Sony Crystal LED Display - new display tech - Page 16 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 18Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 519 Old 06-16-2015, 05:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agisthos View Post
When doing such comparisons, of course it will never be apples to apples. There is differences in calibration, color reproduction, black levels, contrast e.t.c not to mention the general detail levels that can differ between two different panels types (despite both being 1080p).


But none of those things account for the largest difference in that screen capture. It is obviously motion, with the HX925 only being able to push the usual 300-500 lines of resolution in motion, hence the motion blur. The CLED, with it's instant LED switching, is doing far better.


And yet this is all visible from a screen capture of a youtube video (which has been scaled to fit my computer monitor). No doubt if we had access to the source video interview and could capture some direct frames, the motion blur difference would be even more pronounced than it is here.
First of all, yes, a single shot like you grabbed can show that at least the camera is capable of showing that the CLED is using discrete pulsing. So I can see that it's almost certainly better at motion given that.

But you cannot actually see the motion differences on your existing monitor while its moving unless your monitor exceeds at least one of the two. Hence I'll ask my question again: what monitor is in front of you?

My current monitor is an old Sony SDM 93 (circa 2004). Even though you can grab a still from a youtube video showing more discrete pulsing, when it's actually playing (I don't care HOW sharp they are), I'm seeing the same gobleddygook on both screens. My monitor simply cannot handle motion worth a @#$% (it's an old LCD from 11 years ago). I would need a better monitor to see a difference between those two screens past a single screen capture.

What you supplied just now is evidence of better motion handling. Good. Actually Mark Rejhon (blurbusters) and I were discussing this years ago about the CLED because he noticed that there was a distinct interference with the cameras so he presumed it was bright enough to engage a pulsing mechanism and hence have better motion. But to see it beyond a single image, you'll need a monitor that doesn't smear the image as badly as the lcd on the right does.

Your notion that relative differences in two monitors for any particular metric is always apparent is just wrong. It depends upon what the monitor is at the tail end of the chain (the one in front of you). Same with spatial resolution as it is with motion resolution. I cannot see motion better than the smear this SDM in front of me makes on my retina.

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".
tgm1024 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 519 Old 06-16-2015, 05:18 PM
Member
 
Agisthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
My current monitor is an old Sony SDM 93 (circa 2004). Even though you can grab a still from a youtube video showing more discrete pulsing, when it's actually playing (I don't care HOW sharp they are), I'm seeing the same gobleddygook on both screens. My monitor simply cannot handle motion worth a @#$% (it's an old LCD from 11 years ago). I would need a better monitor to see a difference between those two screens past a single screen capture.
Ah, well in that case no wonder you cannot see any difference. Any motion playback is a blurry mess on an LCD computer monitor from that era.


In fact it was only about 2010 onwards that LCD monitors became reasonable. You can tell motion is important to me, so I use a highly responsive Asus ROG swift. They are clear as day compared to older monitors.
Agisthos is offline  
post #453 of 519 Old 06-16-2015, 11:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,770
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 664 Post(s)
Liked: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
The sony a few years back was working. It was a prototype, far from being a product but the point is that the foundation was there. It was build into the prototype TV, wasn't it? What they can do with LED at some point they can do with Quantum Dots.
The Sony was an actual hand-built prototype of something. Show me the 4-inch display built using emissive quantum dots. What? You can't? Why? Oh, because no one has ever demonstrated one? Oh, OK then.
Quote:
OLED will try to make it next few years. And if that not works. Q-LED might be an option. I understand that we are years away from having a Q-LED product but we are not in a hurry.
The two things are entirely unrelated, except in the FUD world of Samsung. Clearly, they didn't get permission from Korea Inc. to infringe on LG's patents and clearly they don't see a rapid path to Kateeva's tech producing TVs. So they go and create FUD around what LG is doing by pretending "there is another." But you know what? Princess Leia was no Jedi.

Whether or not OLED TV succeeds has nothing to do with whether someone figures out a way to make an emissive quantum dot device that can then be manufactured. In the meantime, at least 4 different methods for producing OLED TVs have been / will be explored. All have been demonstrated more extensively -- some by orders of magnitude -- than an emissive quantum-dot TV.
Quote:
And that is what we talking about. Is Q-LED an option for the near future? Since you did an article on Kateeva you might as well do an article on QD Vision and figure out were they are now and were they are heading with the QD stuff.
You should re-read the article you linked. QD basically says they abandoned the technology. They don't say anything about pursuing it. You should read this from QD-Vision's co-founder from last year: http://www.hdtvexpert.com/qd-vision-...th-of-oled-tv/

He basically says, QD films will kill OLED. Not one word about emitters, which don't exist in any sort of TV application form.

Sadly for QLED, it's fairyland fantasies date back to at least 2002 http://www.newscientist.com/article/.../#.VYEUp1nBzGc and there is nothing to show for them 13 years later. There is still no prototype display and still no discussion of how someone would build TVs based on this technology.

In the meantime, OLED TVs have been built using WOLED / vapor deposition, FMM/small mask scanning, solution processed inkjet in normal atmosphere (numerous prototypes), solution processed inkjet in nitrogen chamber (Kateeva prototypes, none shown publicly that I'm aware of), and photoresist based processes (a recent development, prototype not shown publicly). OLED also has been used in significantly more than 100 million Samsung phones and phablets, numerous digital cameras, the Apple Watch and other products. It's real. It's real good. And until it fails to take over the TV market, it's the heir apparent for the high end.

It also continues to face every commercial / marketing / chicken-and-egg problem I've described since at least 2012 (if not earlier) as it competes with LCD. QLED would face those problems times 10.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #454 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 04:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
What you supplied just now is evidence of better motion handling. Good. Actually Mark Rejhon (blurbusters) and I were discussing this years ago about the CLED because he noticed that there was a distinct interference with the cameras so he presumed it was bright enough to engage a pulsing mechanism and hence have better motion. But to see it beyond a single image, you'll need a monitor that doesn't smear the image as badly as the lcd on the right does.
Yes, it's clear that the Crystal LED display was a scanning display, similar to CRTs of old:


Sony's OLED monitors are also scanning displays by default - though the latest models also offer a flicker-free mode.


I'd much rather see a globally refreshed display (all pixels updated at once) rather than scanned, but I suppose that's probably not going to happen as long as we're stuck with 60Hz as flicker would be a lot more noticeable when the whole screen turns off at once.

LG's OLEDs are flicker-free displays, which is why they have a full 16.67ms persistence with 60 FPS content (twice that at 30 FPS) and it's why they have such poor motion handling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
The Sony was an actual hand-built prototype of something. Show me the 4-inch display built using emissive quantum dots. What? You can't? Why? Oh, because no one has ever demonstrated one? Oh, OK then.
http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journa...n.2011.12.html
And something newer: http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journa...n.2015.36.html

It's clearly a long way away, but it is being worked on.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #455 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 05:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
I'd much rather see a globally refreshed display (all pixels updated at once) rather than scanned, but I suppose that's probably not going to happen as long as we're stuck with 60Hz as flicker would be a lot more noticeable when the whole screen turns off at once.
Truly simultaneous? Well, if such a display actually exists, I'd like to know how they pulled it off. Such a device would require a read from some kind of memory that stores the raster----the one internal to the display, not the video card. Multiported memory is horrifically expensive, and that's only for a handful of simultaneous accesses. The device you're considering is a 24 million-ported memory. I suppose it's possible to have a dedicated patch of memory (with a mini dedicated "bus" of sorts) per subpixel or pixel, that is fed seperately and then a line is pulled down to access it, but that would be equally expensive to create.

Almost all the time in electronics (you can usually say all the time), anything that seems simultaneous is actually sequential in nature. If LCD grids are actually not doing any scanning at all, what are they doing? Is the image uploaded sequentially to the transistor backplane, and then "triggered" at once?

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".

Last edited by tgm1024; 06-17-2015 at 05:51 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #456 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 06:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agisthos View Post
Ah, well in that case no wonder you cannot see any difference. Any motion playback is a blurry mess on an LCD computer monitor from that era.


In fact it was only about 2010 onwards that LCD monitors became reasonable. You can tell motion is important to me, so I use a highly responsive Asus ROG swift. They are clear as day compared to older monitors.
Right; and that's an unusually good display as all Republic of Gamers monitors are. And this explains why the CLED & LCD were so evidently different to you; most folks don't have a display anywhere near that thing. If your monitor is recent, then with that G-SYNC 1ms beast on your desk, in this chain:

test video --> two displays (CLED & LCD) --> video capture --> the ROG display in front of you

...the weak link is the video capture (which has proven good enough). In my case the weak link is the tail end.

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".
tgm1024 is offline  
post #457 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 06:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Truly simultaneous? Well, if such a display actually exists, I'd like to know how they pulled it off. Such a device would require a read from some kind of memory that stores the raster----the one internal to the display, not the video card. Multiported memory is horrifically expensive, and that's only for a handful of simultaneous accesses. The device you're considering is a 24 million-ported memory. I suppose it's possible to have a dedicated patch of memory (with a mini dedicated "bus" of sorts) per subpixel or pixel, that is fed seperately and then a line is pulled down to access it, but that would be equally expensive to create.

Almost all the time in electronics (you can usually say all the time), anything that seems simultaneous is actually sequential in nature. If LCD grids are actually not doing any scanning at all, what are they doing? Is the image uploaded sequentially to the transistor backplane, and then "triggered" at once?
Plasmas update the display globally.
The OLED displays used in the HTC Vive, and I believe also the Oculus Rift, are reported to be updated globally.

"Rolling displays" (LCD, CRT, CLED etc.) show skew when anything moves quickly across the screen horizontally - which will be the reason that they're using globally-updated displays for VR.
I would assume that it's fed into a buffer and "triggered globally" as you suggest.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #458 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 06:41 AM
Member
 
Agisthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Right; and that's an unusually good display as all Republic of Gamers monitors are. And this explains why the CLED & LCD were so evidently different to you; most folks don't have a display anywhere near that thing. If your monitor is recent, then with that G-SYNC 1ms beast on your desk, in this chain:

test video --> two displays (CLED & LCD) --> video capture --> the ROG display in front of you

...the weak link is the video capture (which has proven good enough). In my case the weak link is the tail end.

You are right, the difference is very easy to see for me, and I should not have had a go at you without considering you (and others) do not have a monitor so capable of showing such differences.


Anyway, with the paused frame capture you can at least get a sense of the difference. The CLED seems to be awesome for moving many more lines of resolution than the HX925. If its black levels and colour were up to OLED standard, then we have really missed out on something.
Agisthos is offline  
post #459 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 07:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 27,274
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3161 Post(s)
Liked: 2971
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Princess Leia was no Jedi.
Now you tell me?
tgm1024 likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #460 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 07:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,613
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
The Sony was an actual hand-built prototype of something.
Right. Hand-built or something. It was (hand) build and working
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo
Show me the 4-inch display built using emissive quantum dots. What? You can't? Why? Oh, because no one has ever demonstrated one? Oh, OK then.
There was a 4 inch QLED at SID 2011 and a year before that there was ''the first samsung full colored QLED display (1 cm)''.
. And even if there wasn't one sooner or later there will be at least a (hand)build prototype.



ttp://www.qled-info.com/qd-vision-showcase-full-colour-4-inch-qled-display-at-sid-2011/



http://www.qled-info.com/wordpress-r...at-siteground/
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo
But you know what? Princess Leia was no jedi.
Are you shure that Princess Leia was no jedi? According the Wookieepedia she was at various stages of her life, a politican, revolutionary, and jedi knight of the new jedi order.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Leia_Organa_Solo
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo
Whether or not OLED TV succeeds has nothing to do with whether someone figures out a way to make an emissive quantum dot device that can then be manufactured. In the meantime, at least 4 different methods for producing OLED TVs have been / will be explored. All have been demonstrated more extensively -- some by orders of magnitude -- than an emissive quantum-dot TV.
I am clearly speaking of long term. Even if OLED succeeds manufacturers will be working on new technologies. And when we see more and more QD LCd's there will also go more money into QD research which includes QLED AFAIK. And that is when OLED succeeds. When OLED fails there will be going way more money into new technologie research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo
You should re-read the article you linked. QD basically says they abandoned the technology. They don't say anything about pursuing it.
Right. They are not persuing it BUT they are still doing research on it, and so do others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo
You should read this from QD-Vision's co-founder from last year: http://www.hdtvexpert.com/qd-vision-...th-of-oled-tv/

He basically says, QD films will kill OLED. Not one word about emitters, which don't exist in any sort of TV application form.

Sadly for QLED, it's fairyland fantasies date back to at least 2002 http://www.newscientist.com/article/.../#.VYEUp1nBzGc and there is nothing to show for them 13 years later. There is still no prototype display and still no discussion of how someone would build TVs based on this technology.

In the meantime, OLED TVs have been built using WOLED / vapor deposition, FMM/small mask scanning, solution processed inkjet in normal atmosphere (numerous prototypes), solution processed inkjet in nitrogen chamber (Kateeva prototypes, none shown publicly that I'm aware of), and photoresist based processes (a recent development, prototype not shown publicly). OLED also has been used in significantly more than 100 million Samsung phones and phablets, numerous digital cameras, the Apple Watch and other products. It's real. It's real good. And until it fails to take over the TV market, it's the heir apparent for the high end.

It also continues to face every commercial / marketing / chicken-and-egg problem I've described since at least 2012 (if not earlier) as it competes with LCD. QLED would face those problems times 10.
8mile13 is offline  
post #461 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 08:04 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agisthos View Post
Even from a web recording like this, you can see the vastly superior motion performance of the CLED, with scrolling text on the buildings much more visible. The CLED panel can shift the image in motion at full resolution, similar to a CRT.
I watched the video at my Sony W900 professional CRT monitor and I confirm what you say, the better motion performance is quite obvious.
UltraBlack is online now  
post #462 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 09:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
Plasmas update the display globally.
The OLED displays used in the HTC Vive, and I believe also the Oculus Rift, are reported to be updated globally.

"Rolling displays" (LCD, CRT, CLED etc.) show skew when anything moves quickly across the screen horizontally - which will be the reason that they're using globally-updated displays for VR.
I would assume that it's fed into a buffer and "triggered globally" as you suggest.
...........er.......That can't be right, at least I'm not sure how. I'm betting there's still a scan involved, just a very fast one. At this point, it might even be a semantic argument centered around the word "simultaneous".

There is no such thing as a "buffer" that can manage this, unless it's somehow part of the backplane itself. I think for this detail I'll have to have a video hardware design engineer (xrox/ynotgoal?) chime in here, because there are no 24 million ported memories out there, and this has always been a bit of a mystery to me.

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".
tgm1024 is offline  
post #463 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
...........er.......That can't be right, at least I'm not sure how. I'm betting there's still a scan involved, just a very fast one. At this point, it might even be a semantic argument centered around the word "simultaneous".
Well "simultaneous" is probably reduced from 16.67ms to something significantly lower, ideally <1ms.
tgm1024 likes this.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #464 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 11:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 27,274
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3161 Post(s)
Liked: 2971
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
...........er.......That can't be right, at least I'm not sure how. I'm betting there's still a scan involved, just a very fast one. At this point, it might even be a semantic argument centered around the word "simultaneous".

There is no such thing as a "buffer" that can manage this, unless it's somehow part of the backplane itself. I think for this detail I'll have to have a video hardware design engineer (xrox/ynotgoal?) chime in here, because there are no 24 million ported memories out there, and this has always been a bit of a mystery to me.
This is the first time I've heard of a rolling display issue. We commonly talk about rolling shutters as it relates to CMOS sensors in the camera threads, but I've never heard of this as a display related issue.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #465 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 11:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
This is the first time I've heard of a rolling display issue. We commonly talk about rolling shutters as it relates to CMOS sensors in the camera threads, but I've never heard of this as a display related issue.
It's most obvious if you have access to an iPad or similar tablet.
The higher resolution it is, the more obvious the problem will be.
Find a website which has a horizontal bar across the screen and swipe your finger back and forth to move it from the top of the display to the bottom. You'll see that the line bends due to the rolling display.

If you drag a window which is full height, but not full width to one side on a computer, you see a similar effect. Of course your PC monitor might blur things enough that you can't tell.
It's one of those things that once you see it, you're always going to notice it.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #466 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 12:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 27,274
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3161 Post(s)
Liked: 2971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
It's most obvious if you have access to an iPad or similar tablet.
The higher resolution it is, the more obvious the problem will be.
Find a website which has a horizontal bar across the screen and swipe your finger back and forth to move it from the top of the display to the bottom. You'll see that the line bends due to the rolling display.

If you drag a window which is full height, but not full width to one side on a computer, you see a similar effect. Of course your PC monitor might blur things enough that you can't tell.
It's one of those things that once you see it, you're always going to notice it.
And if what you're saying is correct, I'd want to do this why? So I could forever notice something I don't now? I'll pass, thanks.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #467 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 01:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
It's most obvious if you have access to an iPad or similar tablet.
The higher resolution it is, the more obvious the problem will be.
Find a website which has a horizontal bar across the screen and swipe your finger back and forth to move it from the top of the display to the bottom. You'll see that the line bends due to the rolling display.

If you drag a window which is full height, but not full width to one side on a computer, you see a similar effect. Of course your PC monitor might blur things enough that you can't tell.
It's more likely IMO to be the case that if your PC monitor is blurring things already then whatever causes the blur will be directly related to what causes the roll. On my 11 y.o. CCFL-LCD for example, the bottom of a tall skinny window lags behind like rubber when doing that left-right fast movement test you mention.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
It's one of those things that once you see it, you're always going to notice it.
Yeah, likely. Ken, don't do it.

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".
tgm1024 is offline  
post #468 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 01:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agisthos View Post
You are right, the difference is very easy to see for me, and I should not have had a go at you without considering you (and others) do not have a monitor so capable of showing such differences.


Anyway, with the paused frame capture you can at least get a sense of the difference. The CLED seems to be awesome for moving many more lines of resolution than the HX925. If its black levels and colour were up to OLED standard, then we have really missed out on something.
How do you like the ASUS ROG SWIFT compared to the comparably priced benq's? I'm looking to move past this thing. It's amazing really---I am so sensitive to motion, and yet I found a way to deal with this SDM-93. I've conditioned myself to not try to read when scrolling a page, etc., etc. Horrible. I think part of the reason I'm loathe to get rid of it is 1. it works and 2. it was $600 when new. LOL....

As soon as I bought it though, my unreal tournament scores took a total nose dive.

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".
tgm1024 is offline  
post #469 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 01:53 PM
Member
 
Agisthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
How do you like the ASUS ROG SWIFT compared to the comparably priced benq's? I'm looking to move past this thing. It's amazing really---I am so sensitive to motion, and yet I found a way to deal with this SDM-93. I've conditioned myself to not try to read when scrolling a page, etc., etc. Horrible. I think part of the reason I'm loathe to get rid of it is 1. it works and 2. it was $600 when new. LOL....

As soon as I bought it though, my unreal tournament scores took a total nose dive.

Good question. I had the 120hz monitors when they first came out, and they improved things massively compared to the early LCD monitors. But the ROG Swift is something else. There is little motion smear or trailing. Its a very fast panel. Not just for games and first person shooters, but for general Windows use. If you work on the computer a lot, moving stuff around, its a godsend.


But there is a catch, its a TN film panel, so the color and clarity is not up to scatch to an IPS panel. I also do not like the AG coating they have used, its a bit too strong and makes text more fatiguing to read.


The new Acer Predator is similar price, has G-Sync, and IPS, and a clearer AG coating. So it looks like it could be a winner. I will be getting one soon when the production batch issues are sorted out.

Last edited by Agisthos; 06-17-2015 at 03:49 PM.
Agisthos is offline  
post #470 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 04:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,770
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 664 Post(s)
Liked: 923
So the QD-Vision link was from 2011. They hoped to have it working in 3-5 years. They have -- by their own accounts -- abandoned commercial pursuit of these displays by year 4 of this....

The first Nature link was 2010, with absolutely no follow on.

The second Nature link was from last year, with no evidence of a working display at all.

To say people are "working on this" feels like an exaggeration.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #471 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 05:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
So the QD-Vision link was from 2011. They hoped to have it working in 3-5 years. They have -- by their own accounts -- abandoned commercial pursuit of these displays by year 4 of this....

The first Nature link was 2010, with absolutely no follow on.

The second Nature link was from last year, with no evidence of a working display at all.

To say people are "working on this" feels like an exaggeration.
We may never know where the current unspoken/unknown/unbragged-about endeavors will ultimately land us.

I return to this thought from time to time:

An invention has to make sense in the world it finishes in, not in the world it started.
-Tim O’Reilly

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".
tgm1024 is offline  
post #472 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 07:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
It's more likely IMO to be the case that if your PC monitor is blurring things already then whatever causes the blur will be directly related to what causes the roll. On my 11 y.o. CCFL-LCD for example, the bottom of a tall skinny window lags behind like rubber when doing that left-right fast movement test you mention.
If memory serves correctly, it was still an issue with CRTs, and I seem to recall there being someone that had seen it in person saying that they noticed skew on the Crystal LED prototype.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
How do you like the ASUS ROG SWIFT compared to the comparably priced benq's? I'm looking to move past this thing. It's amazing really---I am so sensitive to motion, and yet I found a way to deal with this SDM-93. I've conditioned myself to not try to read when scrolling a page, etc., etc. Horrible. I think part of the reason I'm loathe to get rid of it is 1. it works and 2. it was $600 when new. LOL....

As soon as I bought it though, my unreal tournament scores took a total nose dive.
The BenQ monitors are better if you plan on using it with more than just PC sources, as they have a "single strobe" option in the service menu which can be activated with any 60Hz input. (it's apparently broken on the latest Z-series monitor right now though)

Any other monitor with a strobe option is going to be using NVIDIA's ULMB (Ultra-Low Motion Blur) tech, which is only available at 85Hz and up, and those displays typically only have a DisplayPort input.

If you're thinking about buying one of the ASUS ROG displays, I'd wait for the recently announced PG279Q, which seems to match the specs of the PG278Q, only it's now using an IPS panel rather than TN. ULMB may be limited to 100Hz rather than 120Hz on the upper-end due to the slower response times of IPS, but most people seem to think that the trade-off is worth it.


The main issue I have with these monitors right now is that the G-Sync and ULMB features are limited to only working with NVIDIA GPUs. (and probably only on Windows too?)
You can use it as a standard 144Hz monitor with Intel/AMD, but you only get G-Sync and ULMB when connected to an NVIDIA GPU.
I just don't know that I like spending that sort of money on something where the main selling point only works with one vendor.

There are a selection of competing monitors now which have Adaptive-Sync/AMD FreeSync, which is equivalent to G-Sync - but there are some teething issues there with that being new tech, and despite that being a VESA standard, NVIDIA do not currently support it.

If you want an Adaptive-Sync monitor with a strobed mode, BenQ monitors are your only option, while all current G-Sync monitors should support ULMB.


But I don't know how much of an issue that is these days.
As much as I like their approach of working to develop open standards instead of closed solutions, I just don't see much reason to buy an AMD card these days unless you want to save $50-100 on an equivalent level of gaming performance, while sacrificing a number of features to do so.

It looked as though they were ready to finally compete with NVIDIA again with their latest GPU line-up (just announced yesterday) only it is looking like the price and performance is basically the same as NVIDIA's 980Ti, and it's now being reported that the new cards apparently only have support for HDMI 1.4 and not HDMI 2.0


I'd recommend reading reviews/articles on sites like TFT Central before buying one as well.
Though they are very good displays in many respects, there are still drawbacks to some of these features.
tgm1024 likes this.

Last edited by Chronoptimist; 06-17-2015 at 07:42 PM.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #473 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 10:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,770
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 664 Post(s)
Liked: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
We may never know where the current unspoken/unknown/unbragged-about endeavors will ultimately land us.

I return to this thought from time to time:

An invention has to make sense in the world it finishes in, not in the world it started.
Right.

For a reality check on displays, it's worth remembering this:

1) It takes more than a decade for a display technology to go from prototype to mass production. It took that long for PDP, LCD, OLED.

2) Since the days of Farnsworth and Zworykin, dozens of new types of displays have been proposed, maybe hundreds. Three have ever made it to market. One is gone and one has managed to achieve success in one manufacturer's smartphone line and nowhere near 1 million TVs...

When I am skeptical it's because basically nothing changes. In fact, LCD very nearly never happened for TV. There were a couple of years where it looked like it wouldn't.
tgm1024 likes this.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #474 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 10:28 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 537
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Liked: 53
All LCD types of panels are bad for video gaming.

TN - Requires you to sit at proper angle, really bad for 4k because you sit so close making the viewing angle clip black.
IPS - Terrible black levels, good viewing angle.
VA - Higher input lag.


OLED - Perfect black levels, lowest input lag, near perfect viewing angles.


The future of monitors is OLED.
Chase Payne is offline  
post #475 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 11:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase Payne View Post
All LCD types of panels are bad for video gaming.

TN - Requires you to sit at proper angle, really bad for 4k because you sit so close making the viewing angle clip black.
IPS - Terrible black levels, good viewing angle.
VA - Higher input lag.

OLED - Perfect black levels, lowest input lag, near perfect viewing angles.
The future of monitors is OLED.
Except current OLED monitors have input lag more than an order of magnitude higher than the best gaming monitors (50ms vs <5ms), motion handling that pales in comparison to any strobed display, are currently limited to 60Hz (vs 144Hz), they suffer from ABL, have undefeatable unwanted image processing, LG's panels are RGBW which is not suited to displaying computer content, and they are susceptible to image retention from the static elements in game UIs.

Gaming-optimized VA displays like the Eizo Foris with 5000:1 contrast still have considerably lower latency than LG's OLED TVs - and most of that seems to be Eizo's signal processing rather than the panel itself.

Do you happen to work for LG, or are you just really happy with an OLED TV that you recently bought? All of your posts here seem to be OLED propaganda.
OLED is very exciting stuff, but let's not pretend that it's something it's not.
Bruce2019 likes this.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #476 of 519 Old 06-17-2015, 11:43 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 537
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post
Except current OLED monitors have input lag more than an order of magnitude higher than the best gaming monitors (50ms vs <5ms), motion handling that pales in comparison to any strobed display, are currently limited to 60Hz (vs 144Hz), they suffer from ABL, have undefeatable unwanted image processing, LG's panels are RGBW which is not suited to displaying computer content, and they are susceptible to image retention from the static elements in game UIs.

Gaming-optimized VA displays like the Eizo Foris with 5000:1 contrast still have considerably lower latency than LG's OLED TVs - and most of that seems to be Eizo's signal processing rather than the panel itself.

Do you happen to work for LG, or are you just really happy with an OLED TV that you recently bought? All of your posts here seem to be OLED propaganda.
OLED is very exciting stuff, but let's not pretend that it's something it's not.
Are you talking about OLED TV's or OLED monitors here? I don't recall saying the future of PC is playing on an OLED TV.... I said monitor.

Also, the OLED technology itself has less than a 1ms latency time, anything added to that is just signal processing.

Also, I don't care who makes the OLED. LG doesn't even make OLED for monitors, so it would be hard to say "I work for them."

Plus even If I did work for them, why would I care to use my free time to post on forums? As soon as my job stops paying me, I'm done.

If you can get your hands on a Sony GDM-FW900 that is the best computer monitor you can get. While it only has a CR of 400:1 it has no fixed resolution and has a very high refresh rate. If anything, I would state CRT is king with computers but no one makes them anymore.

Last edited by Chase Payne; 06-17-2015 at 11:56 PM.
Chase Payne is offline  
post #477 of 519 Old 06-18-2015, 05:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,101
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1408 Post(s)
Liked: 1378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase Payne View Post
All LCD types of panels are bad for video gaming.

TN - Requires you to sit at proper angle, really bad for 4k because you sit so close making the viewing angle clip black.
IPS - Terrible black levels, good viewing angle.
VA - Higher input lag.
OLED - Perfect black levels, lowest input lag, near perfect viewing angles.

The future of monitors is OLED.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase Payne View Post
Also, the OLED technology itself has less than a 1ms latency time, anything added to that is just signal processing.
You might be confusing timings, or at the very least, terminology.

The 1ms figure often given for OLED as a display tech is the response time (often historically referred to as GTG, or gray-to-gray, because of the transition timings from the various levels in LCD arrays). You however referred recently to input lag, which is a different beast entirely.

Input lag is the time it takes for all changes in the image stream to react a change in the monitor display. There is no such thing as "just" signal processing, as if you can easily wave it away as noise. The sum total of all processing is enormous on displays, and as such you could theoretically have a display tech with a (mythical/theoretical) zero response, but very high input lag. They're aren't directly connected.

Further, we were primarily talking about motion effects, so your OLED 1ms reference is a further mystery to me. Regarding motion discomfort, the role of response time is still under debate, but it's generally accepted to not be the primary cause of motion discomfort; Persistence is. We have to be careful here to not discount the honest reporting from some who see OLED's as having the best motion ever; but we do have to point out that this is rare in comparison to those affected by persistence.

Current OLED displays seem to currently lack the fundamental brightness to pull off the tight strobing required to shorten persistence enough to compete with the fastest LCDs.

Cogito ergo sum makes a fundamental mistake because it ignores the implied existence of the narrator. Descartes might as well have said "A rose is red, therefore I am".

Last edited by tgm1024; 06-18-2015 at 05:52 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #478 of 519 Old 06-18-2015, 07:44 AM
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 537
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
You might be confusing timings, or at the very least, terminology.

The 1ms figure often given for OLED as a display tech is the response time (often historically referred to as GTG, or gray-to-gray, because of the transition timings from the various levels in LCD arrays). You however referred recently to input lag, which is a different beast entirely.

Input lag is the time it takes for all changes in the image stream to react a change in the monitor display. There is no such thing as "just" signal processing, as if you can easily wave it away as noise. The sum total of all processing is enormous on displays, and as such you could theoretically have a display tech with a (mythical/theoretical) zero response, but very high input lag. They're aren't directly connected.

Further, we were primarily talking about motion effects, so your OLED 1ms reference is a further mystery to me. Regarding motion discomfort, the role of response time is still under debate, but it's generally accepted to not be the primary cause of motion discomfort; Persistence is. We have to be careful here to not discount the honest reporting from some who see OLED's as having the best motion ever; but we do have to point out that this is rare in comparison to those affected by persistence.

Current OLED displays seem to currently lack the fundamental brightness to pull off the tight strobing required to shorten persistence enough to compete with the fastest LCDs.
It is true OLED is struggling with motion because it uses sample and hold; it does have to use motionflow/trumotion to get it. I do not know why but even with motionflow turned on the input lag only seems to increase by about 10ms, where as on LCD it seemed a lot more than that. Not sure if it has anything to do with the display though.

I can't find any documentation on the SONY OLED's input latency, but the larger the screen the higher the latency. Eventually, in due time OLED will replace monitors; but the question is when? Unless you have a CRT, nothing is really ideal for computing at this moment.

LCD got a really bad start, it seems OLED is improving a lot faster in a much quicker time period than it took with LCD displays.
Chase Payne is offline  
post #479 of 519 Old 06-18-2015, 07:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,613
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Right.

For a reality check on displays, it's worth remembering this:

1) It takes more than a decade for a display technology to go from prototype to mass production. It took that long for PDP, LCD, OLED.

2) Since the days of Farnsworth and Zworykin, dozens of new types of displays have been proposed, maybe hundreds. Three have ever made it to market. One is gone and one has managed to achieve success in one manufacturer's smartphone line and nowhere near 1 million TVs...

When I am skeptical it's because basically nothing changes. In fact, LCD very nearly never happened for TV. There were a couple of years where it looked like it wouldn't.
Basically only LCd has made it to the market succesfully. PDP and CRT are gone. It is hard to tell right now if OLED will succeed.

It is also worth remembering that at some point in the future new technologies will try to become a succesfull massmarket product and shurely QD LED might be one those AFAIK
8mile13 is offline  
post #480 of 519 Old 06-18-2015, 08:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Bruce2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 404
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chase Payne View Post
It is true OLED is struggling with motion because it uses sample and hold; it does have to use motionflow/trumotion to get it. I do not know why but even with motionflow turned on the input lag only seems to increase by about 10ms, where as on LCD it seemed a lot more than that. Not sure if it has anything to do with the display though.

I can't find any documentation on the SONY OLED's input latency, but the larger the screen the higher the latency. Eventually, in due time OLED will replace monitors; but the question is when? Unless you have a CRT, nothing is really ideal for computing at this moment.

LCD got a really bad start, it seems OLED is improving a lot faster in a much quicker time period than it took with LCD displays.

Dont LCD also use sample and hold?


Look at these motionflow/trumotion comparioson: Oled vs LCD (both sample and hold)




Start time: 2:20, pay attention to the fast moving object. First is oled, then the Panasonic lcd.


Both sample and hold displays, but the oled really fails.


Its not an oled issue, it is processing lg issue.
UltraBlack likes this.

Last edited by Bruce2019; 06-18-2015 at 08:07 AM.
Bruce2019 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off