Friday, June 5th 2020

LG's 48-inch OLED Gaming TV with G-SYNC Goes on Sale This Month

LG is preparing to launch its latest addition to the gaming lineup of panels and this time it goes big. Preparing to launch this month is LG's 48-inch OLED Gaming TV with 120 HZ refreshing and G-SYNC support. To round up the impressive feature set, LG has priced this panel at $1499, which is a pricey but a tempting buy. Featuring 1 ms response time and low input lag, the 48CX TV is designed for gaming and fits into NVIDIA's Big Format Gaming Display (BFGD) philosophy. Interestingly, the TV uses LG's a9 Gen3 AI processor which does content upscaling so everything can look nice and crisp. Ai is used to "authentically upscale lower resolution content, translating the source to 4K's 8.3+ million pixels. The technology is so good, you might mistake non-4K for true 4K"
Add your own comment

131 Comments on LG's 48-inch OLED Gaming TV with G-SYNC Goes on Sale This Month

#51
Vayra86
Chrispy_
I don't see that brightness is an issue. On a 300nit LCD panel, ULMB will reduce brightness to 100-150 nits because the light pulse will be 1/3rd to 1/2 the refresh duration and the length of the pulse has a linear relationship with brightness. 100 nits means you need to be indoors and away from bright reflections or rooms with lots of windows on a clear day, but I would naturally choose a lower brightness than ULMB forces on my monitor.

For OLED screens with HDR certification, they need to be able to reach 540nits so at 120Hz you could run a 3ms pulse and still have 200nits brightness with ULMB.

Honestly, the "ULMB is too dark" thing is a hangup from the very early days of Lightboost for 3DVision and perhaps some poor/afterthought implementations today. Yes it's darker, but on TV's with >1000nits it's especially irrelevant.
So do you have examples of a working OLED panel with ulmb? That is somewhat suitable for gaming (no huge inputlag)?
Posted on Reply
#52
Metroid
skizzo
I'm still turned off by the OLED burn in risk
Reviewers said degradation on hdr will happen every year with oled tv's plus the chance of burning. Current OLED tv's are only good for the first 5 years then you can thow at bin resell or do something else with it as is better to buy a new one.
Posted on Reply
#53
londiste
Metroid
Reviewers said degradation on hdr will happen every year with oled tv's plus the chance of burning. Current OLED tv's are only good for the first 5 years then you can thow at bin resell or do something else with it as is better to buy a new one.
I have a 5-year old OLED TV. No noticeable problems so far.
Posted on Reply
#54
Metroid
londiste
I have a 5-year old OLED TV. No noticeable problems so far.
Very good to hear.
Posted on Reply
#55
Valantar
londiste
In the thread linked in his signature, I suppose:

I'd say vertical is the problem - height. I have 2x27" monitors on my desk and horizontally, it's fine. 48" is ~70% higher.
I would really love something in 43" range (similar PPI with 2160p as 27" 1440p) and I have used a 43" 2160p TV as a monitor for a while - anything bigger than that feels suspect :)
Ouf, the ergonomics of that look downright terrible. I would at least have though it was mounted as far down as possible given the height. That looks like a neck injury waiting to happen. I definitely wouldn't want a setup like that.
Vayra86
So do you have examples of a working OLED panel with ulmb? That is somewhat suitable for gaming (no huge inputlag)?
This series? The larger versions have been out for a bit. Black frame insertion works fine.
Posted on Reply
#56
Vayra86
Valantar
This series? The larger versions have been out for a bit. Black frame insertion works fine.
So they have it? What spec should they be recognized by? I don't see anything like it on the spec pages for CX TVs...

This is a genuine question. What I do see, is FreeSync support was added post launch and GSync support is stuck at 'compatible' on the LG site. That usually doesn't spell ULMB.

Is it Motion Pro?
Posted on Reply
#57
skizzo
Valantar
Ouf, the ergonomics of that look downright terrible. I would at least have though it was mounted as far down as possible given the height. That looks like a neck injury waiting to happen. I definitely wouldn't want a setup like that.
the only thing ergonomically poor about my setup is I wish I had a more comfy chair. the only neck injuries I would ever sustain are from head banging too hard while I rock out. \m/ [ - - ] \m/
def not from using my PC though. but hey, each their own right! everyone has a preference and being entitled to it.
Posted on Reply
#58
Chrispy_
londiste
Still trying to find the time to properly read Blurbusters' references but is there something in how eye and vision works and perceives motion that benefits from blanking?
Yes. 100%. That's why I gave you the links, and included in that page is the older Microsoft research which is also pretty enlightening.
I'm not just going off their word for it though, I see it myself - it's a night and day difference on my own ULMB display and on OLED TV's I see in stores, exhibitions, showrooms.
Read the references but it does sound like you've never had the pleasure of seeing a responsive modern ULMB display capably of full pixel transitions between strobes. It's glorious
Vayra86
So do you have examples of a working OLED panel with ulmb? That is somewhat suitable for gaming (no huge inputlag)?
I haven't ever gamed seriously on one - a friend has an LG of some description (presumably a 2018 CX model) and TruMotion (Black Frame Insertion) was really nice for a PS4 Pro playing Horizon Zero Dawn for an afternoon. Input lag on a console at 60fps with a wireless analogue controller isn't really the best scenario to test input lag but it seemed fine.

BFI doesn't add any lag whatsoever. There's no additional processing or buffering that needs to be done - The only drawback to BFI is that it's tricky to avoid flickering at the same time as VRR, because the pulse length needs to be proportional to the interval between frames (which is variable during VRR) but if you run it at a fixed refresh then that doesn't matter. Maybe BFI and VRR is a solved problem by now - I'm not really sure.

Actually, it looks like LG solved HDR + BFI back in early 2018. Since HDR messes around with brightness one would assume that in solving that with BFI they've also managed to solve VRR?
Posted on Reply
#59
lynx29
I am still debating this or not, it is up for pre-order right now. I mostly am worried about burn in, I do play games like 10 hours in a row with static hubs sometimes... lol I am thinking maybe for this kind of money, I should just get the top of the line Samsung QLED
Posted on Reply
#60
Vayra86
lynx29
I am still debating this or not, it is up for pre-order right now. I mostly am worried about burn in, I do play games like 10 hours in a row with static hubs sometimes... lol I am thinking maybe for this kind of money, I should just get the top of the line Samsung QLED
That would be wise, I think if you're on long gaming sessions and idle usage this is not a good match. It also depends on expectations wrt longevity. If you are expecting 5 years, by all means. But 10 ? Doubtful.

There are technologies at work that reduce the impact of burn in and actively combat it; but they usually also incur some sort of pixel degradation, and that mostly shows in brightness loss over time, or some hues becoming less prominent. An LCD is still much more likely to remain 'as it was' over longer periods of time.

I had a look at the top end QLEDs and they sure do look good, contrast wise as well. I've got a simpler 43 inch one (no local dimming) downstairs. Its a decent VA, really. Not fantastic, decent. For gaming though... meh.
Chrispy_
Yes. 100%. That's why I gave you the links, and included in that page is the older Microsoft research which is also pretty enlightening.
I'm not just going off their word for it though, I see it myself - it's a night and day difference on my own ULMB display and on OLED TV's I see in stores, exhibitions, showrooms.
Read the references but it does sound like you've never had the pleasure of seeing a responsive modern ULMB display capably of full pixel transitions between strobes. It's glorious

I haven't ever gamed seriously on one - a friend has an LG of some description (presumably a 2018 CX model) and TruMotion (Black Frame Insertion) was really nice for a PS4 Pro playing Horizon Zero Dawn for an afternoon. Input lag on a console at 60fps with a wireless analogue controller isn't really the best scenario to test input lag but it seemed fine.

BFI doesn't add any lag whatsoever. There's no additional processing or buffering that needs to be done - The only drawback to BFI is that it's tricky to avoid flickering at the same time as VRR, because the pulse length needs to be proportional to the interval between frames (which is variable during VRR) but if you run it at a fixed refresh then that doesn't matter. Maybe BFI and VRR is a solved problem by now - I'm not really sure.

Actually, it looks like LG solved HDR + BFI back in early 2018. Since HDR messes around with brightness one would assume that in solving that with BFI they've also managed to solve VRR?

Nice, well even a fixed refresh BFI is a nice to have, and if they can do that while preserving brightness (I suppose they use peak brightness more actively?), sweet.

Stilll though, when the pixel response is as stable as it is on an OLED, the benefit of BFI to me seems limited. And with it being a self emissive display... I do also think it incurs some sort of degradation, after all, pixels must go brighter and switch much more often.

You can probably tell I'm still a little bit anxious about OLED longevity :p I really want it to be perfect... but there's always a catch - usually.
Posted on Reply
#61
lynx29
Vayra86
That would be wise, I think if you're on long gaming sessions and idle usage this is not a good match. It also depends on expectations wrt longevity. If you are expecting 5 years, by all means. But 10 ? Doubtful.

There are technologies at work that reduce the impact of burn in and actively combat it; but they usually also incur some sort of pixel degradation, and that mostly shows in brightness loss over time, or some hues becoming less prominent. An LCD is still much more likely to remain 'as it was' over longer periods of time.

I had a look at the top end QLEDs and they sure do look good, contrast wise as well. I've got a simpler 43 inch one (no local dimming) downstairs. Its a decent VA, really. Not fantastic, decent. For gaming though... meh.



Nice, well even a fixed refresh BFI is a nice to have, and if they can do that while preserving brightness (I suppose they use peak brightness more actively?), sweet.

Stilll though, when the pixel response is as stable as it is on an OLED, the benefit of BFI to me seems limited. And with it being a self emissive display... I do also think it incurs some sort of degradation, after all, pixels must go brighter and switch much more often.

You can probably tell I'm still a little bit anxious about OLED longevity :p I really want it to be perfect... but there's always a catch - usually.
I decided I am going to hold out until end of summer for the Vizio 2020 quantum models to arrive. I probably will buy a high end of one those if it has HDMI 2.1 and native 120hz. i think the 2019 models came out last august, so i expect same this time
Posted on Reply
#62
Chrispy_
Vayra86
You can probably tell I'm still a little bit anxious about OLED longevity :p I really want it to be perfect... but there's always a catch - usually.
I haven't bought an OLED yet because I would use it as a monitor and burn the taskbar and docked icons into it.

OLEDs have a long life now - in that they'll probably go several years of regular TV and movies without burning out or fading. The blue OLEDs still have a short lifespan but most TVs now have a RGBB or WRGBB subpixel. The white saves the RGB from being used as much, and the BB stands for a double-sized blue subpixel which can be used at a lower brightness to extend its life.

Still, Sites like RTINGS have done the research for us and burn-in is still very much possible on a modern OLED if you leave it on a static image, so I'm making do with IPS and VA still!
Posted on Reply
#63
Valantar
Vayra86
So they have it? What spec should they be recognized by? I don't see anything like it on the spec pages for CX TVs...

This is a genuine question. What I do see, is FreeSync support was added post launch and GSync support is stuck at 'compatible' on the LG site. That usually doesn't spell ULMB.

Is it Motion Pro?
Yep, Motion pro includes Black Frame Insertion. Covered quite well in HDTVTest's (as usual excellent) review here from about 4:48 onwards. It seems I didn't watch that bit quite carefully enough though: from what I can tell from the video, BFI is only activated with Motion Pro set to high (the other two settings just seem to reduce the 'on' time/duty cycle of the OLEDs). MP Low is 70% duty cycle, MP Medium is 50%, and High is 50% + BFI.

Edited my previous post after looking back into this btw.
skizzo
the only thing ergonomically poor about my setup is I wish I had a more comfy chair. the only neck injuries I would ever sustain are from head banging too hard while I rock out. \m/ [ - - ] \m/
def not from using my PC though. but hey, each their own right! everyone has a preference and being entitled to it.
Well, while there are individual variations in what constitutes good ergonomics, they all fall within a common spectrum which your setup looks like it's way outside of. Though from the looks of it that is set up to be used while leaning very far back, which would alleviate that to a certain degree - though it would then still dramatically increase neck strain even with a good head rest on your chair. You might not be susceptible to RSI from it, but that doesn't mean your sitting position isn't strained. Remember, what feels comfortable and what is good for your body are not the same thing - if that was the case, we wouldn't have an epidemic of RSI due to poor ergonomics in the first place. If it works for you then good for you, but it's important to take care of your body - those types of pains and injuries are really hard to get rid of once they take root.
Posted on Reply
#64
0x4452
Many replies say it will be too big for a desk.

I have been using a 42" TV (60Hz) on my desk as a monitor for several years now and cannot see myself ever going back to a smaller screen. The real estate is convenient for work. The large screen is immersive for gaming.

It's like in 1995 we all (or at least the old timers) had 15" monitors and were content. Probably back then many people would have thought that 27" is an overkill for a desk.
Posted on Reply
#65
Vayra86
0x4452
Many replies say it will be too big for a desk.

I have been using a 42" TV (60Hz) on my desk as a monitor for several years now and cannot see myself ever going back to a smaller screen. The real estate is convenient for work. The large screen is immersive for gaming.

It's like in 1995 we all (or at least the old timers) had 15" monitors and were content. Probably back then many people would have thought that 27" is an overkill for a desk.
You were content because monitors were ridiculously expensive. CRT... what was it for a 1600x900 display at 17 inch? 1,5k ?
Posted on Reply
#66
bug
lynx29
I am still debating this or not, it is up for pre-order right now. I mostly am worried about burn in, I do play games like 10 hours in a row with static hubs sometimes... lol I am thinking maybe for this kind of money, I should just get the top of the line Samsung QLED
www.rtings.com/tv/learn/real-life-oled-burn-in-test
Posted on Reply
#67
Valantar
0x4452
Many replies say it will be too big for a desk.

I have been using a 42" TV (60Hz) on my desk as a monitor for several years now and cannot see myself ever going back to a smaller screen. The real estate is convenient for work. The large screen is immersive for gaming.

It's like in 1995 we all (or at least the old timers) had 15" monitors and were content. Probably back then many people would have thought that 27" is an overkill for a desk.
What kind of viewing distance is that at? UHD on 42" is 104ppi, so just slightly lower than27" 1440p, but it's the field of view that worries me - having to move your head around a lot, particularly up and down, is really bad for neck strain over time. Given that even a 27" monitor fills the majority if not all of the focal area of the human field of vision at normal desk viewing distances, 42" would necessitate a lot of movement unless the vast majority of the screen was just for peripheral use (which of course begs the question of its necessity). And 48" is of course noticeably larger than 42".
Posted on Reply
#68
0x4452
Valantar
What kind of viewing distance is that at?
Definitely a bit further out than you would have with a smaller screen. My TV is at the very edge of the desk, towards the wall, freeing up desk real estate. I just measured and my eyes are 27" / 70 cm away from the screen as I am typing this.

48" might be a bit too much, hard to tell. 42" is fine - minor head movement given the distance above.
Posted on Reply
#69
ObiFrost
lynx29
I am still debating this or not, it is up for pre-order right now. I mostly am worried about burn in, I do play games like 10 hours in a row with static hubs sometimes... lol I am thinking maybe for this kind of money, I should just get the top of the line Samsung QLED
Isn't QLED just a VA in disguise with quantom dot backlight strobbing? Because many assume it's a direct competitor to OLED in terms of "possible" capabilities, even though QLED is shiet.
Posted on Reply
#70
lynx29
ObiFrost
Isn't QLED just a VA in disguise with quantom dot backlight strobbing? Because many assume it's a direct competitor to OLED in terms of "possible" capabilities, even though QLED is shiet.
QLED ties OLED imo. I have been to Costco and Best Buy and they have high end QLED sitting right next to OLED, both calibrated playing same content. QLED holds its own imo, but only the high end variants which cost similar to OLED. But no risk of burn in, so still the winner imo

cheap QLED is a joke though yes.
Posted on Reply
#71
Chrispy_
ObiFrost
Isn't QLED just a VA in disguise with quantom dot backlight strobbing? Because many assume it's a direct competitor to OLED in terms of "possible" capabilities, even though QLED is shiet.
QLED can't offer the HDR experience that OLED offers, especially not in a dark room - because the blacks aren't black and the important bright/dark HDR edge contrast is spoiled by the coronas and halos.

OLED can light one pixel at 500 nits and a neighbouring pixel at 0 nits true black without any problem.
QLED can light a pixel to 1000 nits but the 'black' pixel next to it will be 50 nits grey because each backlight zone is roughly a 160x160 pixel grid.

Also, the retina-searing brightness of QLED HDR isn't actually better, it just needs to be that bright to offer the contrast ratio, given the poor black levels. HDR isn't really about peak brightness, it's about a wider range of brightness and "range of brightness" is effectively a different way of saying contrast ratio. The thing that makes an OLED "pop" is the edge contrast, which will always be infinity:1 for anything moving against a black background. With QLED, the maximum static contrast is going to be the 3000:1 of the underlying VA tech. Your eye doesn't care that a completely different part of the scene in a different backlight dimming zone is perfect black, it's only seeing the contrast at the edge interface between the light and dark.
Posted on Reply
#72
Chomiq
lynx29
QLED ties OLED imo. I have been to Costco and Best Buy and they have high end QLED sitting right next to OLED, both calibrated playing same content. QLED holds its own imo, but only the high end variants which cost similar to OLED. But no risk of burn in, so still the winner imo

cheap QLED is a joke though yes.
Except in game mode on Samsung QLED's most of the signal processing gets disabled and FALD looks like a mess.
Posted on Reply
#73
lynx29
i watch this guy a lot, he is a genius. yeah hmm. this does change things. maybe I will risk the LG 48" OLED after all. also now that im older, i really dont do many long sessions like i used to, so i should be ok on burn in
Posted on Reply
#74
Valantar
lynx29
QLED ties OLED imo. I have been to Costco and Best Buy and they have high end QLED sitting right next to OLED, both calibrated playing same content. QLED holds its own imo, but only the high end variants which cost similar to OLED. But no risk of burn in, so still the winner imo

cheap QLED is a joke though yes.
So you have looked at displays set to high brightness in extremely brightly lit conditions and see that as a valid demonstration of how it will look in a dim or dark living room? Sorry to inform you, but that won't hold up. Bright conditions serves to hide bloom and similar FALD artifacts.

As for burn-in, I still wouldn't choose an OLED for my main PC screen or for anything showing a static UI for any significant stretch of time. Pixel shift and similar tech can't really do much about static logos, desktop/taskbar icons, etc. WOLED like LG uses (only white OLEDs with an LCD-like color filter in front) is much less susceptible to burn-in simply because you don't have the added factor of different wear rates for different OLED colors, but you still risk fading due to differences in intensity/luminosity over time. So if it's for varied use I wouldn't mind as long as some care is taken (set it to dim or shut off when idle etc.), but not for anything static. I couldn't use an OLED as my primary monitor as the Word and Firefox UI + taskbar icons would be bound to burn in, but it would make an excellent secondary monitor for gaming and the like. I would just really want it smaller than 48".
0x4452
Definitely a bit further out than you would have with a smaller screen. My TV is at the very edge of the desk, towards the wall, freeing up desk real estate. I just measured and my eyes are 27" / 70 cm away from the screen as I am typing this.

48" might be a bit too much, hard to tell. 42" is fine - minor head movement given the distance above.
That's a similar distance to my 27" monitor, which is exactly why I don't think anything much above 32" 16:9 will work for me. Mainly too tall, extra width doesn't matter much and can definitely be beneficial, but that would leave the top ⅓ of the monitor essentially unused. I wouldn't want to have to tilt my head back in order to see my tabs or office UI.
Posted on Reply
#75
xtreemchaos
i would gladly give a kidney for that if i had one spare, joking a side when the price drops a bit i would be interested i have a 40 inch monitor/tv at the mo and another 8 inch would be nice + a high refresh.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment