lol, not at this size/price. i can get a 48in oled moni for half.

fry178:

lol, not at this size/price. i can get a 48in oled moni for half.

yes but... there is a compelling case to make for mini-leds as they share the intrinsic value of per pixel illumination with OLED a lot of people have no room for 48" (either physically or aesthetically). a lot of people have very bright rooms both are solid reasons to buy this as are the technical specs. but the real reason to buy this is it's very price competitive with next gen monitors in price, performance, and true black HDR consider the ROG Swift, Alienware, Samsung QD/OLED and it's nearly the least expensive.

not really, anyone i know able to spend +2k on a moni DOES have the space for a 48. even here in the forum ive seen more with the bigger oleds than the smaller mini led, and we're on a "enthusiasti" site, e.g. ppl willing to spend a little more .

fry178:

not really, anyone i know able to spend +2k on a moni DOES have the space for a 48. even here in the forum ive seen more with the bigger oleds than the smaller mini led, and we're on a "enthusiasti" site, e.g. ppl willing to spend a little more .

Average Computer Desktop depth is 85cm - and at that distance, an OLED screen of 48" is unpalatable. For anyone to want a 48" screen at that distance does not make any sense, as you would have to sit back and be unable to do basic computer stuff like type. 34" is about the maximum tolerable diagonal width for 8 hour session on a computer, using a variety of programs and use-type, let alone high-frame-rate gaming....sat less than a metre from a 48" OLED would be horrible.

Loobyluggs:

Average Computer Desktop depth is 85cm - and at that distance, an OLED screen of 48" is unpalatable. For anyone to want a 48" screen at that distance does not make any sense, as you would have to sit back and be unable to do basic computer stuff like type. 34" is about the maximum tolerable diagonal width for 8 hour session on a computer, using a variety of programs and use-type, let alone high-frame-rate gaming....sat less than a metre from a 48" OLED would be horrible.

Ya, nah 🙂 TBH I sit like 1-1.2m from my c1 48" I had to extend my desk a bit, wooden shelf with some screws handled it. Still worth it. Even tho I jumped on it from mere 24"... BUT, I am waiting at the moment for dells aw3423dw on qd-oled, it supposed to be in september. Then C1 will go to bedroom.

GREGIX:

Ya, nah 🙂 TBH I sit like 1-1.2m from my c1 48" I had to extend my desk a bit, wooden shelf with some screws handled it. Still worth it. Even tho I jumped on it from mere 24"... BUT, I am waiting at the moment for dells aw3423dw on qd-oled, it supposed to be in september. Then C1 will go to bedroom.

why did you not sit 10cm from the screen, why 1.2m ? Also, this was not a contender for you? better than that XXXX from alienware, and, actually 4K and not... 3.36k ?

@Loobyluggs based on what? i actually HAVE a 50in 2ft away from me on my desk (3ft deep). instead of arguing about a personal preference/recommended distance, ignoring the fact that you arent even using a setup like this, e.g. not talking from experience. just because i "shouldnt" be close, doesnt mean i "can't " to, especially since its not gonna have negative affects on eye sight etc.

fry178:

@Loobyluggs based on what? i actually HAVE a 50in 2ft away from me on my desk (3ft deep). instead of arguing about a personal preference/recommended distance, ignoring the fact that you arent even using a setup like this, e.g. not talking from experience. just because i "shouldnt" be close, doesnt mean i "can't " to, especially since its not gonna have negative affects on eye sight etc.

jesus...that's very close sir...I could quote the various studies on this for ideal distance, scaling etc, but I think such studies do not apply to you, and you must have been at the far end of the graph someone, on your own. I would never, ever, tell a member of staff they MUST sit at that distance with a 50inch panel, it goes against employment law in my country. Fair to you, it is your choice to sit that close and I will respect it.

quote Average Computer Desktop depth is 85cm - and at that distance, an OLED screen of 48" is unpalatable. For anyone to want a 48" screen at that distance does not make any sense, as you would have to sit back and be unable to do basic computer stuff like type. -- i do recommend a min/max seating distance, but its just a RECOMMENDATION, not written in stone. it does NOT mean you cant use a screen at a different (shorter) distance, like you stated . and it is completely unrelated to desk size, as you're ignoring that ppl can 1. wall mount it or 2. put it on a media screen mount/stand. no one is forced to have their screen standing on the desk (another assumption on use).

tunejunky:

yes but... there is a compelling case to make for mini-leds as they share the intrinsic value of per pixel illumination with OLED

1152 diming zones is not a per pixel illumination.

Aura89:

1152 diming zones is not a per pixel illumination.

correct. this is the next best thing with a mini-led FALD. which is also why i questioned its price spec. the main gist of my point was this was expensive and under-spec for MSRP at this price point there are (well just a bit higher) white mini-led full array IPS. they just bring up the marketing hype (25% to disguise or distinguishing from sourcing). oled rocks the price range but not necessarily the form factor (48" + with a handful of 34"). however... unless you need on location broadcast/streaming monitoring (where HDR 1000+ lives) in a variety of lighting conditions you do not need the full mini-led option. it's still the ultimate very large array so if you're going to rock 85" + where lighting is certainly an issue that's the other real world use scenario. i'm very, very impressed with QD/OLED and they do have per pixel illumination at the same price range and in the same form factor but you have to pay the form factor tax because the 48" OLED is less expensive, has True Black and Freesync Premium (120fps). which brings in the QUESTION is this primarily for gaming? if not if it's at all mixed use or in a medium to large room the 48" with an articulated wall bracket (under $50) is the way to go because the best looking 4k high refresh monitor is a tv (LG C2 48"). when you have to share space with a significant other you know solo gaming holed up in a room is not a viable option outside of well discussed boundaries. but if i was solo gaming 😎 i would have to take time to come up with an excuse for the cost differential.

fry178:

quote Average Computer Desktop depth is 85cm - and at that distance, an OLED screen of 48" is unpalatable. For anyone to want a 48" screen at that distance does not make any sense, as you would have to sit back and be unable to do basic computer stuff like type. -- i do recommend a min/max seating distance, but its just a RECOMMENDATION, not written in stone. it does NOT mean you cant use a screen at a different (shorter) distance, like you stated . and it is completely unrelated to desk size, as you're ignoring that ppl can 1. wall mount it or 2. put it on a media screen mount/stand. no one is forced to have their screen standing on the desk (another assumption on use).

Sorry, I think your quote didn't trigger a notification, else I would come back to your point earlier than 4 days... On wall mounting - fine, as this does allow for your desk to be farther away from the screen - but then leaves a gap if your desk is too small, and is therefore an inefficient use of space - so my point stands on desk size averages because they are averages. You have to think about that for a second - if the average depth of a desk is 85cm, most (and when I say most, I mean a huge majority) people will be using a desk, so, again, my point stands. Would you like me to source and link the studies which have been done over time on 'working environments for desktop users' and the studies comparing different distances, attention/fatigue, PPI, desk size, monitor/screen size, type of work, head height to monitor height (top of monitor), nausea etc etc? The one that stands out of most is the Harvard study, because it was pretty detailed and recent on this. Srsly? The studies have been done - a singular screen of that size is negative for desktop users, not positive, when at that distance. So, it is up to you and I will always respect that, but I can not think of anything worse than being that close for extended periods of time to a monitor/panel/screen/sunlamp/lamp/oscilloscope. And all studies support this, sorry - and to play an FPS on something like that would be a nightmare, that I could probably not tolerate for longer than 5 mins without wishing to throw myself off a the top of a very large building. 34" is more than large enough, and even that would cause me to reach for the eye drops.