Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 Review: Fast, mini-LED, True HDR Gaming

gamerk2

Posts: 628   +546
The fact this costs $2500 despite the fact it's still fundamentally LCD based shows how broken the display market really is. The fact you can get the top-tier OLED for over a grand less shows how PC gamers have been getting bent over for literally decades now.
 

VitalyT

Posts: 6,036   +6,409
One important thing not clear from this article - when testing HDR, which connection was used (DP or HDMI)? I suspect there may be a difference.

We’re still getting a DisplayPort 1.4 connector with DSC, which provides bandwidth for the full 5120 x 1440 resolution at 240Hz with 10-bit HDR
There's some dark magic going on around that one, because DP 1.4 doesn't support half of it. I suspect someone cheated there somewhere. We will know when the first real reviews start coming in from buyers.

Now let's hope to see a similar-specced productivity 32" monitor, one that hopefully won't cost an arm and a leg, like ASUS PA32UCG-K, which costs around $5,000.
 
Last edited:

SirDigby

Posts: 855   +692
TechSpot Elite
I think it'd be cool if I could replace my two 27" 4K monitors with a curved one, I have them on a dual monitor bracket so can swing them around a bit but they're 1cm short of being far enough apart so they overlap slightly at an angle, which is fine for work and I only use 1 for my home PC for gaming.

I'm guessing for gaming, a 32:9 1440p screen will have the same performance as a 16:9 2160p screen?
 

enemys

Posts: 264   +294
TechSpot Elite
One important thing not clear from this article - when testing HDR, which connection was used (DP or HDMI)? I suspect there may be a difference.


There's some dark magic going on around that one, because DP 1.4 doesn't support half of it. I suspect someone cheated there somewhere. We will know when the first real reviews start coming in from buyers.

Now let's hope to see a similar-specced productivity 32" monitor, one that hopefully won't cost an arm and a leg, like ASUS PA32UCG-K, which costs around $5,000.
There is no black magic there, just Display Stream Compression. According to VESA, it gives a 3.75:1 compression rate for 10-bit HDR, so if DP 1.4 can do 1440p200 10-bit without it, it should easily do 2x1440p240 10-bit (which is 2.4x data) with it.
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,485   +2,123
The fact this costs $2500 despite the fact it's still fundamentally LCD based shows how broken the display market really is. The fact you can get the top-tier OLED for over a grand less shows how PC gamers have been getting bent over for literally decades now.

top tier OLED for $1500 bucks?

What model and size?
 

gamerk2

Posts: 628   +546
top tier OLED for $1500 bucks?

What model and size?
Pretty much any mainline LG TVs @ 55". The CX is going for $1400 right now, and the 55" C1 is going right at $1500 with the 48" at $1300.

So yeah, top OLED TV's are going for $1500.

OLED monitors are just as overpriced; 21" models go for $3000+. The display market as a whole knows they can get a 2x+ markup becuase people are willing to pay that much for miniscule increases in performance; that's why many of us are flocking to the 48" CX/C1 models that offer better performance at half the cost.
 

BadThad

Posts: 755   +855
Good luck keeping your fps high at that resolution! For gaming, ideally, you want your fps AND refresh as high as possible and, if possible, sync'd. While this monitor provides some nice eye candy at $2500 I can certainly think of lot of things I'd rather have.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,867   +2,222
TechSpot Elite
At that price, they can keep it. I'll take an Oculus Rift, Samsung HMD Odyssey+, HTC VIVE Pro or Pimax Vision 8K X instead. For gaming, I'd rather have a VR headset than a display panel. Especially considering that the most expensive VR headsets are a fraction of this price.
 
Last edited:

3volv3d

Posts: 415   +215
Pretty much any mainline LG TVs @ 55". The CX is going for $1400 right now, and the 55" C1 is going right at $1500 with the 48" at $1300.

So yeah, top OLED TV's are going for $1500.

OLED monitors are just as overpriced; 21" models go for $3000+. The display market as a whole knows they can get a 2x+ markup becuase people are willing to pay that much for miniscule increases in performance; that's why many of us are flocking to the 48" CX/C1 models that offer better performance at half the cost.

I told my step son get the c1 48, but it's £1299 I think. He opted for the CX 55" for £1099.
Muppet. He asked what's the best for ps5.
Clearly the one I picked.
If you're paying for a CX, tech is not exactly ps5 par.
And the 48" is the sweet spot for input lag.
I have a c9 55" and I get pwnd on FPS like cod. Switch to my 34" lg and I'm so much better at camping. Lol.
Highly recommend if it's for a console get the c1 48. If in UK only get it from John Lewis or richer sounds. That 5 or 6 year guarantee is going to get you an upgrade within them years. Admittedly I had the b6 55" and had intermittent issues from 6 months in.

I would love to have this monitor too though. Looks noice!
 

gamerk2

Posts: 628   +546
I told my step son get the c1 48, but it's £1299 I think. He opted for the CX 55" for £1099.
Muppet. He asked what's the best for ps5.
Clearly the one I picked.
If you're paying for a CX, tech is not exactly ps5 par.
And the 48" is the sweet spot for input lag.
I have a c9 55" and I get pwnd on FPS like cod. Switch to my 34" lg and I'm so much better at camping. Lol.
Highly recommend if it's for a console get the c1 48. If in UK only get it from John Lewis or richer sounds. That 5 or 6 year guarantee is going to get you an upgrade within them years. Admittedly I had the b6 55" and had intermittent issues from 6 months in.

I would love to have this monitor too though. Looks noice!
The C1 and CX series are more or less functionally equivalent as far as gaming features go.
 

Pastuch

Posts: 103   +94
42 inch lg oled comes out in the next few months. That thing takes a dump all over this curved nonsense. I had a curved Samsung VA for a year, hated it.

Ultrawides are ridiculous, too many strategy games don't support them.
 

Watzupken

Posts: 390   +365
42 inch lg oled comes out in the next few months. That thing takes a dump all over this curved nonsense. I had a curved Samsung VA for a year, hated it.

Ultrawides are ridiculous, too many strategy games don't support them.
Taking the price aside, I feel the form factor is good for productivity (since it can easily replace 2x 27 inch monitors) and even for multimedia usage. For gaming, I feel 21:9 is probably the max one should go.
 

Watzupken

Posts: 390   +365
The fact this costs $2500 despite the fact it's still fundamentally LCD based shows how broken the display market really is. The fact you can get the top-tier OLED for over a grand less shows how PC gamers have been getting bent over for literally decades now.
I don't disagree. But I feel this is probably cheaper than getting an extremely overpriced Asus Mini LED monitor. I am contemplating getting this when it gets cheaper next year because it can replace my 2 work monitors. OLED TVs are cheaper for sure, but they are too tall and wide at the same time since the smallest I've seen is 48 inch so far. I do look forward to see cheaper Mini LED or OLED monitors.
 

gamerk2

Posts: 628   +546
I don't disagree. But I feel this is probably cheaper than getting an extremely overpriced Asus Mini LED monitor. I am contemplating getting this when it gets cheaper next year because it can replace my 2 work monitors. OLED TVs are cheaper for sure, but they are too tall and wide at the same time since the smallest I've seen is 48 inch so far. I do look forward to see cheaper Mini LED or OLED monitors.
Here's the thing: OLED monitors exist, and those are just as overpriced. Because "monitors" these days results in a 250% markup.
 

Markoni35

Posts: 1,318   +534
If they continue like this, the next version will look like a full cylinder. It'll need to have a door, so you can enter and sit behind it. I mean, inside of it. At least it will have realistic surround sound.
 

DonquixoteIII

Posts: 101   +58
The warranty will be interesting... When I pay this much for a monitor I expect a good 6+ years and a warranty for about half that. I am not accusing Samsung of planning for obsolescence, but isn't it just convenient that as soon as the warranty expired on my CF791 the backlight grid started showing through the screen? Buyer beware... The more costly, the more to be aware.

Then there is the actual gaming bits... How many games are made for a 5120 width? I have had to jump through a few hoops to make some games work with my CF791. (It is a 34" 3440 x 1440 screen) and can just imagine what more I'd have to go through. First thing I would do before committing this kind of money on a GAMING ONLY monitor (this is never going to be a creator's tool, too tight of a radius for accuracy) is to check out your present library of games you can't live without and then check out what has to be done to play them in 5120 x 1440. Lastly, don't forget to measure your available space.

The one good thing out of this article, for me, was all the graphs with "LG G1" at the top of the stack...
 

Biostud

Posts: 66   +23
I paid $1350 for the G9, and wouldn't pay close to the double for better HDR. But given the current market all "true" HDR monitors are in the +$2000 range, so it fits well into the market. (not taking the OLED TVs into account)

Also I would wait for a firmware update to fix HDR before contemplating buying it.
 
I have a Samsung C49RG90. 2 models previous to this one.

I am looking to upgrade for the increased curvature and increased refresh rate.
I was waiting to see how this neo version HDR turned out. I'm not sure if I'll get this over the G9.


I also plan to get a 48/50" TV whether it's a oled or Samsung QN90A or similar.

I think that's definitely the best of both worlds for first who can afford it. A curved ultrawide like this for gaming, then a solid TV like LG C1 fit movies etc.

I love the Samsung C49RG90 I have. It's so bright and so wide. It's honestly one the best monitors I've ever had. I really do love it. I haven't had a single problem with in the year and half I've owned it. Not a single dead/stuck pixel.

Great review, thank you.
 
As expected this review agrees with the HWU review and pretty much the entire Reddit Ultrawide community in that HDR on it is a total SS. I hope Techspot reported this to Samsung as currently a lot of people either aren't buying this at all or are getting it, being grossly disappointed, then returning it. I've called and chatted with Samsung and they said the monitor is perfect and they have heard of no issues (literally, no joke!). I love my Note 10 but Samsung support is the worst.
 
I actually have this monitor, I can confirm that HDR does not work correctly, monitor has a mind of its own, it does not remember settings, even youtube HDR vids look crap, Come on Samsung sort your selves out, One very disgruntled Neo G9 owner....
 

Junglist724

Posts: 16   +8
One important thing not clear from this article - when testing HDR, which connection was used (DP or HDMI)? I suspect there may be a difference.


There's some dark magic going on around that one, because DP 1.4 doesn't support half of it. I suspect someone cheated there somewhere. We will know when the first real reviews start coming in from buyers.

Now let's hope to see a similar-specced productivity 32" monitor, one that hopefully won't cost an arm and a leg, like ASUS PA32UCG-K, which costs around $5,000.
DSC stands for display stream compression...