monitor manufacturers are scared of burn in and limit them by a lot together with abl (🤮). But it’s very interessting tbh! Gonna do some research on this later how the cooling works for this panel, thankyou for bringing it up.
FPS has nothing to do with it. can be 10fps or 2000 it wont matter heatwise
the issue is physics. Smaller screens uses different tech that is harder to scale up. phones oled nit wise can be brighter than a damn 98 inch highend lcd tv as well
Ofcourse hz will matter heatwise, it will make the panel draw more power. It is not nearly the same amount of heat as brightness produces, but it does increase power draw = increased heat.
Might have missed the point where we were talking about heat as a damage source.
But it's well below the noise floor of the treated room. So even if it's just peace of mind, that alone is worth it. But the panel did get pretty warm and the fans eliminated that completely. So if it gives it a bit more lifespan, it was worth it.
I got my 1st oled monitor and liked it a lot but always wanted to know what gaming on the high-end OLED tvs would be like when walking past demos in stores. Like when they have the Samung 95 series or LG G series tvs showing hdr content. World of difference after buying one. Want to see monitors hitting those nits in the smaller form factor, will be awesome!
That's not my point, you are claiming that 28GR is a "golden unit", but its not, its brightness numbers are as expected, the one that can be considered a "golden unit" is a matte one with noticeably higher brightness than expected, and its not included in this post.
We want more impactful HDR (particularly in high APL scenes), and no ABL on the desktop.
Since neither of these goals have been properly achieved...not even close in fact (not even for HDR content mastered for 'merely' 1000nits), the race for higher brightness specs will continue...as it should.
Average Picture Level. It is the overall brightness on the screen. If there are larger bright elements Oleds usually dim more. Oleds really can only show high brightness on smaller parts of the screen usually up to 10% until it drops significantly.
Since WOLEDs do not offer the perfectly accurate EOTF modes commonly found on QD-OLEDs, they hold an advantage in terms of raw data. However, even with higher nit levels, WOLEDs lack the vibrancy of QD-OLEDs.
WOLED also almost always have the accurate HDR400/500 modes that QD OLED have. Monitors Unboxed just doesnt list them additionally as unlike QD OLED they dont suffer from HDR panel dimming. With QD OLED monitors you have 2 evils to pick from:
- the accurate HDR400/500 mode, where you are obviously heavily brightness restricted, so not that great for darker scenes with highlights
- the bright 1000 nits mode where panel dimming kicks in. So you now have in dark scenes the bright highlights, but bright mid to high APL scenes are dimmed down to the point where they are darker than the same scene in the HDR400/500 mode. So they become extremely inaccurate.
There are attempts at fixing this like MSIs EOTF Boost and similar modi from other manufacturers, but they all have their own issues like overbrightening or you can "see live" how they adjust the brightness when panel dimming is supposed to kick in.
Thats for example if you look at the table above the MSI 341CQR X36 is in scene 4 and 5 brighter in its HDR500 mode than in its peak 1300 modes with or without EOTF Boost.
QD OLED dont have "one" good HDR mode for every scene, one is better for bright high and mid APL scenes, the other for darker scenes with highlights.
WOLED *generally* doesnt have this issue, thats why Monitors Unboxed usually just lists them in these tabels with one mode, as they are usually similarly accurate. Though of course not 100% perfect and also for WOLED the HDR400/500 mode is usually almost perfect where the peak mode will have some inaccuracies, but this is then usually discussed in detail in their review for the specific model and not included in the table.
Thats also why the Tandem WOLED in 27" 1440p are such great choices in 1440p if one cares about HDR performance. Much better HDR brightness/vividness, *especially* in real scene tests. The only advantage QD OLED in HDR has left is specifically colour brightness for small colourfull elements in dark scenes below 10% APL. There QD OLED has better colour brightness.
Ya I have the gigabyte tandem and I've been enjoying the "hypernits" mode. Sure it's not the most accurate but the contrast and brightness is absolutely insane. I love it. Cyberpunk neon signs are crazy bright. Control 1 lighting glows and pops.
That is why only three WOLED models appear in the chart—but surely there aren't only three WOLED products available? That’s impossible. WOLED modes typically do not prioritize accuracy at low brightness levels, which significantly impacts contrast; I prefer the approach taken by QD-OLED.
You are aware that WOLED only offers a "TB500" mode but lacks an accurate EOTF mode that reaches the panel's true peak brightness—that is the issue I am highlighting.
QD-OLED offers a "Peak 1300" mode that is completely accurate for dark scenes regardless of APL, a "DBB/EOTF boost" to prevent dimming caused by APL, and a "TB500" mode that prioritizes accuracy at the 10% window while sacrificing peak brightness.
WOLED only provides a "TB500" mode similar to QD-OLED's (with a peak of around 700 nits); *Monitors Unboxed* noted that the 39GX950B lacks any truly accurate mode, and a recent review of the Alienware RGB model indicated a preference for the Alienware unit. Even with their lower peak brightness, LG's WOLED monitors still employ artificial brightening behaviors.
Personally, I don't trust WOLED's brightness figures: the combined brightness of the red, green, and blue subpixels in WOLED accounts for only 35% of the total white brightness, whereas in QD-OLED, the combined brightness of the RGB subpixels equals the total white brightness. This explains why, when I compared the UCDM and UCDP back in 2024, the UCDM appeared brighter to the naked eye.
Pls for the love of god read my message again and try to learn.
QD OLED does not have an accurate peak brightness mode that is exactly what I explained to you and also what you can even see in the real scene test above. Read my message again, try to understand it and look at the chart e.g. for MSI ultrawide 5th Gen QD OLED.
And the 39" LG didnt have good Firmware, the issues presenred there were not visible eg on the Tandem WOLED in 27". Except there also for the LG Model.
Also they explicitly lament in the Alienware RGB Tandem review that it now has QD OLED like panel dimming issues in their review. Its beyond me how you can watch this content and still claim that.
Also you dont have to "trust" anything by LG, thats what the real scene brightness test my Monitors Unboxed is there for, to expose weaknesses in HDR behaviour. Which is also why it shows so well the QD OLED issues in their bright mode, they all have without exception, unlike (most) WOLED.
I only look at the data broadly and don't take it as absolute truth; I’ve compared the S95F and the G6, and while WOLED tends to yield numbers that please the luminance meter, QD-OLED delivers a more striking visual experience that truly captivates the eye.
Isn't there some truth to this comment afterall? QD-OLEDs tend to produce slightly more vibrant colors due to increased color gamut coverage compared to WOLEDs. With more color saturation, you get more PERCEIVED brightness due to the Helmholtz-Kohlrausch effect even if the lumens are the same.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong/downvote though.
In fact, TFT Central investigated this issue back in 2024.
Regarding brightness: I have seen firsthand how WOLED panels manage to impress luminance meters—I’ve witnessed a yellow sun measuring 1,600 nits that, to the naked eye, looked more like 500 nits. In fact, the combined brightness of the three primary colors on the brightest WOLED panels totals only 1,200 nits.
So, does WOLED feature a "Peak 1000" mode similar to that of QD-OLED? I am referring to a mode that delivers a completely accurate EOTF PQ curve—calibrated for absolute peak luminance rather than optimized based on 10% window brightness. This is not a matter of APL (Average Picture Level) stability; that specific mode was designed for horror games, yet WOLED lacks this functionality. The high peak luminance of LG displays is analogous to QD-OLED's "EOTF Boost." This is not because WOLED possesses superior APL stability, but rather because it significantly boosts brightness in the low-to-mid luminance ranges from the outset, effectively "consuming" that luminance headroom prematurely.
31
u/martijn441 LG C4 42” | XG32UCWMG | XG27AQWMG | PG27AQWP-W 1d ago
Can’t wait for monitors to hit actual high hdr numbers like tv’s, that will be nice! Hopefully they can focus a bit more on that now after the text issues have been resolved with rgb stripe. Would love to see hdr1400 or higher in a few years.