Samsung CRG9 - awesome monitor, totally ignored so far

[xg32]

18 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

.

 

fact of the matter is, it has the worst color space out of any hdr10 monitors, sure it might fit the bill as hdr10, per definition, but i wouldn't pay 1500 for a monitor with 92% RGB coverage (it's terrible), but it's about what i'd expect from samsung. I know what WCG stands for. you are free to defend its marketing and exact definitions of things.

 

This is a 49inch monitor that would look worse in image quality than all of the other hdr10 offerings, and that's my main point.

[LAwLz]

On 6/15/2019 at 8:19 PM, xg32 said:

if that's the criteria of hdr10, then it is frankly too loose, the first hdr10 monitors from last year dell 2718up, x27, pg27uq all have better color coverage,  (92% RGB is way too low to be charging 1500usd for, and at that point it doesn't matter if it's hdr10 (the colors will look a bit off). Samsung is known for better marketing, that's how they are slaughtering LG with QLED vs OLED in the TV space, despite oled looking ALOT better (OLED's gonna die soon). Samsung in general does a very good job at marketing a worse product and overpricing it. Again, the monitor's only selling point i'd consider at 1500usd is a 49inch gaming monitor that has above average colors for content, if that's what you are looking for, then it's decent, but it's by no means a good deal. 

 

HDR10 should really require a monitor to have 1000 nits peak + 99%~+ RGB coverage, <1 delta E, and a 12 or 14bit LUT, but it's really a failure of marketing by the other brands.

Again, you are throwing around a lot of terms you clearly do not understand what they mean.

 

 

You're getting AdobeRGB mixed up with sRGB.

 

You're getting HDR10 mixed up with DisplayHDR certification.

 

 

 

DisplayHDR1000 does require a monitor to have 1000 nits of break brightness, and this monitor does.

 

DisplayHDR1000 does require a monitor to have a 99% coverage of sRGB, on top of a 90% DCI-P3 coverage. This monitor does (125% for sRGB and 95% for P3).

 

A DeltaE of below 1 would be ridiculous. I mean, the PG27UQ has a saturation accuracy of around 3 DeltaE. You're gonna need a reference monitor for it to be below 1.

 

Why a 12 or 14 bit LUT? The DisplayHDR1000 certification requires the panel and LUT to be at least 10 bits. That's already really, really good (remember, we're dealing with the power of 2, so 8 to 10 bits is a massive jump). 10 bits is already very, very granular stepping. So much that it is considered perfectly acceptable for even very color accuracy demanding applications. Besides, you are going to have a very hard time finding any program which actually has a full 12 bit color path. Even 10 bit is hard to find these days, but has gotten more common over the last couple of years. I am not even sure Windows supports over 10 bits of color depth.

Like I said earlier, I own this monitor and I run it at 8 bit color depth because DisplayPort is not powerful enough to drive it at 10 bit color at 120Hz. Let that sink in for a moment... We're already passed the maximum DisplayPort supports, and you want to further increase that by 16 times (4 more bits, each extra bit doubles the precision).

 

Most monitors doesn't even use a true 8 bit panel. They are mostly 6 bit with dithering. So this monitor is already 16 times better than most monitors when it comes to color lookup precision.

[LAwLz]

37 minutes ago, xg32 said:

fact of the matter is, it has the worst color space out of any hdr10 monitors, sure it might fit the bill as hdr10, per definition, but i wouldn't pay 1500 for a monitor with 92% RGB coverage (it's terrible), but it's about what i'd expect from samsung. I know what WCG stands for. you are free to defend its marketing and exact definitions of things. 

  

This is a 49inch monitor that would look worse in image quality than all of the other hdr10 offerings, and that's my main point.

It's not 92% sRGB coverage... It's 92% AdobeRGB coverage... There is a massive difference.

 

This monitor has exactly the same percentile DCI-P3 coverage as the Acer and Asus monitors you linked (which is considerably far more expensive I might add). 95% coverage.

 

Please tell me your definition of WCG. I am very curious.

[xg32]

51 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

.

just gonna clear up that i refer to adobe RGB simply as RGB and sRGB as sRGB (by definition a monitor that's good at adobe RGB is also good at sRGB, that's the reason i didn't distinguish between the two), you seem to be looking for a debate while assuming alot about what i do or don't know. Let's just agree to disgree.

 

I'm very confident that this samsung offering looks worse than any of the other hdr10 monitors and would not pay 1500usd for it. 

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, xg32 said:

just gonna clear up that i refer to adobe RGB simply as RGB and sRGB as sRGB (by definition a monitor that's good at adobe RGB is also good at sRGB, that's the reason i didn't distinguish between the two)

Seems to me like you just didn't know the difference between the two, since you said a monitor with 92 RGB coverage is terrible here:

2 hours ago, xg32 said:

i wouldn't pay 1500 for a monitor with 92% RGB coverage (it's terrible), but it's about what i'd expect from samsung.

 

92% sRGB coverage would be bad (that's what I expect from a ~100 dollar monitor).

 

92% AdobeRGB coverage is excellent and really, really, high end. Only the best of the best monitors (outside of reference monitors) get close to 100% AdobeRGB coverage. But it doesn't really matter anyway, since that's for printing. DCI-P3 is what matters, and 95% coverage on that is fantastic.

 

1 hour ago, xg32 said:

you seem to be looking for a debate while assuming alot about what i do or don't know. Let's just agree to disgree. 

I am not looking for debate. I am looking to correct all the misinformation you are spreading in this thread. You don't seem to know what you're talking about. It's quite obvious you have mixed up quite a few terms when you call 92% AdobeRGB coverage "terrible", and for no reason bring up HDR10 and compares that to DisplayHDR (which are two completely different standards which deals with different things).

 

I can't really "agree to disagree" with you when you are objectively wrong.

 

1 hour ago, xg32 said:

I'm very confident that this samsung offering looks worse than any of the other hdr10 monitors and would not pay 1500usd for it. 

How can you be that? It's pretty obvious that you hate Samsung, but don't let that cloud your reasoning skills.

This is a fantastic monitor. It is one of the best on the market, and there only a handful of monitors which come close to being as good. Those that do also cost as much if not more.

 

And can you please clarify what you mean when you say you think the Samsung will "look worse"? Look worse in what way and why are you so confident in that assessment?

 

And when you say HDR10 do you mean DisplayHDR1000 or do you mean a monitor which supports HDR10? Again, DisplayHDR1000 and HDR10 are two different things.

 

The LG 27UL500-W is also a HDR10 monitor. Would you say this Samsung CRG9 monitor looks worse than that LG monitor? Both are HDR10 but you are confident that the Samsung one is the worst looking HDR10 monitor, right?

The LG one has 98% sRGB coverage, and 300 nits sustained brightness. It can't even pass DisplayHDR400 certification, yet you are confident that it looks better than this DisplayHDR1000 monitor from Samsung.

 

Or do you admit that you got HDR10 and DisplayHDR1000 mixed up?

If not, I can keep on posting lots of low-end monitors which are clearly inferior, but also feature HDR10 support. I got a long list of them.

[mikegray]

34 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

How can you be that? It's pretty obvious that you hate Samsung, but don't let that cloud your reasoning skills.

This is a fantastic monitor. It is one of the best on the market, and there only a handful of monitors which come close to being as good. Those that do also cost as much if not more.

Say LAwLz -

 

In your first post in this thread you wrote, "It's a fantastic monitor, but not worth the price."

 

You've been pretty direct about its upsides so far in this thread. What are the aspects you're disappointed with, where you feel like a buyer should be getting more at the price point?

 

* * * * 

 

BTW, to my surprise, mine was delivered Saturday, and I'm already using it - mostly for work so far. (I had an extremely heavy work weekend, so I haven't had much time to play yet!) Four main negatives so far:

 

- Backlight bleed. Not horrible, but quite visible when there's just a dark background - I notice it more than with my old 27" screen, which stands to reason. I tried taking some cell phone pictures, but they don't represent what I see very well.

 

- Using Windows with HDR. (Yeah, I found the HDR slider, which is a BIG help. But something STILL feel a little wonky. I think it's reasonable to hope that MS will make some improvements in HDR handling.

 

- Using Windows snap-to commands with an ultrawide. (I just got DisplayFusion, though, so once I get to know the program, I think I'll be good. But Windows is clearly not thought out for this. At all. And, in comparison to HDR, I don't know whether there's much hope that MS will invest much in improving this.)

 

- Using Office software with a super-ultrawide. Although it was awesome to have a 15-page running sheet open in Word and see the entire document on screen, having my menus and tool bars in the upper left-hand corner of the screen was super annoying when I wanted to edit something at the far end of the document - i.e., bottom right-hand corner of the screen.

 

Note: 3 of 4 negatives have to do with software, not the monitor itself!

[LAwLz]

4 hours ago, mikegray said:

You've been pretty direct about its upsides so far in this thread. What are the aspects you're disappointed with, where you feel like a buyer should be getting more at the price point?

Benefits:

• Fantastic display. It's pretty much as good as you can get in terms of colors, brightness and features on a PC monitor.
• Good PPI. Not low despite its massive size, but not high enough to require scaling in Windows (which brings with it a lot of issues).
• As someone who is used to having triple screens, the size feels very good, and the curvature really helps with immersion and usability.

 

Drawbacks:

• HDR on Windows is not that great, like you mentioned. The monitor really feels limited by the HDR "ecosystem".
• I can no longer use programs in fullscreen, which is a real issue for gaming. I used to be able to run a game fullscreen on my middle monitor, watch a video on my right monitor, and have stuff like chats and a browser on the left monitor. That is no longer possible.
• Support for 32:9 seems pretty hit and miss. I haven't tried it a lot, but it seems like games have problems with it. For example I tried the Unreal Tournament alpha (one of the few games I got installed) and the menu was pushed to the left side of the screen, with the right side being completely black. Seems like the menu doesn't really work at 32:9.
• It's expensive as fuck. I can't really recommend anyone spend this much money on a monitor.

[SolarNova]

@mikegray

 

IIRC the CRG9 as good as it sounds, is still VA. As such, although it 'may' look good,which depends entirely on the QA on ur unit as it can easily have terrible uniformity like many LCD's do be it from panel color distortions or BLB, it will also certainly not have a fast enough pixel response to handle high refresh rates.

120hz requires a 'maximum' (not average) pixel response of 8.3ms. The specs state 4ms but that is certainly an average of a specific test used that 'looks good' on a spec sheet. A real world test will show a higher average pixel response and most certainly a maximum pixel response higher than 8.3ms, as is the case with every VA/IPS monitor ever tested by a competent 3rd party reviewer. As such it will experience bluring/ghosting, more observable in certain scenes, likely dark ones.

 

I think my point is, its a 'good' monitor ... for an LCD. However its still going to suffer from the usual tropes of an LCD screen, and in this case a VA type. Pixel response issues, possible viewing angle issues, BLB, poor black level performance (though VA is the best in this regards vs TN and IPS), and uniformity issues.

 

Still, i hope it as good as you expect and your enjoying it.

[Karlovsky120]

I'm happy to report that CRG9 is the latest monitor selected for the rtings.com review, I'm just not sure when they'll do it exactly.

[mikegray]

On 6/23/2019 at 3:12 AM, Karlovsky120 said:

I'm happy to report that CRG9 is the latest monitor selected for the rtings.com review, I'm just not sure when they'll do it exactly.

You know, if there's one thing I've really appreciated about this otherwise annoying story, it's the tech sites I've discovered that I otherwise never would have heard of - and of all of them, rtings takes the cake. That thing is awesome! 

[Voltronic]

On 6/14/2019 at 2:18 AM, mikegray said:

 

NEGATIVES: When you use Samsung's PBP functin, you lose somethings: To the best of my knowledge, you lose basically all the good gaming settings. To wit:

• max 60 hz
• no freesync
• Also you have some other limitations:
  • max. two "virtual screens" - you can't create three or four
  • you can't put a PBP screen in the middle of the monitor.
  • No built in KVM switching to use one keyboard/mouse with two different sources - If you want KVM you'll need to get a separate one.

More about these pros and cons from this guy on youtube.

 

NOTE: Tell me in the comments, and I'll be happy to update and correct this information.

Assuming they didn't downgrade from the previous model, the 60hz cap shouldn't be there. I have the CHG90 (previous model) and I was able to do 120hz in PBP. I was running my computer one end and the xbox one x on the other both at 120hz. It was definitely a bit finicky, but it did work at 120hz. I do hope they've fixed some of the connection issues though. Across multiple systems I've had issues with booting and getting no display until I unplug the monitor and plug it back in or the HDR kicking on and off, however that only seems to be across DP and I feel like that might be more of a windows issue than a Samsung issue.