LG announces the first 1440p 240Hz OLED monitor and it only costs $999

Burty117

Posts: 4,702   +3,079
I'm on Asus Pg32uqx 32in 4k and on standard desk depth about 20-24in it's been perfect for me. Using powercolor red devil 6900xt ultimate to power the monitor.

It's been a dream setup: High pixel density, ultra settings, and high refresh (and adaptive sync when the game is demand and can't push 144hz consistently).
Lovely Monitor, and you sit about as far away as me as well.
However, I couldn't pay £2500 for it, not when OLED exists as a technology.

To me, OLED (Specifically QD-OLED) is a bit like that jump from HDD to SSD.
I've actually done this with my 40" 4K screen in a 1:1 scale, reducing my image size to about 33". Running at 3200x1800 has been an excellent compromise on my GTX 1070, which can't quite handle 4K smoothly, but often gives me 40-50fps at 1800p. 3840x1600 is another nice option on this screen for games that support ultrawide.
Great move! I honestly wonder why monitor/panel producers don't provide more native choices like these. Much easier to run while looking considerably better than 1440p.
 

Watzupken

Posts: 762   +645
Wow, "only cost USD 999" made it sounds like it's really cheap, except that it's 1 buck away from a 1 grand monitor. It's an OLED and with high refresh rate, and one of the cheaper options, but it's certainly not cheap.
 
32" 1440p looks bad? I disagree. 92ppi is fine even if identical to 24" 1080p. More pixel density is better only when you can see it. On a smaller size monitor, you can't. On a smaller monitor it's indiscernible for your eyes from 1080p, unless you're watching from a very very short distance. But that's not really watching. 27" 1440p is on the edge, it looks a tiny bit sharper, but fonts, huds, etc are annoyingly smaller, because... Windows. But sure, there's people playing even 4k 27"... to each their own.
32" indeed look bad for 1440p, not only clarity issue but everything looks too big in 100% scaling and windows can't scale below 100%.

I once own 32" in 1440p but due to the pixelate and everything look too big, I sold it within a month.

The best resolution vs size to maintain the text sharpness and clarity.
  • 1080p - 24" and below (actually 22" is the best for clarity as anything below 100 ppi is bad)
  • 1440p - 27" ~ 28" (best scaling in 100%)
  • 2160p - 32" ~ 42" (32" best scaling in 125%, it looks kind of identical to 1440p in 27" 100%)
 
Last edited:

nnguy2

Posts: 651   +1,498
32" indeed look bad for 1440p, not only clarity issue but everything looks too big in 100% scaling and windows can't scale below 100%.

I once own 32" in 1440p but due to the pixelate and everything look too big, I sold it within a month.

The best resolution vs size to maintain the text sharpness and clarity.
  • 1080p - 24" and below (actually 22" is the best for clarity as anything below 100 ppi is bad)
  • 1440p - 27" ~ 28" (best scaling in 100%)
  • 2160p - 32" ~ 42" (32" best scaling in 125%, it looks kind of identical to 1440p in 27" 100%)
I tried to explain this on the 42 in LG Oled review
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 8,432   +7,877
Now the marketing cheat of 240 and 500 Hz monitors started. This fish is not biting that bait. Nobody needs 240 Hz, let alone 500, except 0.001% playing with DLSS 3 activated.
When OLED monitors are capable of sub-ms response times, it does not seem like a marketing shtick. To me, it just seems that they are pushing the monitor to utilizing its capabilities to the fullest. Why not, when the panel is capable. If they were trying a marketing shtick, I would imagine that they would be pushing to 1,000 Hz since 1/1ms = 1,000 Hz.
 
Last edited:

wiyosaya

Posts: 8,432   +7,877
Finally! I am happy to see OLED monitors hitting the market at reasonable prices, although, I will probably end up waiting until their price comes down further.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 8,432   +7,877
I've got a pair of LG monitors I've had for several years. Very dependable and very, very good .... in fact I'm wondering if I'll ever have a good reason to buy anything else ..... not a bad problem to have!
I've a 24" LG 16x10 monitor and other than it identifying itself as a TV and PCs not detecting it properly (which I was able to edit the on-board firmware to fix), I've been very happy with it, and I will likely keep it for a while longer - until the prices on OLED monitors drop further.
 

Darkmatter

Posts: 9   +4
Personally I found 32" 4K a bit to small without 125 (or was it 150?) scaling. My old eyes aren't as good as they used to be! I think I'd prefer 36" at 4K. Ultra wide is a nice option that I've never tried. I think I'd rather have a 2nd monitor both for productivity and for gaming and web or something. I'm sure ultra wide's have PiP but I've never really liked it personally.

Still, OLED at 27 1440 is still tempting. I'm glad to see OLED's coming as dedicated monitors. Is it based on LG's 2nd gen OLED's or the first gen? Also I'm not sure how much difference you'd see with QD-OLED vs OLED. I've heard they're brighter, but I like my retinas in tact thank you very much. :)

BTW, what is this about G-Sync without hardware acceleration? How can it be G-Sync without a chip?
 

neeyik

Posts: 2,431   +3,000
Staff member
BTW, what is this about G-Sync without hardware acceleration? How can it be G-Sync without a chip?
It's G-SYNC Compatible, which means when paired with a GeForce card, the monitor's variable refresh rate ability gets used. This is because it's HDMI 2.1 capable, so the hardware supports VRR too. When in 'G-SYNC' mode, it's just using HDMI timings, rather than Nvidia's. The LG monitor also supports DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync, so VRR is pretty much guaranteed no matter what GPU and cable you use.

Like many G-SYNC Compatible monitors, there isn't any proprietary hardware inside.
 

nnguy2

Posts: 651   +1,498
It's G-SYNC Compatible, which means when paired with a GeForce card, the monitor's variable refresh rate ability gets used. This is because it's HDMI 2.1 capable, so the hardware supports VRR too. When in 'G-SYNC' mode, it's just using HDMI timings, rather than Nvidia's. The LG monitor also supports DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync, so VRR is pretty much guaranteed no matter what GPU and cable you use.

Like many G-SYNC Compatible monitors, there isn't any proprietary hardware inside.
I hate the fact my monitor is gysnc branded and I had to pay Jensen money for it.