Later
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 60
Apparently LG has postponed release to next year.
https://www.kedglobal.com/newsView/ked202108190017
https://www.kedglobal.com/newsView/ked202108190017
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah and this is exactly why I think a gimped model is a possibility.People also need to understand that it's about tapping a market. Right now, the sweet-spot for OLED TVs in terms of sales is between 55 and 65 inches. The 48 and 77 inch variants don't sell as well.
The 42 inch is a bit of a gamble; it will mostly appeal to PC users that think 48 inches is still too big, but even then, it's still significantly bigger than the normal 27-32 inch monitors that most enthusiasts use. It will have to be priced right to penetrate the market, but seeing as the Samsung G9 Neo is priced at an eye-watering $2500, it will make a supposed 42" OLED TV/monitor seem like a downright bargain (if it hits around $1000).
Gimped in what way? If they aim it for the monitor market then I would expect it might have some different mitigations for burn in compared to the TVs.Yeah and this is exactly why I think a gimped model is a possibility.
The 42" model is going to be targeted to console and PC gamers, so gimping the connectivity and refresh rate would be unthinkable if that's your target demographic. If anything I think you'll see them cheap out on things like the internal processor, resulting in worse image processing and laggier TV OS menus. Neither of those features matter much to gamers and being able to use an older cheaper SoC would likely be quite desirable right now given the shortage of fab supply for higher end processes.Gimped as in A series with 60hz only would be bad; less processing/features (VRR), connectivity (HDMI 2.1) and calibration would also be bad; less smart TV features I wouldn't care too much.
Check the headlines...I don't think they are targeting gamers at all. Gamers consist of a tiny portion of their sales, they are targeting people who don't want a 48" or larger display in their space that value image quality.
I dunno where this impression that LG OLED's as a brand are a PC/console gaming orientated product because they clearly aren't. It's what people have made them out of necessity due to the garbage monitor market. It's still 98% a home theater/cinema product. Just look at their product pages, tiny blurb about Gsync and 1ms, the rest is Smart TV and cinema related picture quality nonsense.
I think your read on this wrong. If the home theater/cinema market really wanted sub 50" displays then the 40 to 50" segment wouldnt have collapsed like it did a few years back.I don't think they are targeting gamers at all. Gamers consist of a tiny portion of their sales, they are targeting people who don't want a 48" or larger display in their space that value image quality.
I dunno where this impression that LG OLED's as a brand are a PC/console gaming orientated product because they clearly aren't. It's what people have made them out of necessity due to the garbage monitor market. It's still 98% a home theater/cinema product. Just look at their product pages, tiny blurb about Gsync and 1ms, the rest is Smart TV and cinema related picture quality nonsense.
40-50" segment hasn't collapsed? America is not their only market, there are lots else where who prefer a smaller TV.I think your read on this wrong. If the home theater/cinema market really wanted sub 50" displays then the 40 to 50" segment wouldnt have collapsed like it did a few years back.
Have you gone and looked at the customer reviews for the CX48 and C1 48"?40-50" segment hasn't collapsed? America is not their only market, there are lots else where who prefer a smaller TV.
Get back to me when LG's " Gaming & PC centric" TV's wake and sleep like a monitor.
I think forums/reddit have people deluded into thinking everyone and their mom is buying OLED's to game.
Says it's coming, and won't be gimped, (will be HDMI 2.1, VRR, Freesync Premium, Gsync compatible) and should be priced at ~$1k.
Says it's coming, and won't be gimped, (will be HDMI 2.1, VRR, Freesync Premium, Gsync compatible) and should be priced at ~$1k.
Depends on the games you play. I haven't found a recliner yet that offers a good mouse and keyboard experience. None of the lapboards do it for me, and I like to play most of my games with M&K.They very well could gimp it and put it in the “budget” line like the A series. Generally, the smaller the TV, the less “high end” features it will have across all brands and TV models. 99% of people can buy a 42” TV at Walmart for like $150 these days. Going to be a hard pass for most people even at $1000 range. I’m glad they’re making it though. I had to convert my setup from a PC desk to a wireless home theatre setup with a recliner to accommodate my 55” OLED and I don’t think I’ll ever go back since Recliner > Computer chair any day of the week.
So I might be able to help ya here. I did dozens of hours of both online research and going into box-stores and sitting on Recliners to find what works best for me.Depends on the games you play. I haven't found a recliner yet that offers a good mouse and keyboard experience. None of the lapboards do it for me, and I like to play most of my games with M&K.
They wouldn't gimp it. OLED TVs are already in the premium TV segment. Anyone who wants a cheaper TV will get a larger mainstream panel from someone like Vizio.
The only reason smaller OLED panels haven't come to market sooner is they make OLED panels as large sheets of semiconductors. They cut those sheets into the TV-sized panels. Anything leftover is trash and wasted money. The 48 and 42 sizes didn't come neatly out of leftovers from the 55 and 65 panels so they didn't make them until prices came down or they found a way to produce them without wastage.
The 42 inch is a bit of a gamble; it will mostly appeal to PC users that think 48 inches is still too big, but even then, it's still significantly bigger than the normal 27-32 inch monitors that most enthusiasts use. It will have to be priced right to penetrate the market, but seeing as the Samsung G9 Neo is priced at an eye-watering $2500, it will make a supposed 42" OLED TV/monitor seem like a downright bargain (if it hits around $1000).
I am really looking forward to the 42" OLED for my PC. I think it would have all the same specs as the regular 'C' series OLED TVs that LG has come out with these past several years. The only thing that annoys me is that LG will probably announce the 42" at CES this January but then you wont be able to actually purchase it until May or June of next year like the 48" was this year. So these are still effectively just under a year away. It always seems like the display I want is always a year away....
I doubt LG would suddenly segment their TVs like that. Even the B1 OLEDS still get VRR and HDMI 2.1 The 48" C1 still has all the same features as its larger versions.Don't get your hopes up. In the 43" Samsung QN90A thread it was discovered that Samsung had decided to strip the 43" model of 120Hz and VRR while leaving the 50" sizes and up with it, that basically makes the 43" DOA as a PC monitor as nobody is going to pay $1300 for a 60Hz no sync display. LG might just do the same thing and remove 120Hz + VRR from the 42" OLED. Not saying it's gonna happen, but I wouldn't rule it out completely.
I doubt LG would suddenly segment their TVs like that. Even the B1 OLEDS still get VRR and HDMI 2.1 The 48" C1 still has all the same features as its larger versions.
Samsung has a history of dumb shit like this. LG doesn'tI don't think either but just saying if Samsung actually did it then who knows.
So if the 42" ends up not happening due to the lack of light output from the smaller pixels required for 4k at 42" (from this post), then just hypothetically speaking, what about 1440p? A 32" 1440p 16:9 would have an identical pixel pitch as the 48" 4k. Or a ~40" ultrawide with 3440x1440 resolution. It's the same pixel pitch as 24" 1080p, but over a bigger screen so you'd sit farther back, making the lower resolution less noticeable. Honestly, for gaming/media I don't think I'd mind a lower resolution if that's what it takes to achieve decent HDR performance on an OLED that size, especially at a lower price point. What do you think, would you guys go for something like that?
The 32" is inket printed, so it's a bit apples and oranges. But that could be part of it.Hmmm is that why the 32" OLED monitor has such a low peak brightness? I believe it's like 400 nits peak or something.
At that point why not just run a custom resolution? With the OLED having true blacks it’s not that different than having the top and bottom cut off. And the desk space used would be about the same anywayThe 32" is inket printed, so it's a bit apples and oranges. But that could be part of it.
For the same PPI as the 48", a ~45" 3840x1600 ultrawide is also possible. Essentially just a cut down 48" panel. IMO that would be a compelling option as well.
With less height it makes it more feasible to use on your desktop, rather than having to mount it somewhere behind the desk. It'd also have more space above/below if you needed it.At that point why not just run a custom resolution? With the OLED having true blacks it’s not that different than having the top and bottom cut off. And the desk space used would be about the same anyway
Running a 3840x1600 custom resolution on my LG CX 48", the issue becomes the lack of curvature. It feels nowhere near as nice to use as a curved monitor. Of course OLEDs would be pretty good at the curved thing so it would not be impossible to make or anything.With less height it makes it more feasible to use on your desktop, rather than having to mount it somewhere behind the desk. It'd also have more space above/below if you needed it.
I might even prefer a UW 45" over the 42" - it's wider, but not as tall, which I feel is generally more comfortable to use as a desktop monitor.
I had the 48" model on a Multibrackets VESA HD arm. Because of the size of the display the tilt would buckle unless really cranked, same as my Samsung CRG9 which currently uses the arm. Even at the smaller 42" size you might run into those issues even if on paper your arm can hold it up.42 inch on a monitor arm without a stand is what I'm planning. The 48 inch without stand is right around 30 pounds, the 42 inch hopefully is closer to 25 pounds. Then I can use my current arm.