ASUS GeForce RTX 4080 Noctua OC Edition review
MSI Clutch GM51 Wireless mouse review
ASUS ROG STRIX B760-F Gaming WIFI review
Asus ROG Harpe Ace Aim Lab Edition mouse review
SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Headset review
Ryzen 7800X3D preview - 7950X3D One CCD Disabled
MSI VIGOR GK71 SONIC Blue keyboard review
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D processor review
FSP Hydro G Pro 1000W (ATX 3.0, 1000W PSU) review
Addlink S90 Lite 2TB NVMe SSD review
Samsung sees no future for OLED TVs
Ah bummer, I was kinda hoping for a Samsung OLED UHD TV myself. Samsung sees no future for OLED TVs, according to Kim Hyun-suk who leads the display division of Samsung Electronics there have been too few enhancements while OLED remains to be tricky and expensive to fabricate.
Back in 2013 Samsung already produced OLED TVs, but halted production on 2014. Samsung Electronics president and TV chief Kim Hyun-seok on Tuesday reaffirmed to koreaherald that the company has no immediate plan to produce organic light-emitting diode TVs. But the tone and manner was stronger than ever.
“I have always said it would take two to three years to consider OLED TV. But now when little progress has been made on its tricky production and high costs since our suspension back in 2013, I wouldn’t say OLED is our future direction,” he told reporters at the company’s headquarters in Suwon, Gyeonggi Province.
OLED boasts more accurate and vibrant picture quality compared to conventional liquid-crystal displays. Despite its increasing usage in smartphones and other smaller devices, its TV adoption has been delayed due to the higher costs of production and lower manufacturing yields of the larger panels.
Samsung is a market leader in smaller OLED. It has recently inked a deal with Appel to supply OLED screens for next-generation iPhones.
But when it comes to TVs, Samsung has poured more resources into improving the quality of LCD TVs. Especially its latest SUHD TVs feature the quantum dot technology that uses tiny particles that emit a different color of light depending on size.
“It is also likely that new technology like quantum dot could progress faster than OLED,” he said.
Samsung claims that its quantum dot TV already outpaces current OLED TVs in terms of picture quality and brightness, even though it is still disputable which display is the better display technology.
Currently, its archrival LG Electronics is a market leader in OLED TVs. Last year, Samsung was the biggest TV maker with a market share of 27.5 percent in terms of revenue. But the company now sees less profits as prices continue to fall due to cheaper products from Chinese rivals. The company said it would beef up premium products to restore profits. On its home turf, sales of the latest quantum dot TVs have increased more than 40 percent compared to last year’s models. The company plans to launch the TV models in Europe and Brazil in the coming months in line with the regions’ big sports events such as the Euro 2016 and the Rio Summer Olympics in August.
“Starting this year, the quantum dot TVs are being launched globally. We will become the No. 1 TV maker for the 11th consecutive year,” Kim said.
NVIDIA and Samsung Agree to Settle All Outstanding IP Litigations - 05/03/2016 05:59 PM
NVIDIA and Samsung have agreed to settle all pending intellectual property litigation between the two companies, NVIDIA announced today....
Samsung C32F391FW is 31.5 Inch Monitor with 1800R curve - 04/28/2016 08:05 AM
Samsung is to launch the C32F391FW is 31.5 Inch Monitor, the VA panel based screen comes with a 1800R curve, which is a lot more 'bend' opposed to what you are used to....
Samsung starts later this year with 2nd gen 10nm production - 04/25/2016 08:35 AM
Later this year Samsung will start production at 10nm. While this years GPUs finally move to 14/15/16nm based on FinFET transistors the race to 10nm already has started. Production at the end of the y...
Samsung S24F350FH and S27F350FH Monitors - 04/18/2016 09:31 AM
Full HD seems to be the most popular format still, Samsung will be adding the S24F350FH and S27F350FH. The panels embedded are 23.6” (S24) and 27” (S27) AD-PLS (Advanced Plane to...
Samsung Starts Shipping 4TB model of 850 Evo SSD - 04/15/2016 01:55 PM
Samsung has started rolling out their 4TB version of their 850 Evo SSD. This 2.5" model appeared in online pricewatch engines and will be selling for 1349 euro. The high capacity is possible du...
ttnuagmada
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2015-05-18
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2015-05-18
#5266964 Posted on: 05/04/2016 07:58 PM
You can try reading the rest of the comment, where I explain what I mean.
Yes the image quality of a stationary picture is better on OLED. Obviously contrast is higher -- colors pop more, but that's mostly because they are over-saturated. Calibrate both a Samsung/LG OLED with Spyder/Colorimeter of your choice and AgryllCMS and the colors are very similar.
I have an i1d3 and a i1pro, with Calman enthusiast. I know plenty about television calibration. (no one uses a spyder fyi, they are trash). That color "pop" comes from the contrast. The colors are not oversaturated on OLED, the lower intensity colors on LCD's are undersaturated because of poor black levels. Every single review you read on the internet is based upon a calibrated display. OLED is not inherently over-saturated. You are just someone who vaguely knows something about televisions/calibration trying to act like the resident expert (IE no one uses a Spyder to calibrate anything, and ArgyllCMS has long been the backend of DispcalGUI which is what everyone uses these days).
Watch a football game on it though -- the image ghosts. I haven't seen the 2016 LG OLEDs, but the 2015 was terrible
That is not ghosting. OLEDs have CRT level pixel response times. What you are witnessing is the product of LG's poor image processing. They use a sample and hold technique which confuses your brain on moving images. The solution would be black-frame insertion, but they have yet to implement it. Like I said in my first post, it has nothing to do with OLED, and everything to do with LG having poor image processing.
(I was going to buy one). Peak brightness is better on the Samsung and makes it more suitable for brighter rooms.
Even the 2015 OLEDS could do 400 nits. This is searing bright, and not something that any LCD prior to last years LCD sets were even capable of. The 2016 OLEDs can do 600+ nits, which is brighter than any 2015 Samsung save for the JS9500 which could only get marginally brighter.
Dark gray has Mura issues on the OLEDs as well. Grayscale uniformity is still a hit or miss on the edges (Samsung has this problem too with some sets)
This is the main issue with them currently. however, every LCD has poor screen uniformity unless they are back-lit/FALD. Grey uniformity on any LCD is generally mediocre at best.
and ABL constantly changes the brightness when watching stuff based on the content in order to avoid burn-in.
You have not witnessed one in person if this is your description of it. ABL kicks in as the APL nears 100%, it is not "constantly changing brightness". The vast majority of content is lower than 50% APL, and most significantly lower (movies average in the 15%-20% range). It will curb it some if you put a full white field on the screen, as do LCD's. (look at brightness measurements on rtings at different window sizes if you don't believe me)
And yet there are still users reporting burn-in. So it's not a solved issue.
I didn't say it was a solved issue, I said that it is currently not really that bad, and is related to blue sub-pixels aging more quickly than the reds and greens, which makes it a solvable issue. We're about to start seeing laptops and monitors with OLED, which means manufacturers are making improvements. It was already better than the best plasma's from day one, and late model plasma's didn't have serious burn-in issues.
Like yeah, OLED TV's are pretty good -- but they aren't $1500 better than Samsung equivalents. Couple that with the higher manufacturing cost and Samsung's inability to get the WOLED patent -- it makes sense to me for Samsung to stick with what it's doing.
If you watch content in a dark room, they are absolutely 1500 dollars better than Samsung equivilents
You can try reading the rest of the comment, where I explain what I mean.
Yes the image quality of a stationary picture is better on OLED. Obviously contrast is higher -- colors pop more, but that's mostly because they are over-saturated. Calibrate both a Samsung/LG OLED with Spyder/Colorimeter of your choice and AgryllCMS and the colors are very similar.
I have an i1d3 and a i1pro, with Calman enthusiast. I know plenty about television calibration. (no one uses a spyder fyi, they are trash). That color "pop" comes from the contrast. The colors are not oversaturated on OLED, the lower intensity colors on LCD's are undersaturated because of poor black levels. Every single review you read on the internet is based upon a calibrated display. OLED is not inherently over-saturated. You are just someone who vaguely knows something about televisions/calibration trying to act like the resident expert (IE no one uses a Spyder to calibrate anything, and ArgyllCMS has long been the backend of DispcalGUI which is what everyone uses these days).
Watch a football game on it though -- the image ghosts. I haven't seen the 2016 LG OLEDs, but the 2015 was terrible
That is not ghosting. OLEDs have CRT level pixel response times. What you are witnessing is the product of LG's poor image processing. They use a sample and hold technique which confuses your brain on moving images. The solution would be black-frame insertion, but they have yet to implement it. Like I said in my first post, it has nothing to do with OLED, and everything to do with LG having poor image processing.
(I was going to buy one). Peak brightness is better on the Samsung and makes it more suitable for brighter rooms.
Even the 2015 OLEDS could do 400 nits. This is searing bright, and not something that any LCD prior to last years LCD sets were even capable of. The 2016 OLEDs can do 600+ nits, which is brighter than any 2015 Samsung save for the JS9500 which could only get marginally brighter.
Dark gray has Mura issues on the OLEDs as well. Grayscale uniformity is still a hit or miss on the edges (Samsung has this problem too with some sets)
This is the main issue with them currently. however, every LCD has poor screen uniformity unless they are back-lit/FALD. Grey uniformity on any LCD is generally mediocre at best.
and ABL constantly changes the brightness when watching stuff based on the content in order to avoid burn-in.
You have not witnessed one in person if this is your description of it. ABL kicks in as the APL nears 100%, it is not "constantly changing brightness". The vast majority of content is lower than 50% APL, and most significantly lower (movies average in the 15%-20% range). It will curb it some if you put a full white field on the screen, as do LCD's. (look at brightness measurements on rtings at different window sizes if you don't believe me)
And yet there are still users reporting burn-in. So it's not a solved issue.
I didn't say it was a solved issue, I said that it is currently not really that bad, and is related to blue sub-pixels aging more quickly than the reds and greens, which makes it a solvable issue. We're about to start seeing laptops and monitors with OLED, which means manufacturers are making improvements. It was already better than the best plasma's from day one, and late model plasma's didn't have serious burn-in issues.
Like yeah, OLED TV's are pretty good -- but they aren't $1500 better than Samsung equivalents. Couple that with the higher manufacturing cost and Samsung's inability to get the WOLED patent -- it makes sense to me for Samsung to stick with what it's doing.
If you watch content in a dark room, they are absolutely 1500 dollars better than Samsung equivilents
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5266973 Posted on: 05/04/2016 08:16 PM
The display units get burn in because they are on 24/7 at full screen brightness. I have a Samsung Galaxy Nexus that has burn in where the status bar is, but I've had the phone for nearly 5 years now. My S4/6P are both AMOLED and have had no issues.
http://i.imgur.com/sKoQRsX.jpg
That's a picture I took of an S6 Edge in October of last year. That's six months after release.
Regardless, my point wasn't that phones are unusable due to burn in, my point is that burn-in is still a problem with OLED devices. And until a manufacturer comes out and says either "this is fixed" or "we guarantee no burn-in for 6 years" I don't think I'm willing to commit $3000 to that product.
For me, biggest problem with amOLED screens is, that they are slow to light up and turn off light (go black again).
When I use gearVR, screen shows how slow it is by objects having trails.
Btw, that photo of burn-in, I saw better looking industrial plasma TVs which were running 24/7 showing same stuff for 10 years.
That S6e shows at least 5 distinctive patterns, that's quite some abuse for only few months.
The display units get burn in because they are on 24/7 at full screen brightness. I have a Samsung Galaxy Nexus that has burn in where the status bar is, but I've had the phone for nearly 5 years now. My S4/6P are both AMOLED and have had no issues.
http://i.imgur.com/sKoQRsX.jpg
That's a picture I took of an S6 Edge in October of last year. That's six months after release.
Regardless, my point wasn't that phones are unusable due to burn in, my point is that burn-in is still a problem with OLED devices. And until a manufacturer comes out and says either "this is fixed" or "we guarantee no burn-in for 6 years" I don't think I'm willing to commit $3000 to that product.
For me, biggest problem with amOLED screens is, that they are slow to light up and turn off light (go black again).
When I use gearVR, screen shows how slow it is by objects having trails.
Btw, that photo of burn-in, I saw better looking industrial plasma TVs which were running 24/7 showing same stuff for 10 years.
That S6e shows at least 5 distinctive patterns, that's quite some abuse for only few months.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14038
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 14038
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5266977 Posted on: 05/04/2016 08:26 PM
I have an i1d3 and a i1pro, with Calman enthusiast. I know plenty about television calibration. (no one uses a spyder fyi, they are trash). That color "pop" comes from the contrast. The colors are not oversaturated on OLED, the lower intensity colors on LCD's are undersaturated because of poor black levels. Every single review you read on the internet is based upon a calibrated display. OLED is not inherently over-saturated. You are just someone who vaguely knows something about televisions/calibration trying to act like the resident expert (IE no one uses a Spyder to calibrate anything, and ArgyllCMS has long been the backend of DispcalGUI which is what everyone uses these days).
That is not ghosting. OLEDs have CRT level pixel response times. What you are witnessing is the product of LG's poor image processing. They use a sample and hold technique which confuses your brain on moving images. The solution would be black-frame insertion, but they have yet to implement it. Like I said in my first post, it has nothing to do with OLED, and everything to do with LG having poor image processing.
Even the 2015 OLEDS could do 400 nits. This is searing bright, and not something that any LCD prior to last years LCD sets were even capable of. The 2016 OLEDs can do 600+ nits, which is brighter than any 2015 Samsung save for the JS9500 which could only get marginally brighter.
This is the main issue with them currently. however, every LCD has poor screen uniformity unless they are back-lit/FALD. Grey uniformity on any LCD is generally mediocre at best.
You have not witnessed one in person if this is your description of it. ABL kicks in as the APL nears 100%, it is not "constantly changing brightness". The vast majority of content is lower than 50% APL, and most significantly lower (movies average in the 15%-20% range). It will curb it some if you put a full white field on the screen, as do LCD's. (look at brightness measurements on rtings at different window sizes if you don't believe me)
I didn't say it was a solved issue, I said that it is currently not really that bad, and is related to blue sub-pixels aging more quickly than the reds and greens, which makes it a solvable issue. We're about to start seeing laptops and monitors with OLED, which means manufacturers are making improvements. It was already better than the best plasma's from day one, and late model plasma's didn't have serious burn-in issues.
If you watch content in a dark room, they are absolutely 1500 dollars better than Samsung equivilents
I said Spyder because I own a Spyder from long time ago and it just happens to be the device I use to calibrate with. And I know what DispCAL is. Rtings show pre and post calibrated results for their reviews. The precalibrated results for LG's OLED TV's are definitely over-saturated. And yes, I know that contrast boosts the perceived saturation values of colors.
My knowledge of OLED's come from last years models, which at 50% ABL had a brightness of 250 -- my 8500 is 365 by comparison. I don't pretend to be a resident expert, but I do think I know a little bit more then the average person, who just comes in here and says "I want a OLED Monitor" not knowing anything about the drawbacks of OLED, especially with static images.
And I still disagree that it's $1500 better then Samsung's TV's. But then I use my TV as a fourth monitor and I use it for gaming and not just movies. Last year when I was looking, I didn't think the cost difference was worth it -- especially with the idea that I leave my desktop up on it and it's more prone to burning in. If you claim LG is making big improvements, then yeah, maybe I'll re-evaluate my opinion. Regardless, one of the biggest reasons why LG is able to pull off it's OLED feats is due to the white OLED, which is a Kodak patent they own. So I still stand by my original argument that I agree with Samsung, it's not worth them pursuing, especially if they feel they can continue to improve on LCD while keeping the cost significantly lower then OLED equivalents.
I have an i1d3 and a i1pro, with Calman enthusiast. I know plenty about television calibration. (no one uses a spyder fyi, they are trash). That color "pop" comes from the contrast. The colors are not oversaturated on OLED, the lower intensity colors on LCD's are undersaturated because of poor black levels. Every single review you read on the internet is based upon a calibrated display. OLED is not inherently over-saturated. You are just someone who vaguely knows something about televisions/calibration trying to act like the resident expert (IE no one uses a Spyder to calibrate anything, and ArgyllCMS has long been the backend of DispcalGUI which is what everyone uses these days).
That is not ghosting. OLEDs have CRT level pixel response times. What you are witnessing is the product of LG's poor image processing. They use a sample and hold technique which confuses your brain on moving images. The solution would be black-frame insertion, but they have yet to implement it. Like I said in my first post, it has nothing to do with OLED, and everything to do with LG having poor image processing.
Even the 2015 OLEDS could do 400 nits. This is searing bright, and not something that any LCD prior to last years LCD sets were even capable of. The 2016 OLEDs can do 600+ nits, which is brighter than any 2015 Samsung save for the JS9500 which could only get marginally brighter.
This is the main issue with them currently. however, every LCD has poor screen uniformity unless they are back-lit/FALD. Grey uniformity on any LCD is generally mediocre at best.
You have not witnessed one in person if this is your description of it. ABL kicks in as the APL nears 100%, it is not "constantly changing brightness". The vast majority of content is lower than 50% APL, and most significantly lower (movies average in the 15%-20% range). It will curb it some if you put a full white field on the screen, as do LCD's. (look at brightness measurements on rtings at different window sizes if you don't believe me)
I didn't say it was a solved issue, I said that it is currently not really that bad, and is related to blue sub-pixels aging more quickly than the reds and greens, which makes it a solvable issue. We're about to start seeing laptops and monitors with OLED, which means manufacturers are making improvements. It was already better than the best plasma's from day one, and late model plasma's didn't have serious burn-in issues.
If you watch content in a dark room, they are absolutely 1500 dollars better than Samsung equivilents
I said Spyder because I own a Spyder from long time ago and it just happens to be the device I use to calibrate with. And I know what DispCAL is. Rtings show pre and post calibrated results for their reviews. The precalibrated results for LG's OLED TV's are definitely over-saturated. And yes, I know that contrast boosts the perceived saturation values of colors.
My knowledge of OLED's come from last years models, which at 50% ABL had a brightness of 250 -- my 8500 is 365 by comparison. I don't pretend to be a resident expert, but I do think I know a little bit more then the average person, who just comes in here and says "I want a OLED Monitor" not knowing anything about the drawbacks of OLED, especially with static images.
And I still disagree that it's $1500 better then Samsung's TV's. But then I use my TV as a fourth monitor and I use it for gaming and not just movies. Last year when I was looking, I didn't think the cost difference was worth it -- especially with the idea that I leave my desktop up on it and it's more prone to burning in. If you claim LG is making big improvements, then yeah, maybe I'll re-evaluate my opinion. Regardless, one of the biggest reasons why LG is able to pull off it's OLED feats is due to the white OLED, which is a Kodak patent they own. So I still stand by my original argument that I agree with Samsung, it's not worth them pursuing, especially if they feel they can continue to improve on LCD while keeping the cost significantly lower then OLED equivalents.
icedman
Senior Member
Posts: 1244
Joined: 2013-02-22
Senior Member
Posts: 1244
Joined: 2013-02-22
#5266994 Posted on: 05/04/2016 09:04 PM
I had a feeling oled wasn't going to take off its only been what 10 years since they where first shown and to this day are still not feasible.
I had a feeling oled wasn't going to take off its only been what 10 years since they where first shown and to this day are still not feasible.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 14038
Joined: 2004-05-16
That's total b... And you know it.
Before I got SGS6e, I checked friend's S4 and where was no burn-in at all.
Only possibility is that static image leaves its ghost for few seconds, if it was displayed for hours. But not even that did ever happen to me or people I know who have OLED variations.
Blue degrades, on phone it is not that big problem. Because one does not use it intensively for several years. But it sure is problem for monitors/TVs. As owners expect them to last 5~10 years.
The display units get burn in because they are on 24/7 at full screen brightness. I have a Samsung Galaxy Nexus that has burn in where the status bar is, but I've had the phone for nearly 5 years now. My S4/6P are both AMOLED and have had no issues.
http://i.imgur.com/sKoQRsX.jpg
That's a picture I took of an S6 Edge in October of last year. That's six months after release.
Regardless, my point wasn't that phones are unusable due to burn in, my point is that burn-in is still a problem with OLED devices. And until a manufacturer comes out and says either "this is fixed" or "we guarantee no burn-in for 6 years" I don't think I'm willing to commit $3000 to that product.