LG 45" OLED 240Hz Gaming Monitor REVIEW - They ALMOST did it...
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 янв 2023
- Reviewing the LG 45" UltraGear OLED Gaming Monitor (45GR95QE-B) - is this MONSTER Monitor with a 240hz OLED panel worth $1699??
▶LG UltraGear Gaming Monitor : bit.ly/3IieWGz
▶LG UltraGear Gaming Monitor on Best Buy : geni.us/OMy8Br
#Gaming #Monitor #OLED
Can't get enough of your TECH? Why not SUBSCRIBE? (it's free!) 😄
▶ RUclips: bit.ly/2UyCBGq
📷 Instagram: / thetechchap
🐦Twitter: / thetechchap
🎵 Music by Epidemic & Artlist 
Наука
Hey Chaps! If you had $1699 to spare...🤑would you buy this??
Update (March 2023)
1. For a brighter display, turn off the "Smart Energy Saving" in the monitor settings.
2. A firmware update for the monitor's Game Mode is coming in April - boosting brightness during gameplay
The flex also has HDR1000 compaired to this 200 nits on this guy!
I see that you said it has 650 nits, however on their own website for specs it is said 200 nits in the spec sheet.
No thanks 🙂
Nope resolution is to low for that size and curved is to much for my liking. I will stick with my Alienware aw3423dwf. And aren't these non-QD OLED monitor more susceptible to burn in?
No I wouldn’t, will you have a video on the 27 inch version ?
Not having built in speakers...
IS ABSOLUTELY INCREIDBLE! THANK YOU LG FOR NOT COMPROMISING THE DESIGN WITH LOW QUALITY SPEAKERS!
but it does have built in speakers
@macfrost74 it does not
Something I wish Nvidia would do is enable DLDSR over HDMI 2.1 seeing as how we have the extra bandwidth there. The only way to use DLDSR on this monitor is to us DP 1.4 (not DSC) at 144hz in order to force a higher resolution through the Nvidia Control panel, which could help a little bit with the sharpness of the overall image. I know it's not the same as true PPI with true 3840x1600, but it could be a solid middle ground.
Thank you for the transparent review and wonderful video!
You really need to observe this monitor in person to see how it fares. I was lucky enough to find a store where it had this monitor next to the LG 48" 4K OLED and the Samsung Neo G9 (which I have).
The PPI is not an issue as I could only see the pixels when I had my nose touching the screen. If anything, the 48" 4K OLED's pixels on text was much more noticeable at close range (which is weird I know).
The Neo G9 is very long but short. The 48" 4K OLED is like a TV, wide and tall but boxy and at 16:9, which is good for watching content, but less immersive for RPGs and too "big" for productivity unless you scale or sit further back. The 45" LG UltraGear is in between the two. The deep curve actually takes up less space (depth) than the G9 Neo because the OLED screen is so much thinner. The G9 is also noticeably hotter with a very significant screen glare.
I'm still undecided as to whether to replace my G9 with the 45" UltraGear - will wait to see how the new G9 OLEDs work out.
And?
I bought it and don’t regret it. It’s a very unique monitor. I don’t even notice the lower resolution it still looks amazing.
I think they should bring the size down to 42 inch and bring the resolution up to 3840x1600. That would bring the pixel density up to 98 PPI.
That resolution is not supported near as much as 3440x1440 in games. They need to get the screen down to 32-34in and cut the curve to 1800R which works really well for gaming and content creation.
@@jimbo_dilly1675 Both resolutions are "supported" just fine stop spreading misinformation.
@@drunkhusband6257 No they are not. In about 3/4 of the most recent AAA title games, yes, but it’s still not a common enough resolution and many games are plagued with menu sizing problems because of it. I have been running an 3440x1440 since 2015 and very rarely does a game have any problems with it. My wife has been using a 3840x1600 since 2017 and still runs into issues.
@@jimbo_dilly1675 What games do you play that don't support ultrawide? because they are very few within the last 6-7 years that don't run fine
I agree, thats why i recently bought 38'' ultrawide IPS screen with 1600p , as there aren't coming new OLEDs panels in 2023 with reasonable size, or resolution, either its overkill with 40''+ with resolution like 34 , or there are the same 34'' screens from 2022. But with 34'' you lose vertical space compared to 32'' screen
Been waiting for a review! Yes!
❤️❤️❤️ i have been waiting for this big boy
This monitor would be perfect if it was 40 inch and has less curve like 1500-1800. PPI would then be around decent 93 ppi and with less curve you can push it back little further. Being 800 curve, you are forced to bring in the monitor closer which will make you notice low pixel 82 ppi. Maybe next iteration...
Great review. It really should be 92 dpi at least, so I do agree that they should shrink it a bit. I have a 32” (31.5”) 2K (2560 x 1440) main monitor and a 24” (23.8”) secondary FHD monitor. Both are IPS and have nearly the same approx 92 dpi pixel density. For my eyes and at my viewing distance, their pixel density is sufficient enough that I don’t notice the pixels. Perhaps on a different panel type, I might notice. In contrast, I have a 27” FHD monitor at the office, and its too pixelated. The small decrease in pixel density makes a huge difference.
Literally this with a higher resolution would be my dream display. I have the alienware QD oled, and I absolutely love it, just wish it was sharper
@@SUSSYMEMES Im waiting for a 3840x1600p 38" oled. For me personally would be perfect.
I'm super happy we are hitting the next gen of screens (OLED, micro LED, mini LED), that I"m really exciting for. I'm not into curved these days. I had a 27inch curved monitor for home and a 34" ultra wide curved for work for two years. I gamed on both of them. Both were gaming monitors (MSI and Acer gaming lines.). With my current setup I'm using two screens. The primary is a Lenovo office monitor with some gaming'ish features on it and I love it.
Thanks for that amazing review!
I think you said it perfectly. The low resolution is a deal breaker. I currently have a lg 38gl950g-b and I was considering this display until I found out about the low res.
Exact same boat as you. Seems the 38gl950g will be hard to beat. Might be older but it is still better resolution wise. I cannot downgrade quality for more real estate. I want my BIG picture with BETTER picture quality. Not bigger but less resolution. Time to keep waiting.
They definitely should have made this monitor in 34” instead since its 1440p. The bigger 45” size makes total sense if it were a 4k panel though.
the samsung 49 UW is 1440p as well. its still dogshit.
@@charliek9394 yes but the aspect ratio makes the 49” the same pixel density as a 27” 1440p, so it still looks sharp. This one is going to be worse than the 49
@@charliek9394 what? The G9 is the equivalent of two 1440p 27" monitors side by side. Are you saying 1440p at 27" isn't good enough?
@@charliek9394 Wrong info, do research before commenting.
I'd love to see you make a head to head video between this and the Asus 42" OLED. It's awesome to say, but this year I'm finally upgrading my 1080p monitors and it's gonna be one of those 2 haha
I would be more happy with 42" model of this monitor for sure. After a lot of research I am pushed more towards this than the other 21:9 OLED though. . I hate 16:9 aspect ratio and I also don't want to waste my GPU power on a 4K monitor / TV, I would always choose the better immersion of the 21:9 monitor. I have had my Acer IPS 34" 21:9 for many years an love the aspect ratio. I do have the LG G2 TV and love that TV but also love the UI of it. I never been a fan of the QD-OLED and the raised blacks that appear grey in brighter ambient lighting. also if you use a PS% on a 65" TV the graphics are pretty low anyhow, very rare you will get a native 4k output. yes you are perhaps sitting 8Ft away though. tough one this year for me
Like the Corsair monitor.. I think a higher resolution or smaller size (Maybe 38 to 40 inches max) would have been better. That said, if your main goal is to play games, can take advantage of the 240 hz, AND have the desk/room setup so you can sit farther away from the monitor then this is probably the best ultrawide gaming experience at the moment.
for someone who wants to build a simulator and cannot use triples its also a very good choice
I honestly like it. I use two 32" 1440p monitors side by side and think this would be a nice upgrade. Mostly because of the OLED panel, but still I like it.
Just go 38" ultragear IPS, it still better, plus you want more brightness if its gaming anyways. They should have just went 5k x 2k resolution with 200+ ppi and they can have everyone's money.
@@amychao7076 Except very few people would buy a $2000 + monitor that requires a $2000 RTX4090 to drive it at a decent refresh rate.
Great review, great as always. I didn’t hear one, does the monitor have the ability to mount it on the wall?
Glad I watched this video. Will look at the alienware monitor or something of equal size. Got a predator x34 but been having issues with it, granted its has gone through a good 7 years of use.
The resolution would be for me a nogo either. At least 3840x1600 would be acceptable, but on this size 5k*2k would be more optimal.
If they would bring out a higher resolution with like 165hz refresh rate, that would start to be interesting. But atm the normal small c2 oled TV is simply the best option.
I agree I am so done with companies only releasing 3440 X 1440p ultrawide monitors. Every time I see it and I hear it's that's resolution I immediately skip the review because it's been done now.
I wish companies would focus on 4k/5K monitors so the pixel density increases with ultrawides like this. I mean I get why they do it that's where most of the market lies but we have so many of these monitors with that resolution that I feel like people who are looking for a good ultrawide that is 3440 X 1440p have a myriad of options to choose from now. Let's try and move on to another resolution
Of course Im not saying we should outright abandon 3440 x 1440p because there are still many improvements to be made with the current monitors with that resolution that are available now I’m just saying that there also should be a stronger focus on 4K+ monitors
@@emiel255 totally agree! it's so insane that the iMac from 2014 launched with a 27" 5K display, and for ages PC monitors seemed to be stuck at 1440p, or 4K was prohibitively expensive. Now 8 years later, the PC market has 4K hi refresh rate options but...that's kind of it? I am SO done with seeing pixels.
Or a 3840x1600 at 38 inches would've been more optimal.
@@vintage0x yes exactly that's why I hope in the next few years (hopefully this year as well) there will come a monitor that's moves on from 3440 and is a 4k/5k monitor. I mean LG has been doing it for many years now with their 5k ultrawides only those aren't exactly meant for gaming. Let's see what the (nearby) future holds
I can almost see the pixels of a phone with 395 ppi, now imagine an 82 ppi monitor xD
I think I would prefer the Alienware 34 inch OLED model. I have the IPS LCD right now and I love it. The curve is more subtle on it and gaming is an absolute joy
I'm returning the alienware it's garbage colours washed out
@@ktm-kr9mm washed out ? or do you mean raised black levels due to reflective issue of the panel in ambient lighting ?
Which game mode setting were you using in WarZone at the 3:00 mark? Your settings look great-very bright and clear!! 💯
Thank you for reviewing this unit. Have you noticed any noise coming from it, be it a fan (if it even has one?) or coil whine?
no noise on mine.
If this thing were 4k, it would be an auto-purchase. You are 100% right, it is too much of a compromise at too high of a price as is. If I'm looking for a compromise, I'd consider the A2 when it goes on sale for about $700. That said, I saw it at Best Buy and the curve grew on me. I would probably impulse buy it if it goes on sale for $1200 or so.
Absolutely love this monitor, gonna be buying it whenever it's in stock. Love the curve and I only ever buy ultrawides.
Ultra wides need at least a 1000R curve. 800R only makes it better. Curve is what makes it actually immersive not just size. Pity a lot of reviews use the word "immersive" without understanding the nature of curvature and ultrawides.
Thanks, agreed on the pixel density and resolution. Pass for me. The upcoming Samsung OLED G9 makes more sense but till it is released we have no idea how good it might be.
I preordered this baby. Cant wait to get my hands on it
A year later, what's the word on the monitor?
I like everyone want a 38" OLED ultrawide but LG could've done 45" over 38"-42" because it works better when cutting it out of the master glass. Maybe cutting a master glass panel into 45" ultrawides is just more cost effective because there's less waste. In doing so the price is 1700. If this were true then it's probably why we didn't get a smaller size because the price for those would be higher because of the excess waste created. It could also just be "big number = easy to market = more money"
The curve is overly aggressive, way beyond what I'd be comfortable with. Still, happy to see OLED UltraWides that leverage HDMI 2.1 for the extra bandwidth to reach higher Resolution/Refresh Rate/12Bit/RGB. At the 1440p resolution it should have been much smaller, or they should have increased the res and lowered the Refresh Rate
Agree
I love the curve. If you don't like it, you can get the corsair xenon flex. Same panel but bendable.
If you're sitting close enough the curve is def fine.
It's basically what curvature radius stands for
@@HeLithium 800r curve is perfect at 800mm which is 32 inches away
@@sabresandiego Yup.
I'm currently using a 27' flat display 750mm away, where I suffer a lot from viewing issues at the sides of the screen.
800R is perfect for users like me lol
I could have considered it for a second gaming setup if it had a luxurious glass coating like the g8oled. Once you tried the g8oled, it's really hard to come back to those AR coatings.
Saving for the g8oled, unless a new monitor pops...
nice review
Resolution fail. Curve fail. Price fail.
Other then that I like it.
😂
How is the curve a fail? The price is around 1200 nowadays either way
@@THE-STREET-HERO people are dumbasses,curved screen is so much better for eyes and immersion once you get used to it...I went from 34" ips to 43" LG C3 and i almost returned it because no curve was absolutely massive deal! Now I'm thinking of buying this LG45
@notimeforspace2477 I'm thinking on going from a 32in with a very light curve to this beauty, the 1440p is actually awesome, I can still use my current graphics card and I won't lose performance unlike a 4k screen
Missed opportunity.
Needed to be 4K at that size, even if they had to drop the refresh rate down to 200Hz or even 175hz it would have been a far more interesting product with those specs.
It would have to be dropped to 120hz at 4k.
Great video.
Are you going to be reviewing the 27" veron of this monitor :D
Ugh omg give us a damn 42 inch 16:9 qd oled ALREADY. JESUS. What's with the ultra wide obsession??!!!!
I know right , god damn , had to get a 42in c2 since I heard no news of a 16:9 qd OLED in the near future
yep - agreed!
@Dx just a suggestion. So, I have the 65 inch c7 and still love it. Great picture and hdr, except for game mode picture and performance. So, I left the perfectly well performing c7 in my bedroom for my wife and I and wanted to get a gaming/streaming/pc use TV just for me for the office. I got the 42 c2 and man, I couldn't even tell if hdr was on. The 42 inch oleds are definitely dimmer and that isn't reported on much at all. I ultimately got the qn90b 42 inch. It's not crazy bright either, but better than the c2. So...I'll be keeping the qn90b 42 until and IF we ever get a qd oled in a 42 inch size. I seriously don't get what the deal is. And obviously I don't wanna go ultrawide cuz movies and ps5 games wouldn't present right. 16:9 is essential.
@@michaelmcgehee5932 , same here although I altered my settings and to me the brightness is pretty good but I play with limited setting for black level and not Full and it looks miles better , that said I need 16x9 for my consoles like you said ,. Not sure why there isn't one released yet lol
Agreed, I just want a 32 inch 16.9 … it’s like they are making everything but the standard sizes. Doing my head in
Well, a 51.3 inch cut of the panel used for the 27 inch monitor would yield a 5K-2K 21:9 (Ultrawide). It would be a bit bigger than this, but would have higher pixel density. That would imo be the holy grail of immersion gaming and a no compromises qualitative step up from anything LCD monitors can currently offer. A shame there's no news or leaks of such a monitor.
Samsung could also do a 50.9 inch 5K-2K Ultrawide cut of its QD-OLED panel.
It might be that in both cases it would result in too much leftovers from the manufactured OLED piece they're cut from, but it's a shame there isn't anything like that.
after a lot of researching, waiting, staring at my C2, I finally pulled the trigger and snagged it. cant wait to play Apex and Destiny on this thing
I have the Xeneon Flex and I agree completely. Great while gaming, wish the ppi was higher.
Are the HDMI 2.1 ports the full 48Gbps bandwidth?
I've been on 3440x14400 for like 7 years now and it's brilliant! However I 'only' have 34" and I really think I'd agree that it's too low for 45" 🤔
14400?! HOLY SHIT
Sadly many games don't support native 21:9 still... Even new AAA games
@@Dr.WhetFarts I have never encountered a game that didn't support it. Some better than others, yes, but all of them rendered just fine on UW.
@@SubzeroBlack68 yes, it's not actually UltraWide but UltraHeight 😅
@@MrFloRolf Just use that monitor in horizontal mode, problem solved! 🤣
Got my aw3423dw, I'm not ready to trade it off :) But Happy to see more HDR and OLED/QLED coming
Just got mine. I will be playing with it for a few before passing judgement. Out of the box, first word comes to mind is immersive. It's replacing a 40" curved LG non-OLED. Much bigger curve on the 45". I am not a super heavy gamer. I understand why some think the resolution isn't the best for this size, and from my research I would say it would be nicer if they pushed higher resolution for the heavy gamers.
So it's been over a week, what's your feedback? Thinking of upgrading from a odyssey g9 (not neo), but there's not enough testimonials!
What’s ur feedback?
Should have made it a 1200R curve, and a 5120 x 2160 resolution.
Even if it was 165Hz, it would have been a lot better than 3440x1440
even more curved?
5120x2160 is just way too hard to run
@@Born_Stellar Less. the smaller the R number, the more curved it is.
@@drunkhusband6257 The new 57" Odyssey Neo G9 is gonna be 7680 x 2160, or dual 4K. That's prob gonna need a DP 2.1 port.
So really, a 5K2K display is only 33% more than 4K. It only needs a DP 1.4 port.
A 4090 can handle that.
BTW, 5K2K displays already exist. There're a few pro grade 40" 21:9 monitors that are 5K2K. The LG 40WP95C-W is one example.
@@rvs55 7680x2160 is double 4k....you need a lesson on math.
This is a great proof of conception, but the resolution at that size is a deal breaker for me. Rev 2 of this could be interesting though.
Proven conception is an important concept
1800p is perfect
@@ReLapseJunkie it is nice 👍
Same monitor in a 24:10 37" size would probably be perfect. If lowering the refresh rate meant cheaper I'd go for that too. Very few game and even fewer GPUs are optimized well enough to ever go as high as 240.
Hooked on classics, a man of culture I see
I think the resolution is good. For it to be higher it been to much money, and majority of users would have trouble pushing it out with decent frames.
I also think 3440x1440 resolution is too low for this screen size, it should be at least 3840x1600, and ideally 5120x2880 resolution.
Will wait for a better resolution.. to reach out 130ppi at least. But that 45' curved size looks sweet :D
Hi, I play competitive fps... Now I use a 34" 21:9 And I feel very good about it (better than 27" 16:9). I had tried the neo g9 32:9 but was too wide. Now I'm undecided between corsair xenon flex, or the new samsung G8 oled...Which one would you recommend, considering that I play about 60 cm from the monitor? Thank you
I’m wondering why no one has released a 5k2k 120hz monitor. Seems like it would be a sweet spot for many people as it would be a great all-arounder.
Exactly, I would instantly buy this with less of a stupid curve and 5k x 2k...........I guess the technology is just not really ready yet, to throw out such a great monitor in mass production.
They basically mainliy just focussed on Mobilphones + TV Screens in terms of OLED
@@derek4177 Even a 4K with a less aggressive curve would be good. Take the Samsung Odyssey OLED G8, It ticks almost every box except it's still 34", something a bit bigger would really hit that sweet spot for me personally. All these 800R, 1000R monitors are just asking gamers who also use their monitor for work to say no.
Lenovo has a business model, P40w-20
1440p ain’t enough for sure. I upgraded from 1440p to 4k on 27” and it’s a MASSIVE upgrade both in normal use and gaming. I can see so much more detail and sharpness picking out enemies in warzone. DLSS looks better than native rendering too
Your opinion was instantly discarded when you said you think AI upscaling looks better than perfect native resolution.
@@CyberneticArgumentCreator Excuse me have you tried it? I’ve done extensive testing on my 850, 950, and 77” C2 in a handful of games. The quality of anti-aliasing is so clean you don’t get any jagged edges or fuzziness. It’s just more natural
I guess it depends of the panel type and technology, VA,IPS,TN,OLED,QD-OLED.
Back then I bought my 27inch Dell S2716dg, one of the first 2k 144hz monitor on the market, it's a TN. I have also bought an ASUS ROG 27inch 2k 165hz IPS monitor, forgot the name because I returned it. I have kept the Dell unit.
The text clarity on the ASUS ROG was something between my old 1080p monitor and my dell 2k tn unit, it was better but not as sharp.
Not gonna lie the jump in quality was insane, but I see very little difference in 4k on a 27inch form factor monitor while taxing the GPU alot more for so little.
I just think 27" is way to small to notice the real difference between 1440 vs 4k especially the GPU sacrifice for it, just not worth it for me. even if I had a 4090, I would still go for a ultrawide again,
I'm getting this one when I can. As I already use my 65" LG CX OLED and sit around the same distance he's sitting from the 45" LG 240Hz OLED. I play a lot of War Thunder and the large screen helps when maps are literally measured in kilometers. Thr largest maps are 64km x 64km making the total map area 4225 square kilometers. At those distances, fighter jets are difficult enough to see when I have to run War Thunder at medium settings at 4k to maintain above 60 FPS with my RTX 2070 laptop.
one niche scenario where these oled panels really shine, is using them as active 3d monitors. since the pixel response time is so low, there is barely any crosstalk.
I got mine a few days ago. So far, I love it. I'm coming from a 27" 1440p 144hz. The main games i play are League of Legends, Destiny, New World and new Open World games that come out. I do find that when i'm playing games, i get immersed enough to not worry about the resolution. However, I do wish it was a 4k display. That would be the peak experience on an OLED this size. I disagree about the gloss. Personally, i play in a dark setting so i don't worry about glare. Glossy would be worth it IMO.
Currently, most games can't be played at 240hz on 4k with current GPU's. I'm on a 3090ti LC and it runs most aaa games under 200fps. League runs at 240 easy and it is the main game I play right now. I think this is a good monitor to tide you over until next year when a 4k variant will like be released around the same time we get a gpu upgrade that may be able to handle it.
Currently, the monitor is ahead of the gpu tech.
Exactly. I have this monitor too. Best ive ever used. 240hz .03ms curved is insane. I loved my c2 4k oled, which actually has better image quality than this by a decent margin. But this monitor has so much better speed and fluidity.
Does it have sRGB mode? Can u adjust RGB colors and brightness in sRGB mode?
@@SubL0ck yeah it has srgb mode but I’m not sure what it is
@@sabresandiego tell me pls, once u are in that srgb mode, can u still control the RGB values and brightness?
@@SubL0ck yes
Exactly how I feel about ultra wide monitors. They need a 4k resolution. I just picked up the alienware Oled monitor, and I'm not impressed. My 27" had the same resolution. To me, it's fuzzy looking. I'm glad I didn't spend the 1700 on this lg just to be disappointed
Im glad to see someone else has the same experience as me. I also thought it was fuzzy, but its not because of the PPI, its because of the triangular QD-OLED pixel structure they use. It got even more clear when i bought the LG C2 42" to compare. It was better in every regard, more details, more clear, more POP. I also compared the Alienware to my glossy LCD 21.5" 1080p monitor and even though the Alienware has a higher PPI, it still looks a lot less detailed/ clear and more fuzzy.
@Allostasis I should of went with the c2
@@King__Casey The C2 42" is not perfect either. It has uneven steps in gradients, showing up mostly on low fidelity content, aka banding. The 42" size you get used too, but its not optimal for desktop use because of the limitations of our eyes. Still the best screen I've ever had.
The perfect monitor for me would be pure glossy coating, perfectly calibrated, around 32", 4k, 240hz+ and clean RGB pixels.
Picked it up today for 1250 Euro. I have an 38" ultrawide and can't go smaller anymore, or slower. Not sure i am going to keep it, but it really is the only monitor on the market that is to be considered an "step up" from what i have. The resolution is a step down, yes, but if i have to generate double the frames from here on out it kinda comes together nicely. I had tried a 42" OLED from Asus and it is just too tall compared to a sleeker ultrawide.
The resolution doesn't bother me, as I'm getting older and my eyesight isn't going to get any better. However that curve is just "too" aggressive and I'd be far more interested in buying one if they gave it a more reasonable curve like the alienware 34" UW OLED.
When you mentioned the resolution it was also a deal breaker for me. I am used to 34", 3440x1440 which looks very good and I would definitely notice the pixel density change. I don't know how a monitor with such price can have that flaw. It costs like an entire system.
Yeah, maybe the monitor would be best for people who have enough room on their desk to place it a little further away from viewing distance.
@@matthewelisha8797 with that agresssive 800R you really need to be in the sweetspot distance
Thing is, if they did raise the resolution proportionately, no PC on earth could achieve the frame rates it's trying to push. Even a 4090 would be crying.
@@johnmclain250 lol you clearly cannot do math dude
if they increased the pixels exactly proportionally from 34" 3440x1440 to 45" inch ultrawide it would be 4551x1905 which is 104% amount of pixels of 4K resolution
@@HeadBassVTEC And you clearly can't read English. I'm aware of the resolution it comes to, and thats exactly in-line with what I was saying, gpus can't handle those resolutions at those framerates, even the 4090. I own one, I should know.
The resolution is what stopped me from purchasing this. Looking to upgrade to OLED from my older Samsung 49" (5120x1440) and do not want to give up nearly 2000 pixels on the horizontal. For a monitor this size and aspect ratio I expect at least 1600p if not 2160p. Will likely upgrade to the new Samsung 49" OLED.
Price compared to those 4k oleds from LG seems like too much if a premium for what you get. Right now that 42in C2 for $900 or less is the sweet spot as far as what you get for the price, imo, compared to other OLED monitors above 34in.
@4:10 you can hold the jog dial to a side and that will decrease/increase by 10 at a time automatically...
Should've been a 5120x2160 monitor in terms of resolution. Defintely would not get over the MSI/Samsung 49' QD OLED. No reason to be frank.
If it was 5120x2160 I would've paid double this price not blinking. At this res and price it's a no I guess.
The curve seems wayyy too excessive to me lol
Yeah, 800R is a bit much for most people. I wouldn't use it for productivity work.
U dont notice it. Plus allows to sit closer. Love mine
@@irmeubu oh ok, that’s cool!
Yeah, once you use it for a short period, it doesn't seem weird anymore.
I just saw it in CES, it is definitely noticeable but I think you would get used to it
I picked it up last night to replace my 38" LG 38GN950-B. Unfortunately the screen size increase coupled with the resolution decrease was a bit jarring. I could live with that, but the (lack of) text clarity/shadowing is a potential deal-breaker for me. I've read that the culprit is that the OLED's subpixel layout differs from other monitors. I'm currently trying to find options to compensate for this.
Dldsr.
Was this monitor worth it? I have the 38gl950g and nothing has prompted me to move from this screen. Looking to upgrade but nothing worthy to upgrade to.
@@bayaholicAfter a couple days, I decided that the issues I mentioned bothered me too much. But then when I swapped back to my old monitor, I really did notice a difference in quality during gaming. Since I don't work from home and 90% of the time on the computer is gaming, I stuck with it. I've been pretty happy, though I do wish the resolution is a little higher. But I can't complain! lol
I'm subscribed, can u answer me this plz, for my ps5, which monitor do you recommend. 2 to choose from? Price really no issue . I'm exhausted with options.
one recommendation I could make that you'll thank me for later is to buy a small magnet mount so you can store the remote underneath or to the side of the monitor so you don't lose it.
great idea!
38 " UHD OLED gsync 4k and 2k is needed. I think the perfect monitor IMO size wise for most desk set-ups
I think it's still a bit small, but it should be 4k at least, and preferably 8k, because its 2023 cmon lol.
How is the size? Does it overwhelm you view like 48" 4K TV? I cannot 48" TV as a monitor on desk because of the tall aspect, you need to move your eyes and head up-left and up-right to read corners. Can you tell LG to make a 40" ultrawide at 3840*1600@144hz. That is enough!
I'm curious as to what Tech Chap's desk is. Is it DIY or did he make a video about this?
3440x1440p at 45 inches is a no go for me. I'd wait for the 27 inch OLED 1440p 240hz monitors from the likes of Asus or go with a 34 inch QD-OLED UW or wait for Samsung's 49 inch QD-OLED super UW.
Those would be my options as well. Until the wait for true 4k 240Hz at 32"+ is available.
This looks insane. But I feel the 27” will be better overall.
After using 40+ inch screens for the past half decade, I can't stand smaller screens anymore. I greatly prefer having a larger screen and sitting about 3 feet back. I feel like its better for your eyes too
LG C2 42” is the way to go. Heck, my 4090 still fights with some games to reach at least 90-110 fps with ultra settings.
So unless it is a high competitive game, the 42” still wins for that crisp and sharp picture for most story single players games.
What type of monitor arm would you recommend safely mounting this with? I just bought this monitor last week and am looking for a solution.
I can’t take these companies seriously when they ruin oled monitors by putting horrible anti-glare coating on it.
Don’t they do it to keep it from reflecting itself?
Terrible review in that the logic used just doesn't ad up. He has in front of him a very unique monitor, which I also OWN ... and you cannot see the pixels. HE said "almost" ... well .. almost is "NOT" seeing the pixels. So he is taking a jab at the product. He put's this monitor down a handful of times. He doesn't speak to the monitor for for himself. This monitor is amazing and it can be found for cheaper now. If he doesn't like it .... move on. It's pointless to try and change to monitor. It's what it is. I don't get these guys that get something and then start complaining about the size, etc etc, this is wrong, that's not great and the they want to just change the form factor around. NO, move on and buy something else.
Finally someone said it
@thetechchap I currently use the LG C2 42 4k super excited about this new monitor. but I have to agree with you. the resolution is not worth the money. Personally I would of preferred a 32 inch 4k version. This is not for the common gamer most of these will be purchased by those that have overkill set ups. I have a 12th gen intel and a 4090 and my current set up only supports 120hz =(. But the picture is beautiful and once you go OLED you cant go back! My advice is if you have the money give it a shot, some say they cant tell the difference between 4k and 1440 on an OLED monitor. One thing we cant take away is that it looks amazing! Cheers!
I replaced my c2 with this. This monitor is way better if you set it up right. The speed and motion clarity of 240hz and .03ms response makes me feel underwater when i try using the c2 again. The c2 does look better than this screen though. This screen is for speed and motion clarity
If Samsung would release a Neo G7 in an OLED it would be the perfect monitor. I was so excited when the G8 OLED was announced because the Neo G7 and G8 are the same monitor with different refresh but no they just had to slap the G8 name on a 1440p ultrawide. I loved my neo g7 for 2 weeks right up until I enabled HDR. I returned it for an alienware but I miss my 4k and Im not digging the ultrawide the alienware is going back too. I'll stick to my C2 42 until a 32-34in curved 4k oled is released.
I’ll take the Samsung or Alienware QD OLED over this any day.. might even wait for the Ultrawide QD OLED.
Avoid it. The pixel structure of the 34" QD-OLED is making a fuzzy picture. Its not the PPI like some people here say. The LG C2 42" is more detailed, clearer and with more pop, a superior display.
@@Deffine if you are referring to the issue where text on webpages and office and such looks like it has a colored shadow around them so too the QD light shine. Yah this is a known issue but not do to the monitor but do to how windows handles text. Microsoft is just behind the technology advancements..
If you wanna spread blind miss information and fear in buyers. Try someone who just believes every random internet expert out doing research themselves 😂.. what a clown
@@Deffine For what I understand qd-oled makes only the text fuzzy not the games/movies but I may be wrong since I dont own one
@@Deffine lol that's bs. Unless you're licking the screen you won't even notice the color fringing. And in gaming it's non-existent.
@@karljuliuz “licking the screen 🤣”
Just to warn people about the pixel density issue here:
On any 42 inch 4k monitor (like LG OLED TV C2) the pixel density is already a littlebit of an issue and that is 104.9 PPI. This is closer to a 55 inch TV (80 PPI) and you would look at it up close it just hard pass because of that at least for me.
Might get one next year
As someone who owns a C2, I don’t think a monitor like this makes sense at this price point and with current gpus. That .03ms though is pretty cool to see!
i lost interest when u named the PPI
Learn grammar
The curve is too much and tbh 45" is just too big. My ideal panel would either be 34" ultrawide QD-OLED with 240Hz (or more) refresh rate, or a 32" 4k QD-OLED with at least 165Hz refresh rate.
What u talking about, there already are options like this on the market... Alienware has nice options especially
@@Jacob_S13 The Alienware panels don't have that refresh rate though, they're 160-175Hz.
@@nicholastaylor9375 ah true, but I don't really see the point going even higher than 144hz. The difference between 30-60-120 Hz are huge and easily noticeable, higher I personally don't see much difference. You put more strain on your PC and probably wont max out the graphics settings at 4k 240 Hz in a AAA game.
@@Jacob_S13 Yeah that's a fair point, it does take a lot to run games at such high refresh rates, particularly at 4k and in more demanding titles. I'm curious to try 240Hz, simply because I've seen a few tech reviewers on RUclips say that although the differences are less perceptible the higher refresh rate you go, it can still make a difference, particularly in first person shooters.
@The Tech Chap would you change your recommendation if you can pick it up for 1400 or even at that price still not worth it?
This thing is tempting but the pixel density and the sheer size kind of rules it out for me. I'll probably go with the alienware QD-OLED instead. The only compromises I see to that one being that it's not as fast in terms of response time and it doesn't hit 240hz, but I frequently game on an LCD TV on consoles and my monitor is a run of the mill 144hz 1440p display so I don't think I'm going to miss the quickness of the LG compare to the Alienware.
be careful as the od-oled from Alienware supports a different sub pixel layout meaning the texts won't look perfect either I think hardware unboxed has some examples of this
Nice 👍. The resolution isn't an issue for me 👌
I got an lg c2 42 for $750 at Best Buy open box, been happy with it
I saw your first look at the ASUS ROG PG42UQ a few months ago - trying to sort out which OLED Monitor I need - are there any with KVM switch built in with HDMI 2.1 ?
I currently have x2 48GQ900, guess ill stick with them, I was super excited for this monitor, but I think the 4K OLED tech has spoiled all other monitors for me
Could you make a video on smart home... A home that completely runs on Samsung's smart home. Show us how it's set up and done, and what are its potential
Just pre ordered
Looks awesome but yeah it just probably isn't for me. I think I would go with a 49 inch for the better side by side view. That is super wild though.
I currently use the LG 40WP95C-W for productivity, paired with a 4090 Suprim and a 7950x, and people need to realize 5K2K is horizontally 33% larger than 4K. That one caps out at 72 fps, so it's just adequate for the type of sporadic, casual single player gaming I do at my age. But running any recent triple A title at maxed out settings even cripples the 4090 at times, dipping below that 72 fps cap more than I'd like.
I wish they'd gone 1600p myself, and possibly shrunk it down to 40-42" for a denser PPI. At 5210x2160 maxed out you'd barely be able to churn out two fourths of the panels 240hz capability, with todays high-end hardware in most games. And that's assuming everyone has a GPU that costs about the same as this monitor.
Piss poor PPI, the 27in is the one to choose. Hope you’ll have a review for that one soon.
What is your honest opinion on brightness? I am heavily considering buy this device but the quoted brightness scares me.
I am thinking the resolution is a deal breaker for me unless you use your PC only for gaming then this may be for you but if you using it for editing as I have a 38 in LG and it's curved but not as curved as this one and I love it as I can't go smaller
Thanks for the review I won't be getting this! LOL