Is anyone else waiting for a 4k 240hz OLED or TN monitor?

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

There are 4k 144hz monitors on amazon but I can't afford any of them.

 

With a 1ms response time, I should theoretically be able to create the custom resolution of 1920x1080 at 960Hz using the Nvidia control panel.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?47143-Increase-your-screen-refresh-rate-(Hz)-with-these-7-steps

On my Acer 1080p 240hz monitor, I was able to get 720x576 at 480hz.

Using the Blur Busters UFO test, the difference between 480hz and 240hz was clear to me and even my little sister who is in 5th grade.

The motion blur on my 240hz monitor is still very noticeable with the test below.

https://www.testufo.com/framerates#count=2&background=none&pps=1920

With the "Video Speed Controller" chrome extension, I speed up videos with dialogue and CC from 2.5x to 8x, and up to 16x for videos with little to no dialogue.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/video-speed-controller/nffaoalbilbmmfgbnbgppjihopabppdk?hl=en

 

Here's some simple equations to explain why I need a 4k 240hz monitor:

 

3840x2160*240=1920x1080*960 [Theoretically 4k 240hz sends the same quantity of information as 1080p 960hz]

 

4k 240hz mode:

(30 fps video)*(8x speed)=240 fps

(60 fps video)*(4x speed)=240 fps

 

1920x1080 960hz mode:

(30 fps video)*(32x speed)=960 fps

(60 fps video)*(16x speed)=960 fps

[Bananasplit_00]

nope, dont give the slightest of craps about anything better than my 32" 1440p VA panel tbh. Have fun with the frame skips and all that fun stuff i guess

[Stefan Payne]

Why the hype about "Moar Hertz". Its not important at a certain point. Its just Marketing Nonsense and in this case video phoolery...

[WereCatf]

19 minutes ago, REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND said:

Is anyone else waiting for a 4k 240hz OLED or TN monitor?

Not in the slightest, no.

[LukeLinusFanFic]

I really don't wanna toot your horn or anything and I really appreciate your enthusiasm, like, great first post, but I just don't share it, unfortunately. 

 

What kind of computer can play games at that refresh rate? 

[SupaKomputa]

Oled will suffer from burn in for long periods of usage.

PC monitor have higher screen on time than smartphones.

I need my monitor that can be used 10 years at least.

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

Ideally I would want a monitor that doesn't frame skip. I agree that 960hz is not noticeable if you watch content in real time. But if you speed up content to 16x speed like I do, It is very noticeable for me.

[Stefan Payne]

Also look for "OLED PS VITA" or "VITA Buying Guide".

Why? Because they came with an OLED Display. And listen to what they have to say about the Colors. Because the way they work, the colors don't age equally and they age dramatically!

The VITA itself isn't even that old! Its only ~7 Years old at worst. And it already shows some real aging...

 

As for TN: They are just bad and the worst of the worst.

They only live because they are cheap and marketing can tell Gamers that they need that for reaction time and such nonsense.

IPS is far better.

*VA is also not the worst.

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

I don't care about color accuracy as much as I care about eliminating motion blur that is very apparent to me.

[badreg]

Your 1ms response time on your 240hz panel is measured at 3ms in reality, and is only for G2G. When changing colors, the response time will be far more than 4ms.

 

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg258q.htm#overdrive (same panel as an Acer 1080p 240hz display)

 

Therefore, any difference that you see between 240hz and 480hz video is placebo.

[PlayStation 2]

Just waiting for a 2560x1600 monitor that isn't 30" or larger.

That or a 3:2 monitor. Hell, I'll take 1920x1280.

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

It's not placebo when I can clearly see the motion blur on my 240hz. I don't know if I my eyes are exceptionally good but I don't have to force myself to see the motion blur.

https://www.testufo.com/framerates#count=2&background=none&pps=1920

[LukeSavenije]

my bank account says I'm not

[badreg]

4 minutes ago, REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND said:

It's not placebo when I can clearly see the motion blur on my 240hz. I don't know if I my eyes are exceptionally good but I don't have to force myself to see the motion blur.

https://www.testufo.com/framerates#count=2&background=none&pps=1920

I didn't say that you couldn't see motion blur at 240hz. This is not something that requires exceptional vision to perceive. The review that I linked clearly shows examples of motion blur at 240hz.

 

What I said was that seeing any difference between 240hz and 480hz is placebo because your panel is not capable of being driven faster than 3ms under ideal circumstances. With real world video, the average response times are on the order of 6-10ms. You can't see something that your display is not capable of displaying.

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

3 minutes ago, badreg said:

I didn't say that you couldn't see motion blur at 240hz. This is not something that requires exceptional vision to perceive. The review that I linked clearly shows examples of motion blur at 240hz.

 

What I said was that seeing any difference between 240hz and 480hz is placebo because your panel is not capable of being driven faster than 3ms under ideal circumstances. With real world video, the average response times are on the order of 6-10ms. You can't see something that your display is not capable of displaying.

I agree that I didn't witness 480hz but I did notice at least 300hz since 1000ms/3ms=333.3

[Labeled]

42 minutes ago, REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND said:

Ideally I would want a monitor that doesn't frame skip. I agree that 960hz is not noticeable if you watch content in real time. But if you speed up content to 16x speed like I do, It is very noticeable for me.

How much coke do you use? x16?? Why?? What??? How?

I can't imagine any reason to do that.

 

I think the visual artifacts that come with using a lower resolution than native are worse than motion blur, The fact that no games run at 240fps in 4k I have no interest in it personally, even at 1080p it's hard to keep games that aren't Esports titles above 144fps

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

6 minutes ago, Labeled said:

How much coke do you use? x16?? Why?? What??? How?

I can't imagine any reason to do that.

 

I think the visual artifacts that come with using a lower resolution than native are worse than motion blur, The fact that no games run at 240fps in 4k I have no interest in it personally, even at 1080p it's hard to keep games that aren't Esports titles above 144fps

I watch some YouTube videos at 1080p at 16x speed with the H.264 codec using a chrome extension.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/h264ify/aleakchihdccplidncghkekgioiakgal?hl=en

[Labeled]

2 minutes ago, REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND said:

I watch some YouTube videos at 1080p at 16x speed with the H.264 codec using a chrome extension.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/h264ify/aleakchihdccplidncghkekgioiakgal?hl=en

Why though?

[REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND]

1 minute ago, Labeled said:

Why though?

To speed up boring sections of videos, clickbait videos, and Time lapses.

I watch videos with dialogue at least 2.5x up to 8x with CC

[Knight77]

4 hours ago, REDTEXTBLACKBACKGROUND said:

There are 4k 144hz monitors on amazon but I can't afford any of them.

 

With a 1ms response time, I should theoretically be able to create the custom resolution of 1920x1080 at 960Hz using the Nvidia control panel.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?47143-Increase-your-screen-refresh-rate-(Hz)-with-these-7-steps

On my Acer 1080p 240hz monitor, I was able to get 720x576 at 480hz.

Using the Blur Busters UFO test, the difference between 480hz and 240hz was clear to me and even my little sister who is in 5th grade.

The motion blur on my 240hz monitor is still very noticeable with the test below.

https://www.testufo.com/framerates#count=2&background=none&pps=1920

With the "Video Speed Controller" chrome extension, I speed up videos with dialogue and CC from 2.5x to 8x, and up to 16x for videos with little to no dialogue.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/video-speed-controller/nffaoalbilbmmfgbnbgppjihopabppdk?hl=en

 

Here's some simple equations to explain why I need a 4k 240hz monitor:

 

3840x2160*240=1920x1080*960 [Theoretically 4k 240hz sends the same quantity of information as 1080p 960hz]

 

4k 240hz mode:

(30 fps video)*(8x speed)=240 fps

(60 fps video)*(4x speed)=240 fps

 

1920x1080 960hz mode:

(30 fps video)*(32x speed)=960 fps

(60 fps video)*(16x speed)=960 fps

 

Of course, 

 

4K HDR OLED 240Hz would be ultimate. 

 

But, I don’t believe you could do 4K 240 anytime soon, so it’s a little pointless. 

 

Plus, we need DisplayPort 1.5 to avoid colour quality loss at these resolutions - currently true 4K HDR stops at 98Hz for DP 1.4. 

 

Im still waiting for the 2K 240Hz Lenovo however.  

 

Yes its TN but it should have 90% DCI-P3 colour. 

 

It was said to launch in April but here we are. 

 

Right now,

 

A 2K HDR OLED 240Hz would be really good. 

 

Anything more and you need next gen Display Port and several more gens of hardware. 

 

When I play games, I like to sustain the top FPS as much as possible and in MP - keep it locked there. 

 

I can do that with the games I play at 2K but no way at 4K and I have some of the best hardware you can buy right now and I don’t expect to be pushing around 2x more pixels and keeping frame rate the same for another 2-3 gens. 

 

Finally,

 

in the next 5 years, I see MicoLED being the superior tech to OLED. 

 

It seems to have all the advantages but doesn’t feature the disadvantages and this may be more attractive to Monitor based companies. 

[Derptacious]

Totally... I'm waiting for 500hz OLED. Then it will finally replace the best CRTs in latency & black levels. Currently latency and blacks suck on all modern screens, except OLEDs (but still too slow).

[SolarNova]

There is much more to the 'blur' you see on a display than just the refresh rate.

 

The 'blur' ur seeing at 240hz is likely both the blur caused by the 'real' pixel response being slower than 4.16ms, which some cheaper 240hz monitors do go over in some transitions, and/or more likely the result of persistence blur caused by the sample and hold aspects of the display. It can also be 'overshoot' caused by using to high a overdrive setting, a common occurrence on peoples displays when they incorrectly think 'max overdrive is best overdrive' , when it very much is not the case. 9 times out of 10 the maximum settings is the worst option and is only their so the manufacturer can claim '1ms response time' on the marketing material. Speaking of which, please do start ignoring the advertised response times, they are 'technically' and 'legally' truth, but are VERY VERY misleading.

 

LG is to release a 4k 120hz OLED display this year that will feature both VRR and BFI. The BFI is important as the OLED pixels will already be near an effective 'instant' response speed, thus having no added blur due to pixel response time, but without BFI it will still suffer persistence blur caused by sample and hold.

BFI gets rid of that by effectively 'flickering' the display at the same frequency the display runs at. This removes the persistent nature of each frame and stops ur eyes from perceiving blur.

 

BFI isnt new, some monitors have this, what they call it varies things depending on the manufacturer, but unlike OLED, LCD displays have to do something extra with BFI to ensure it works correctly, though many do not.

A proper BFI implementation on an LCD display has to sync up the backlight flicker with the Pixel refresh rate, otherwise u get what is called 'strobe crosstalk' , this is an effect that causes duplicate images to trail moving objects on screen caused by the de-sync between backlight flicker and pixel refresh. While LCD monitors with a de-synced BFI will still get that added sharpness and reduced blur, it will still look bad.

 

An added note on OLEDs so called 'burn-in', while there will always be horror stories out their, they are ofc anecdotal and subjective accounts. The newer displays have been thoroughly tested objectively** and with some very minor changes to ones habits, they can be used as a PC and gaming display.

• Auto-hide taskbar
• A dozen or so desktop backgrounds on ~5 minute changing interval.
• Black screensaver (e.g Mystify)
• Dont open browsers full screen / move them around.

 

** https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/real-life-oled-burn-in-test

 

 

~10 minute mark for 24hour gaming burn in test.~