• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NeoGaf OLED owners thread

Skyr

Member
Sep 4, 2013
1,979
2,505
725
I fired up my old Panasonic G25 the other day and noticed it seems to have much better motion resolution than my C9. The G25's 1080p 60fps looks way more realistic than 1440p 120hz VRR on the C9. BFI on the C9 gets it closer but the flickering the BFI causes is awful. I really wish Plasma survived into the HDR VRR era.
I don’t get what you mean by “realistic“.
I still own a Panasonic TX-P50STW50. And while it handles 24fps content definitely a bit better than my C9, there is no difference in motion clarity with 60fps and upwards. So I can’t confirm this.
 

Gek54

Junior Member
Jun 8, 2004
7,402
20
1,455
STrange. I have been absolutely blown away by how good 1440p 120 Hz VRR looks on my C9.
Yeah its much better than my E6 but the C9 is still adding lots of unrealistic blur where as on my Panasonic Plasmas the image looks far more crisp in motion.

I don’t get what you mean by “realistic“.
I still own a Panasonic TX-P50STW50. And while it handles 24fps content definitely a bit better than my C9, there is no difference in motion clarity with 60fps and upwards. So I can’t confirm this.
I noticed immediately with Rocket League and then Forza 7. Proved true on my old ST30 as well, and I will try my VT60 later. The best test is to spin the camera around in rocket league and try to read the text on the walls, it gets completely blurred by the C9 while the text is always legible on my panny plasmas.
 
Last edited:

Skyr

Member
Sep 4, 2013
1,979
2,505
725
I noticed immediately with Rocket League and then Forza 7. Proved true on my old ST30 as well, and I will try my VT60 later. The best test is to spin the camera around in rocket league and try to read the text on the walls, it gets completely blurred by the C9 while the text is always legible on my panny plasmas.
Ok so you are talking about blur. I never did a direct comparison between the two looking specifically at that aspect. I guess it’s possible.
It always felt good enough tho and the overall image quality is just so much better in games that I never noticed.
Got to say tho the plasma is still great for 1080p movies and without OLED as an option I would have never ever replaced it.
 

sunnysideup

Member
Nov 11, 2018
187
232
235
I need another tv to play console games and watch films on. I have an panasonic vt50 which im happy with. Should i buy another plasma(zt60 second hand) or a c9. Led, lcd, qled, is out of the question.

I here alot bout judder, stutter etc with 24-30fps material . Which is worrysome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Celcius

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
34,790
1,970
1,475
HAVE A B6

BURN IN IS A BITCH
Yeah, I got a LG B6 back in November of 2016, and it's a great TV for the most part, but some nasty burn-in in the bottom-left of the screen that really only shows up when there is a lot of red/pink in the image on-screen began appearing mid-2018 or so. It's really annoying.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Inuteu

Spukc

Member
Jan 24, 2015
11,606
8,262
770
Same netflikkxxx
I need another tv to play console games and watch films on. I have an panasonic vt50 which im happy with. Should i buy another plasma(zt60 second hand) or a c9. Led, lcd, qled, is out of the question.

I here alot bout judder, stutter etc with 24-30fps material . Which is worrysome.
C9 65 DO IT



going from plasma to a lcd tv is a big nono (stay on plasma or get even better blacks and way better for gaming oled c9)
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Jan 20, 2014
10,345
4,348
900
I need another tv to play console games and watch films on. I have an panasonic vt50 which im happy with. Should i buy another plasma(zt60 second hand) or a c9. Led, lcd, qled, is out of the question.

I here alot bout judder, stutter etc with 24-30fps material . Which is worrysome.
This is kind of a silly question. There is no reason to even consider a plasma TV anymore. It's a dead technology. If you still have a working plasma that is one thing, but getting the C9 is a no brainer.
 

grfunkulus

Member
Dec 23, 2016
486
112
265
This is kind of a silly question. There is no reason to even consider a plasma TV anymore. It's a dead technology. If you still have a working plasma that is one thing, but getting the C9 is a no brainer.
Every chance to rep the C9...

Seriously, I have an oled too. And a VT60. And two professionally calibrated Pioneer Kuros with black level tweak.

There are some things the plasmas do better. Older games. Motion handling. Filmic look.

Contrary to your assertion that there's no reason to buy anything but Oled (and I LOVE oled) there are aspects of other high end TVs from different eras that do things better than the c9. There is no perfect tv. If you can pick up a top tv froms years past that isn't going to be your main display, at a song, I wouldn't think youre crazy.

A lot of people that have been serious about display tech for more than the last 5 years wouldn't either.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Inanilmaz and Gek54

mitchman

Member
Aug 20, 2013
1,258
49
445
Oslo, Norway
Yeah, I got a LG B6 back in November of 2016, and it's a great TV for the most part, but some nasty burn-in in the bottom-left of the screen that really only shows up when there is a lot of red/pink in the image on-screen began appearing mid-2018 or so. It's really annoying.
I just upgraded from a 65" B6 to a 65" B9 and also noticed a "shadow" at the bottom left after watching too many twitch streams, and it wouldn't go away with clear pixel cycle. Sold it to a friend of mine and he was fine with it, it was only noticeable with specific background colors.
 
Last edited:

Blood Borne

Member
Oct 30, 2017
1,273
1,418
395
Finally !

Excuse the cables lol

Price match from richer sounds on black friday
Really? Lucky you.
I got the C9 65 for £1899 from John Lewis, wanted to get the E9 but lowest price I saw was £2499.

Also got the Sony Z9F sound bar and rear speakers. My gaming experience has been awesome. can’t go back to non-OLED tv and no surround sound.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clarissa

pesaddict

Member
Jun 9, 2017
163
85
340
U.K/essex
Really? Lucky you.
I got the C9 65 for £1899 from John Lewis, wanted to get the E9 but lowest price I saw was £2499.

Also got the Sony Z9F sound bar and rear speakers. My gaming experience has been awesome. can’t go back to non-OLED tv and no surround sound.
Yeah peter tyson and crampton and moore were both doing a £400 off voucher got richer sounds to price match and give me 24 months interest free credit, the deal ended up on hotukdeals, richer sounds ran out of stock fast lol.

Plus free skyQ 18 months
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Jan 20, 2014
10,345
4,348
900
Every chance to rep the C9...

Seriously, I have an oled too. And a VT60. And two professionally calibrated Pioneer Kuros with black level tweak.

There are some things the plasmas do better. Older games. Motion handling. Filmic look.

Contrary to your assertion that there's no reason to buy anything but Oled (and I LOVE oled) there are aspects of other high end TVs from different eras that do things better than the c9. There is no perfect tv. If you can pick up a top tv froms years past that isn't going to be your main display, at a song, I wouldn't think youre crazy.

A lot of people that have been serious about display tech for more than the last 5 years wouldn't either.
Im sorry dude, but I disagree. I am not saying that older tech doesn't have it's advantage in some places, but OLED can do most of the things older tech can do just as well, plus it can also do everything that is great today that older tech can't do.

As for getting a plasma, unless it's at an insanely cheap price, I don't consider it a smart investment when you are choosing between that and an OLED. They have no warranty and could die at any moment, it just simply makes no sense to bother. If you are getting one for the sole purpose of playing older games then it has it's place.
 

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,061
906
555
Only OLED devices I own are my phone and my Vita. It will be a while before I get an OLED Tv unfortunately. Then again, I barely watch or use my TV as it is.
 

Inuteu

Member
Apr 27, 2015
418
215
330
Yeah, I got a LG B6 back in November of 2016, and it's a great TV for the most part, but some nasty burn-in in the bottom-left of the screen that really only shows up when there is a lot of red/pink in the image on-screen began appearing mid-2018 or so. It's really annoying.
at least is only in the reds /pinks and some green for me too

but the blacks are unbelievable. I cant go back
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zefah

Gek54

Junior Member
Jun 8, 2004
7,402
20
1,455
Been playing my VT60 next to my C9 and the VT60, especially in 60fps games, looks so much more realstic and immersive as far as motion goes. The only thing my C9 does better is HDR, its 4K is worthless with any motion.
 

Larsowitz

Neo Member
Mar 2, 2018
49
28
130
I fired up my old Panasonic G25 the other day and noticed it seems to have much better motion resolution than my C9. The G25's 1080p 60fps looks way more realistic than 1440p 120hz VRR on the C9. BFI on the C9 gets it closer but the flickering the BFI causes is awful. I really wish Plasma survived into the HDR VRR era.
Are you talking about movies or games when using BFI?

I notice the flicker on 24fps bluray movies and some netflix shows, so I always turn it off.

However 60hz pc/xbox games look so much better with BFI. I still own a panasonic vt50, but I am convinced that OLED with BFI has better/clearer motion resolution than the vt (even so on paper the vt should be better).
 
  • LOL
Reactions: marquimvfs

Larsowitz

Neo Member
Mar 2, 2018
49
28
130
Been playing my VT60 next to my C9 and the VT60, especially in 60fps games, looks so much more realstic and immersive as far as motion goes. The only thing my C9 does better is HDR, its 4K is worthless with any motion.
With BFI?
 

Gek54

Junior Member
Jun 8, 2004
7,402
20
1,455
I see the flicker in 60fps games with BFI, even in 120hz mode. It's not a viable solution for me. Its like I am wearing 3D shutter glasses.
 
Last edited:

Larsowitz

Neo Member
Mar 2, 2018
49
28
130
C9 doesnt have 120 Hz for 120 fps BFI according to rtings.
yep I think 120hz BFI is not available yet.

Hmmm must be a personal thing then, I never notice the flicker with 60hz content and think the motion clarity greatly improves. For me BFI was the main reason why I bought a Panasonic OLED.
 

grfunkulus

Member
Dec 23, 2016
486
112
265
Im sorry dude, but I disagree. I am not saying that older tech doesn't have it's advantage in some places, but OLED can do most of the things older tech can do just as well, plus it can also do everything that is great today that older tech can't do.

As for getting a plasma, unless it's at an insanely cheap price, I don't consider it a smart investment when you are choosing between that and an OLED. They have no warranty and could die at any moment, it just simply makes no sense to bother. If you are getting one for the sole purpose of playing older games then it has it's place.
If you can verify the hour count, I wouldn't be at all worried about the reliability of the higher end Panasonics. If we're talking Pioneer, well, they're some of the best made displays ever. Built like tanks, and on another level in terms of craftsmanship than anything that is sold today, flat out.

After taking a few apart and replacing boards for upgrade purposes, I can attest to the fact that Pioneer made these things to last.

Lg oleds are premium devices and well made as well. But it's not the same. Former owner of 2 oleds, currently own 1. Have 2 Pioneers, had a Panasonic GT50 and now a have a VT60

If you can pick up a 60+ inch for just a few hundred (definitely possible) it's not a bad buy, especially, as I said, if you have another display as your primary for 4k/HDR fun stuff.
 

dDoc

Member
Jun 14, 2019
77
71
190


Interesting take on the OLED vs LED TV war. Basically both have advantages and disadvantages when compared to each other.
 
Last edited:

AndrewRyan

Member
Jul 23, 2015
145
91
295
This weekend I swapped out a perfectly good 1080ti for a 2080s just to use g-sync with an LG 65oledE9 tv. Results are spectacular! G-sync runs perfectly at 120fps and 1440p resolution. The motion and input feel silky smooth with no screen tearing with fluid panning with gorgeous HDR lighting. This is near gaming heaven.

At 4k resolution you get 60fps which looks better but with less responsive controls and some choppiness while panning. I will choose 120fps over 4k every time.. it's a noticeably better experience for my tastes. Next year we should get 4k, 120fps when the HDMI 2.1 GPUs are available.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
4,522
2,609
625
This weekend I swapped out a perfectly good 1080ti for a 2080s just to use g-sync with an LG 65oledE9 tv. Results are spectacular! G-sync runs perfectly at 120fps and 1440p resolution. The motion and input feel silky smooth with no screen tearing with fluid panning with gorgeous HDR lighting. This is near gaming heaven.

At 4k resolution you get 60fps which looks better but with less responsive controls and some choppiness while panning. I will choose 120fps over 4k every time.. it's a noticeably better experience for my tastes. Next year we should get 4k, 120fps when the HDMI 2.1 GPUs are available.
How come you can't select 4K 120Hz? I'm able to with a 2080TI. Colors will be 8 bit but HDR can still be enabled. 0o
 

dsk1210

Member
Sep 2, 2011
1,659
38
585
edinburgh
This weekend I swapped out a perfectly good 1080ti for a 2080s just to use g-sync with an LG 65oledE9 tv. Results are spectacular! G-sync runs perfectly at 120fps and 1440p resolution. The motion and input feel silky smooth with no screen tearing with fluid panning with gorgeous HDR lighting. This is near gaming heaven.

At 4k resolution you get 60fps which looks better but with less responsive controls and some choppiness while panning. I will choose 120fps over 4k every time.. it's a noticeably better experience for my tastes. Next year we should get 4k, 120fps when the HDMI 2.1 GPUs are available.
I am holding off for the new cards with 2.1 rather than get rid of my 1080 ti, but it's annoying knowing I could have g-sync on if I had another card right now. I am so impatient but fuck that if I am buying a temporary expensive card that does not offer me my end goal of 4k 120hz.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Jan 20, 2014
10,345
4,348
900
How come you can't select 4K 120Hz? I'm able to with a 2080TI. Colors will be 8 bit but HDR can still be enabled. 0o
Because Turing GPUs can only output HDMI 2.0 signals. HDMI 2.0 is limited to 4K/60 at 4:2:2.

Next gen graphics cards should output HDMI 2.1.

HDR needs to be 10-bit for it to be fully utilized.

What's interesting is that DisplayPort 1.3 (which is on the GPUS) utilizes Data Stream Compression that allows data to be output that well exceeds the bandwidth limitations of DP1.3. To my knowledge, no current monitor has taken advantage of this.

HDMI 2.1 also implemented this technology and, while I wouldn't get my hopes up, it's possible that a displayport 1.3 to HDMI 2.1 cable could allow allow for 4K/120 at 10-bit RGB HDR. Unfortunately no such cable is in existence yet.
 
Last edited:

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
4,522
2,609
625
Because Turing GPUs can only output HDMI 2.0 signals. HDMI 2.0 is limited to 4K/60 at 4:2:2.

Next gen graphics cards should output HDMI 2.1.
Last time I checked, 2080TI also uses Turing architecture and mine can output at 4K 120Hz on my QLED so how come it can't on LG OLEDs?

Not that it really matters anyway, there's little that can run well at 4K 120 fps at this time. :p :p :p
 
Last edited:

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Jan 20, 2014
10,345
4,348
900
Last time I checked, 2080TI also uses Turing architecture and mine can output at 4K 120Hz on my QLED so how come it can't on LG OLEDs?
Is it a monitor or a Samsung QLED? What model?
If it's a monitor using DisplayPort, you can output an 8-bit color signal at 4K 120Hz, but no way through HDMI 2.0. The bandwidth isn't there.

You might want to double check.

EDIT: there is bandwidth for 4K/120 if you drop the color bit depth down to 8 bit and output at 4:2:0. That might be what is happening. That is a significant loss in color quality and I'd just stick to using 4K/120.

This video at 4:15 shows it.

However, it doesn't support GSync.
 
Last edited:

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
4,522
2,609
625
Is it a monitor or a Samsung QLED? What model?
If it's a monitor using DisplayPort, you can output an 8-bit color signal at 4K 120Hz, but no way through HDMI 2.0. The bandwidth isn't there.

You might want to double check.

EDIT: there is bandwidth for 4K/120 if you drop the color bit depth down to 8 bit and output at 4:2:0. That might be what is happening. That is a significant loss in color quality and I'd just stick to using 4K/120.
It's the Q950R TV QLED connected with HDMI.

Yeah I'm using 4K 60Hz rather than 120 Hz because of the lack of 10 bit colors. :p

Still I find it strange that LG would deny the option of 4K 120hz when it's possible with HDMI 2.0.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Jan 20, 2014
10,345
4,348
900
It's the Q950R TV QLED connected with HDMI.

Yeah I'm using 4K 60Hz rather than 120 Hz because of the lack of 10 bit colors. :p

Still I find it strange that LG would deny the option of 4K 120hz when it's possible with HDMI 2.0.
As nice as GSync on LG is, there is a lot missing that I find frustrating.

It doesn't even appear to allow 10-bit bpc at 1440p/120Hz, which is within HDMI 2.0's bandwidth budget.

1440p/120/10-bit HDR requires around 16GBps and I am baffled, why I can't get that to work.

My hope is that nvidia/EVGA would make a converter box in which you run two display port 1.3 cables into and that box converts the signal to full HDMI 2.1 4K/120Hz at 10-bit output. I doubt that will happen, but I would pay for it.

However, the big hope is seeing what as I stated in my previous post would be to take advantage of Data Stream Compression (DSC) technology, which is supported by HDMI 2.1 and Display Port 1.3. Display port 1.3 outputs just over 25GBps. Taking advantage of DSC should allow the 36 GBps needed for 10-bit HDR 4K/120 or the 42 GBps for 12-bit HDR 4K/120. So there is hope that a display port 1.3 to HDMI 2.1 cable could allow for such a thing. COULD.

To my knowledge no product on the market utilizes DSC, which surprises me as I would suspect that the high end Gsync monitors from Asus would like to push that extra information. Since no product utilizes DSC, it's unknown what effect it can have on picture quality and/or input lag.

EDIT: Asus apparently has one coming.

Although it has no model number.
 
Last edited:

dotnotbot

Neo Member
Feb 9, 2019
37
59
135
  • Like
Reactions: TheBoss1

devilNprada

Member
May 2, 2019
80
58
190
I have a Sony A9F (OLED) 65" $3500 a Sony X900F(LED) 50" $900... and a Toshiba fire TV 50" $250

My family all came over for thanksgiving and we did a comparison.

The X900F is a beautiful TV everyone liked best (maybe because it is a smaller screen)

The Sony's were obviously superior to the Toshiba but when asked $700 better?

It was a much tougher question to answer. Probably not.

The dolby picture is an option that makes a difference.. I would pay extra for.

No burn in issues with the OLED.
 

dolabla

Member
Oct 9, 2013
4,292
6,006
775
I

I'm afraid it will be only very slightly cheaper than 55 inch but we will see.
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see how they price it. I just hope they don't gimp it and remove features like Samsung seems to do with their smaller sets that are in the same series models. Whatever series it falls in, hopefully it has all the same features.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dotnotbot

holygeesus

Member
Jun 1, 2014
3,081
93
440
I have a Sony A9F (OLED) 65" $3500 a Sony X900F(LED) 50" $900... and a Toshiba fire TV 50" $250

My family all came over for thanksgiving and we did a comparison.

The X900F is a beautiful TV everyone liked best (maybe because it is a smaller screen)

The Sony's were obviously superior to the Toshiba but when asked $700 better?

It was a much tougher question to answer. Probably not.

The dolby picture is an option that makes a difference.. I would pay extra for.

No burn in issues with the OLED.
Better is very much a subjective term when it comes to TVs. I've owned two OLEDs now (the B6 and now an AF9 the same as you - no burn-in on either FWIW) and even the going from a B6 to an AF9 was a massive improvement to me personally. The near black performance alone justified the purchase, with zero of the dancing blacks and blocking issues the LG set produced. Since buying a colorimeter and CalMAN and calibrating the set, it blows me away every time I use it.

I will be keeping an eye on CES and seeing what Sony offer up, in terms of HDMI2.1 (which of course the AF9 doesn't support) but unless next gen consoles offer up significant support, in terms of VRR et al, I won't be upgrading the AF9 for a while as it is perfect in nearly every other aspect, and I will never not buy a Sony from this point on....well, maybe a Panasonic ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: The ninja farmer

God Enel

Member
Mar 26, 2011
2,214
1,764
830
I don’t know shit about the new TVs as mine is still working fine (bought it the year the PS3 released) but the new oled TVs from Sony look fucking beautiful. My jaw dropped. And I also love the Phillips ambilight TVs. Don’t know if they’re good but ..yeah was nice to look at them :)
 

dolabla

Member
Oct 9, 2013
4,292
6,006
775
More confirmation of the 48" OLED :messenger_sunglasses: . Can not wait!



LG Display develops some of the most formally innovative televisions on the market, and its plans for 2020 look set to continue that tradition.

The TV manufacturer has laid out its plans for the coming year, which will include a number of expansions to its existing TV lines. For one, we'll finally get the long-promised 48-inch OLED TV size, which should make the premium panel technology cheaper and more accessible to those with limited space in their homes (given that 55-inch was previously the smallest OLED television size available commercially).
Also, drop down displays.

While we have yet to see the LG Signature Series OLED R hit the market, we've also got formal word of an alternative rollable model that can be installed in a ceiling to unfurl downwards – rather than out of a TV base on the floor.

The "65-inch UHD Roll-Down OLED display", as it's referred to by LG, will be "stored in the ceiling and can be pulled down when desired and rolled up when not in use", thereby "maximizing use of space".
There'll also be improvements on the audio side in the LG OLED TV range, with new OLEDs "with the sound system embedded into the display to generate sound directly from it", sounding similar to Sony's Acoustic Surface Audio+ technology – as well as an 8K TV model with an "11.2 channel sound system".
These announcements have been confirmed ahead of CES 2020, the massive international technology expo hosted in Las Vegas every January.
 

dorkimoe

Member
Aug 19, 2007
8,989
783
1,200
Now I must decide between the 2019 or 2020 version.
55 c9
 
Last edited:

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
4,522
2,609
625
This guy paints a rather bleak outlook for OLED tech, didn't know OLED tech was on its last legs with their blue emitter issues.

 

holygeesus

Member
Jun 1, 2014
3,081
93
440
This guy paints a rather bleak outlook for OLED tech, didn't know OLED tech was on its last legs with their blue emitter issues.

I've got a 2016 OLED still going strong as well as my 2018 AF9. I mean, I don't expect to get ten years out of them, but as I upgrade every couple of years, it seems a bit overblown.