From improvements in the efficiency of OLED materials to software developments and new testing techniques, OLED burn-in risk has been lowered. OLED monitors are generally a more sound investment than ever—at least for the right person.
From improvements in the efficiency of OLED materials to software developments and new testing techniques, OLED burn-in risk has been lowered. OLED monitors are generally a more sound investment than ever—at least for the right person.
I have a budget Samsung 55" NU7400 and I can’t see shit while playing a PS5 game with HDR during the day. I need to close the blackout curtains otherwise I see my face reflected.
Next TV I buy I will do some research and spend a bit more money, 120Hz, more nits, VRR, etc.
NU7400 has a peak of 337 nits and that’s with the poorer contrast ratio of LCD. My LG C1 is 780 nits. I still find it a bit weak with the lights on so I can’t imagine 330 on LCD.
Yeah, HDR is meant to be watched in a 5-nit environment, but sometimes that’s just not reasonable. While my LG is technically better, bright TV shows like Rings of Power are more enjoyable with the 1500 nits my TCL can output. Once that ABL (Automatic Brightness Limiter) kicks in for the OLED, you absolutely need the blackout curtains.
One thing that I also noticed is that my monitor (which has i think 350 nits / LG 27GL850-B) it is much easier and clear to see at direct sunlight because of the anti-glare screen.
But I doubt that antiglare/matte displays is a thing you find on TVs.
Thanks for the hints. So that means that in a bright room, a TV with 1500+ nits is ideal for HDR right?
But even with a 1500 nits TV, HDR will be still much better in a dark room? (Where OLED shines?).