HDR comparison - PG35VQ vs AW3423DW

[MonitorFlicker]

30 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Sure they will. General OLED for like TVs is limited and QD OLED is to improve with that, we just need to see more monitors to come over time. Also not everything is in super high brightness anyway. Darker blacks is more important really, but more even is the range where LCD can't match. 

Also ABL is worse on TVs and can be less noticeable on like a monitor. There's the lower nit mode too. The flicker is not an issues as some out there, it's a small dip in brightness not like some full screen like on some LED backlit displays.

Those demoed LCDs with high brightness don't mean much, they're still LCD panels, again, TVs. We're talking monitors here, top MiniLED monitors make no sense with such price and price won't change much. They still have so little number of LEDs 10000 FALD display would cost fortune and make no sense.

MiniLEDs and local dimming technology are getting cheaper soon. And we are still in the early stage of HDR.

 

Infinite contrast is ideal but OLED PWM fatigue is more pronounced on monitors because you sit closer. I can comfortably sit in front of PG35VQ with higher brightness all day without eye fatigue. I cannot do the same on AW3423DW over 30 minutes. I have to stop using the monitor because it is not pleasant to the eyes.  

 

The white on AW3423DW looks rather yellow. I guess Dell has to low down the blue light to avoid further eye problems in the absence of flicker-free. 

 

Once you have the monitor, you will know what I mean in terms of flickering issues. 

[MonitorFlicker]

4 minutes ago, tikker said:

Then why do you respond so negatively yourself to everything that isn't agreeing with your points? If you're going to present "solid facts" then you'll have to be ready to defend them, whether it's a tech forum or a scientific paper. Facts are only facts by having surived attempts to poke holes in them. It's nice to see people making these comparisons, but realistically all those pictures show us is a bright image next to a dimmer image and an even brighter image next to a bright image with a random rainbow you say is reference in the middle. Which ties in to the next point:

 

Numbers are the representative thing and numbers will be the "solid facts". This is why benchmarks are always graphs, tables, histograms etc. You even argue this yourself by focussing so much on high brightness. It'll be both clearer to communicate and easier to defeind if you can find a metric that encodes the relevant information of your photos and present that.

 

That brings me to this: what proof is shown here? You have two sets of pictures with different exposure times with very little explanation. The second paragraph states one is brighter than the other, but the actual specs/reviews of the brightness would already tell us that in quantifiable numbers. It would be informative if you could add some explanation to the pictures, for example. What do they tell us besides relative brightness? The monumental amounf of images you have attached make it feel like they show something important, but it's hard to tell.

 

Are both monitors calibrated? Is this an "out of the box" comparison? If both are properly calibrated to the same amount of nits in a reference scene, shouldn't they more or less look the same aside from HDR highlights that one can perhaps get brighter than the other? The comparison is again unclear to me. What is "reference" about the central monitor? Is it at reference brightness for us to compare? Are the rainbow curves references levels that we are should do something with? In the latter case, only a reasonable expert is going to be able to make sense of those curves and there's not much explanation to help us out here.

 

 

Regarding flicker, I've been using my LG C9 extensively for two years now, movies, gaming, a bit of productivity here and there, and I must say there is no noticeable flicker unless I enable black frame insertion, in which case it's extremely noticeable to me. Either I'm not that sensitive to it, or I have a good unit if it really is a widespread issue. Regarding brightness, it gets more than bright enough in my living room at night to figuratively burn my eyes out, making me actually squint on bright scenes.

 

Sure, other tech exceeds OLED in terms of brightness, but I'm not sitting here wishing it was capable of 4000 nits. Instead I'm missing the deep blacks and contrast those create of my C9 in all my other monitors. For me, maybe a little boost to brightness to help daylight performance may be nice, but other than that I'm happy with it.

 

First of all, I posted this too soon. I assume people are familiar with how HDR works and have full HDR 1000 experience. In some scenes the average video brightness is 800nits. When the curves are flatted at a certain level, that level is where 1000nits is. And that is enough of numbers to talk about or there will be too many numbers in each scenes. The rest is left to the pictures as proof to show the relative brightness difference. In the pictures with 1/125 shutter speed, details are preserved on both monitors. In the pictures with 1/25 shutter speed, the details is not preserved but more pronounced in SDR. So I expect you can see it in the pictures to know that PG35VQ delivers 2x more luminance than AW3423DW in 800nits scene without losing any details or causing distracting blooming, making a more realistic image.

 

I post it under computer hardware display to talk about monitors. Then guys watching their sub 200nits full-field TV 10 feet away jump in with all that imagination, talking about numbers and their experience of OLED TVs saying the 800nits video is better on their 200nits full-field TV, or sub 300 nits full-field AW3423DW, than on the 1000nits full-field monitor without even realizing the reference curves of luminance is right in the middle monitor, the relative brightness difference is clear. I know you don't know how they looks like but you want to talk about what you know aka infinite contrast to make a point. This is getting old. And HDR monitors doesn't need calibration to make a difference in brightness. 

 

Also, OLED PWM flicker fatigue is more severe on monitors due to the closer distance to the eyes. This is a more serious issue. High brightness is fine as long as the monitor doesn't flicker. I can stare at a much higher brightness DC dimming display all day. But I cannot stare at AW3423DW for over 30 minutes. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Doobeedoo]

1 hour ago, MonitorFlicker said:

MiniLEDs and local dimming technology are getting cheaper soon. And we are still in the early stage of HDR.

 

Infinite contrast is ideal but OLED PWM fatigue is more pronounced on monitors because you sit closer. I can comfortably sit in front of PG35VQ with higher brightness all day without eye fatigue. I cannot do the same on AW3423DW over 30 minutes. I have to stop using the monitor because it is not pleasant to the eyes.  

 

The white on AW3423DW looks rather yellow. I guess Dell has to low down the blue light to avoid further eye problems in the absence of flicker-free. 

 

Once you have the monitor, you will know what I mean in terms of flickering issues. 

Meh, they're still way more expensive than OLED which is better and both will get cheaper. QD OLED already is quite cheaper and even for a first product many didn't expect that. Top MiniLED monitors are twice the price and worse overall. Yeah LCD monitors will still exist for a while but premium one will probably switch to QD OLED as we're seeing already with this monitor. The tech will mature and more manufacturers will come with more models.

 

Many also didn't report flicker though, it can also depend on content/scene too. Was it more in game or watching stuff and such. Maybe it's faulty, not everyone experienced the same though.

 

Maybe white color temp mode was on warm or something.

 

I've seen number of monitors and TVs that flicker, much worse. This one shouldn't actually flicker noticeable like some older and other displays I've seen. 

[MonitorFlicker]

12 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Meh, they're still way more expensive than OLED which is better and both will get cheaper. QD OLED already is quite cheaper and even for a first product many didn't expect that. Top MiniLED monitors are twice the price and worse overall. Yeah LCD monitors will still exist for a while but premium one will probably switch to QD OLED as we're seeing already with this monitor. The tech will mature and more manufacturers will come with more models.

 

Many also didn't report flicker though, it can also depend on content/scene too. Was it more in game or watching stuff and such. Maybe it's faulty, not everyone experienced the same though.

 

Maybe white color temp mode was on warm or something.

 

I've seen number of monitors and TVs that flicker, much worse. This one shouldn't actually flicker noticeable like some older and other displays I've seen. 

The reason it is cheap is maybe due to QD-OLED flickers despite the more difficult production. 

You need to find out if you can stare at it over 1 hour without discomfort. 

[Doobeedoo]

14 minutes ago, MonitorFlicker said:

The reason it is cheap is maybe due to QD-OLED flickers despite the more difficult production. 

You need to find out if you can stare at it over 1 hour without discomfort. 

Not really. Actually QD-OLED simplified manufacturing vs regular OLED though depends also on yields, still early stages, it will improve for sure. But, even for a first product, people expected to cost way more even.

Also really it could be a dud that that monitor needs to be RMA because from what I've heard not everyone has this. Not many out there yet. It is bleeding edge tech and early adopters tax same with first MiniLED monitors.

[MonitorFlicker]

2 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

Not really. Actually QD-OLED simplified manufacturing vs regular OLED though depends also on yields, still early stages, it will improve for sure. But, even for a first product, people expected to cost way more even.

Also really it could be a dud that that monitor needs to be RMA because from what I've heard not everyone has this. Not many out there yet. It is bleeding edge tech and early adopters tax same with first MiniLED monitors.

Now you are fooling yourself. Do some research before display ignorance. 

Nothing is that simple. Ever wondering why production is slow and you don't have a QD-OLED monitor for the moment? 

The blue OLED in QD-OLED has 4-stack structure instead of original designed 3-stack. It results in an even more difficult production than OLED.

QD-OLED might not even exist for long in the market.  

Again, don't derail the post, QD-OLED doesn't solve PWM flickering and low brightness. It still doesn't meet the requirement of a true HDR monitor. 

 

 

 

[Doobeedoo]

13 hours ago, MonitorFlicker said:

Now you are fooling yourself. Do some research before display ignorance. 

Nothing is that simple. Ever wondering why production is slow and you don't have a QD-OLED monitor for the moment? 

The blue OLED in QD-OLED has 4-stack structure instead of original designed 3-stack. It results in an even more difficult production than OLED.

QD-OLED might not even exist for long in the market.  

Again, don't derail the post, QD-OLED doesn't solve PWM flickering and low brightness. It still doesn't meet the requirement of a true HDR monitor. 

 

 

 

Research? There are written reviews for the monitor and also QD OLED tech evolution. Even Samsung them selves said so as far as manufacturing complexity, regular OLED is rather complex and expensive still and that they can make QD OLED easier to manufacture and less steps and materials. Being as rather soon.

The initial yields for QD OLED were very low and they did improve quite a lot lately. Also they're taking it slow with first products with new tech, they even mentioned all of this. Look at the launch price of the QD OLED monitors, it surprised everyone even. Yet MiniLED monitors cost twice, what a joke, they're worth sub 1k really. 

Another reason why they're not rushing as well is they said they're still improving the tech and manufacturing process, they plan to eventually shift to 2 and then later to 1 layer. Then you're telling me LCDs with horrible FALD will get cheaper and better, not really, they can further increase zones for high price and still show blooming. Heck 10 000 zone 13" iPad was showing blooming, can't even imagine price for a monitor with that many zones. And having 10 000 nit capable reflector won't mean anything, it's LCD still. Let's not even go insane with 10 000 zones and 10 000 capable MiniLED monitor, but like around 2000 zones and 2000 nits, that would cost thousands at minimum and for what, still blooming and haloing, still motion blur and not best contrast. 1000 nit QD OLED is way better choice.

The fact that QD OLED even showed up in monitor space is telling it will last long enough. Before it I even doubted it because OLED burn in. But here we are. MicroLED is far off so yeah so far QD OLED and improvements on it seems the way to go.

I'm not derailing anything, the PWM implementation and brightness also depends on product implementation. You're jumping on this first monitor as be all end all of the tech. Funny you also speak of true HDR requirements but then mention LCD with backlight and not per pixel lit display, ok. 

[LogicalDrm]

*** Thread cleaned ***

 

As reminder of rules:

Quote

• Ensure a friendly atmosphere to our visitors and forum members
• Encourage the freedom of expression and exchange of information in a mature and responsible manner
• "Don't be a dick" —Wil Wheaton
• "Be excellent to each other" —Bill and Ted
• Remember your audience; both present and future

 

@MonitorFlicker. please edit your thread to include just couple of your images. You have link for originals, reference to that if someone wants to see more. I will edit them apart from first 2-3 to spoilers to make this thread easier to handle. I also will move this to Member Reviews, because thats what this essentially is, even if you aren't reviewing whole product, but just making comparison of features of products.

[MonitorFlicker]

6 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

Research? There are written reviews for the monitor and also QD OLED tech evolution. Even Samsung them selves said so as far as manufacturing complexity, regular OLED is rather complex and expensive still and that they can make QD OLED easier to manufacture and less steps and materials. Being as rather soon.

The initial yields for QD OLED were very low and they did improve quite a lot lately. Also they're taking it slow with first products with new tech, they even mentioned all of this. Look at the launch price of the QD OLED monitors, it surprised everyone even. Yet MiniLED monitors cost twice, what a joke, they're worth sub 1k really. 

Another reason why they're not rushing as well is they said they're still improving the tech and manufacturing process, they plan to eventually shift to 2 and then later to 1 layer. Then you're telling me LCDs with horrible FALD will get cheaper and better, not really, they can further increase zones for high price and still show blooming. Heck 10 000 zone 13" iPad was showing blooming, can't even imagine price for a monitor with that many zones. And having 10 000 nit capable reflector won't mean anything, it's LCD still. Let's not even go insane with 10 000 zones and 10 000 capable MiniLED monitor, but like around 2000 zones and 2000 nits, that would cost thousands at minimum and for what, still blooming and haloing, still motion blur and not best contrast. 1000 nit QD OLED is way better choice.

The fact that QD OLED even showed up in monitor space is telling it will last long enough. Before it I even doubted it because OLED burn in. But here we are. MicroLED is far off so yeah so far QD OLED and improvements on it seems the way to go.

I'm not derailing anything, the PWM implementation and brightness also depends on product implementation. You're jumping on this first monitor as be all end all of the tech. Funny you also speak of true HDR requirements but then mention LCD with backlight and not per pixel lit display, ok. 

You like the market materials. 4-stack OLED production is slower. It could be even unprofitable. 

If you check the comparison pictures. The bloom is not noticeable on FALD monitors. 

At relative high brightness, OLED is not healthy to the eyes because of PMW flickering. Yet, the brightness is not that high at all. 

That is why I say OLED is struggling. Once you get a AW3423DW, be sure to tell me if you can keeping look at it for over 1 hour without eye fatigue. 

[Doobeedoo]

2 hours ago, MonitorFlicker said:

You like the market materials. 4-stack OLED production is slower. It could be even unprofitable. 

If you check the comparison pictures. The bloom is not noticeable on FALD monitors. 

At relative high brightness, OLED is not healthy to the eyes because of PMW flickering. Yet, the brightness is not that high at all. 

That is why I say OLED is struggling. Once you get a AW3423DW, be sure to tell me if you can keeping look at it for over 1 hour without eye fatigue. 

Dude, I've seen FALD in person it's just bad and haloing sucks. 

Again has nothing to do with OLED but bad implementation with brightness and PWM though. While brightness will improve over time, you don't usually sit in super bright room. 

Even if such problem they should firmware fix it. Then again it's a new tech and first product, obviously it comes with quircks, like what I don't like is sub-pixel arrangement.

[MonitorFlicker]

56 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Dude, I've seen FALD in person it's just bad and haloing sucks. 

Again has nothing to do with OLED but bad implementation with brightness and PWM though. While brightness will improve over time, you don't usually sit in super bright room. 

Even if such problem they should firmware fix it. Then again it's a new tech and first product, obviously it comes with quircks, like what I don't like is sub-pixel arrangement.

There are good and bad FALD monitors. 

You won't find text fringing distracting. But you will find the increased eye fatigue on this QD-OLED.

OLED needs to fix the PMW flickering or the brightness won't be improved much. Or you will have eye fatigue right away.

[Doobeedoo]

10 hours ago, MonitorFlicker said:

There are good and bad FALD monitors. 

You won't find text fringing distracting. But you will find the increased eye fatigue on this QD-OLED.

OLED needs to fix the PMW flickering or the brightness won't be improved much. Or you will have eye fatigue right away.

The flicker may be causes by larger framerate fluctuation in games, low framerate movies, even G-sync as brightness can shift between refreshes. Try turning G-sync off to see.

Oddly enough many reviews shown no flicker or barely any and unnoticable and only capturable with camera. It seems it depends on usage but potentially from panel to panel maybe.

 

I know some say strobing causes flicker for them. Maybe they don't like either brightness change or not lock framerate. I find it good for fps games.

[MonitorFlicker]

3 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

The flicker may be causes by larger framerate fluctuation in games, low framerate movies, even G-sync as brightness can shift between refreshes. Try turning G-sync off to see.

Oddly enough many reviews shown no flicker or barely any and unnoticable and only capturable with camera. It seems it depends on usage but potentially from panel to panel maybe.

 

I know some say strobing causes flicker for them. Maybe they don't like either brightness change or not lock framerate. I find it good for fps games.

The flicker is on the bottom level. It is directly connected to how brightness is controlled. It's not related to user settings or other hardware. It's invisible and different than G-sync VRR flicker. What is worse is  the flicker frequency is as low as screen refresh rate. This is no good to the eyes to use in a dim environment.

[Doobeedoo]

5 minutes ago, MonitorFlicker said:

The flicker is on the bottom level. It is directly connected to how brightness is controlled. It's not related to user settings or other hardware. It's invisible and different than G-sync VRR flicker. What is worse is  the flicker frequency is as low as screen refresh rate. This is no good to the eyes to use in a dim environment.

That is weird to be so low, it should be higher. It seems it differs between reviewers and people who bought it also between them. So many different reports.

[GeneralStark]

I realize this is a very old thread, but the flickering with this monitor is very real. I have been getting serious headaches ever since I purchased this monitor and after sessions of gaming. It is very easy to capture the flicker even in a 60 fps video. It took me a while to narrow it down to this monitor.

 

I had the older AW3420 for a few years and no issues with that.

 

Does anyone know if this will be a problem with any QD-OLED monitor on the market? 

[Stahlmann]

On 12/15/2023 at 3:45 AM, GeneralStark said:

I realize this is a very old thread, but the flickering with this monitor is very real. I have been getting serious headaches ever since I purchased this monitor and after sessions of gaming. It is very easy to capture the flicker even in a 60 fps video. It took me a while to narrow it down to this monitor.

 

I had the older AW3420 for a few years and no issues with that.

 

Does anyone know if this will be a problem with any QD-OLED monitor on the market? 

It seems you're one of the rare cases where you're very susceptible to eye fatigue. Most people don't have any problems with these current OLED monitors. I myself have been using a C2 for over a year now and i never noticed any flicker. I also don't have any additional eye fatigue compared to the flicker-free LCD monitors i've used in the past.

 

The flickering you're describing when filming the display is a common occurence with all display types. It's a mismatch between your monitor refresh rate and camera fps that introduces the visible flickering on camera.

 

OLED monitors don't really flicker though, there is a slight dip in brightness that coincides with the display refresh rate. We're talking only a few nits, maybe in the 2-digits. But there is no on/off flickering like with a real flickering display.

 

But if you do have problems going with a higher refresh rate OLED monitor might help, as the flicker frequency is directly linked to the refresh rate.

[jre84]

I have to agree with you about flickering.  Personally (laughs allowed). I bought a Lg B2 a few days ago to use as a monitor, and as far as flicker lag ghosting ect, its literally perfect, the only thing I would want to change is maybe a higher brightness even though it does appear bright enough, I realize its apples to oranges and not all OLEDs are the same but for what its worth is this monitor is anything like other OLED panels its amazing and I do not experience fatigue even after using it for 8 hours straight