Samsung reveals the 49-inch Odyssey Neo G9: Mini LED and 2,000 nits for $2,499

midian182

Posts: 7,068   +62
Staff member
What just happened? Samsung has announced the successor to its 49-inch Odyssey G9 gaming monitor: the Odyssey Neo G9. As previously rumored, the next Odyssey features a Mini LED backlit panel and can hit an amazing 2,000 nits of brightness.

The Odyssey G9 is one of our favorite monitors, earning a score of 90 in our December review, where we praised its 5120 x 1440 resolution, 240Hz refresh rate, and good color performance for a VA panel.

The Odyssey Neo G9 follow-up shares some of its predecessor's specs—49 inches, 5120 x 1440 resolution (32:9), 240Hz refresh rate, 1ms (GtG) response time, 1000R curvature—but it also offers some significant improvements.

The main change is the addition of Samsung's Quantum Mini LED technology. The OLED-like tech is finding its way into more TVs, monitors, and laptops and is one of the big selling points of the latest iPad Pro 12.9-inch. The Odyssey Neo G9 also increases the local dimming zones to 2,048 from the G9's ten and supports HDR 10 Plus.

"The Odyssey Neo G9 utilizes the same Mini LED technology built into Samsung's latest Neo QLED lineup," writes Samsung. "This next-generation display technology is enabled by a new light source, Quantum Mini LED. At 1/40 the height of a conventional LED,1 the Quantum Mini LED has incredibly thin micro layers filled with many more LEDs."

Another enticing feature is the monitor's peak brightness of 2,000 nits, which should make HDR content look fantastic and let users play in even the brightest of rooms without worrying about glare. A previous report claimed the Odyssey Neo G9 would be VESA DisplayHDR2000 certified, but VESA later said such a thing doesn't exist, at least not yet.

Elsewhere, there's a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio, one Display Port 1.4, two HDMI 2.1, two USB 3.0 ports, a headphone jack, and support for AMD FreeSync Premium Pro and variable refresh rate (VRR). There's also the CoreSync feature that can sync the monitor’s rear-facing light with the on-screen action.

As you might imagine, the Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 is not a cheap monitor. At $2,499, it's almost $1,000 more than the previous model. Preorders start on Thursday, July 29, with global shipping set for August 9.

Permalink to story.

 

Kosmoz

Posts: 376   +679
This is why we need over 2x performance with the next gen GPUs, because the 3090/80 Ti and RX 6900 XT are a (bad) joke for these screens...

What is and will be an even worse joke is the price... of both these screens and GPUs.
 

dangh

Posts: 254   +319
Great screen, I might buy it on a small discount. The last only feature I'd love to see is a proper OLED and would get it on a spot, but minileds are quite good already.
 

VitalyT

Posts: 5,835   +5,890
This is likely the best and the last great monitor to buy these days, and here's why...

Cards like 3080Ti and 3090 are sufficient to run it at its full potential (desregard the BS from the first comment. For example, Battlefield V and Doom Eternal can sustain 180fps at that resolution with 3080Ti). And at the same time, it is likely to be the last such monitor that still relies on DisplayPort 1.4a, because the ones to follow up toward the end of this year will likely feature DisplayPort 2.0, which will require updated video cards also.

So, if you do own 3080Ti or 3090, this monitor does make perfect sense.
 
Last edited:

Geralt

Posts: 559   +780
This is why we need over 2x performance with the next gen GPUs, because the 3090/80 Ti and RX 6900 XT are a (bad) joke for these screens...

What is and will be an even worse joke is the price... of both these screens and GPUs.
If they can at 4K, why not at this extended 1440?
 

mountains

Posts: 36   +54
I have been slow motion monitor shopping for years. This is an interesting, obviously overpriced, early adopter item to see where the market is going. Thoughts:

-No G-Sync?

-Since its Samsung I suppose that means no Dolby Vision. Maybe not a big deal in a PC gaming monitor...?

-Yeah, as VitalyT points out, still no DisplayPort 2.0.

-CoreSync: From the linked "official" statement, "futuristic rear infinity core lighting system, which includes 52 colors and five lighting effect options. The monitor also comes with the CoreSync feature, allowing users to personalize their setup with the multiple color mode, for world-blending immersion." Rear facing RGB lighting as a concept has interested me for a while after seeing it in action, but the marketer-speak to call 52 colors "infinity" made me chuckle. But don't get me wrong, this could be a good feature.

-I would want 4K, and perhaps not curved, though I have not seen a really good monitor IRL with curve yet. Maybe a little smaller as I envision wall mounting it and having a 27" 1080p mounted in portrait mode next to it.

-Still, to avoid being only negative and overly toxic, some of the specs are really good. Mini LED sounds promising. That is a lot of dimming zones. Two HDMI 2.1's is good. The 2000 nits is impressive, maybe even unhealthy.

Still waiting. Getting closer.
 

Kosmoz

Posts: 376   +679
Cards like 3080Ti and 3090 are sufficient to run it at its full potential (desregard the BS from the first comment.
Nothing about what I said is BS, you're just one of those people used to not think/see more than 2m in front of you. No analysis, no predictions, no thoughts about the future. In your defense, there are a lot like you...

Explanation below:

REASON 1.
Do you buy a $1200-$2500 GPU that works OK in some games at 4k, but in others it doesn't, today? Or do you buy it only for 6 months? Do you not think that paying that kind of money should apply to all games in 4k Ultra + RT for at least 2 years from now on?

But how about those games today? 3090/3080 Ti and RX 6900 XT fail at 4k Ultra (+RT optional, based on the game) in these games already:
- CP 77 = they get between 30-40-ish fps
- AC:V = barely get an average of 60fps, with dips below that
- AC:Odyssey = same as above just add +5 fps
- Control = between 40-55fps
"Run it at full potential", really?

There are a few more in the range of 70fps average. And these are games, like I said, available today. I have zero pity for all the fools that threw away thousands of $$$ on these overpriced GPUs who will find out next year more games they can't get 60fps in 4k and even more games the year after that.

If cross gen games today make life hard for these expensive GPU bricks, imagine fully next gen ones (bigger worlds, higher density assets and textures, more particles, RT, etc) how they will make a mockery of them.... pfft.

I'll say it again: this is one of the biggest reasons why the next gen GPUs will have such a huge jump in performance (minimum 2x), not only because they can, but because they need it.

REASON 2.
This screen has 240Hz refresh rate, these most expensive and "most powerful" GPUs today barely get 60fps in some games, in how many games do they get 240fps? Hm? Do you buy this screen to barely play in 60fps?

I rest my case.

@Geralt : See my answer above. Extended 1440p = 4k. Same issues apply.