• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

LG G6 ?

J

jarablue

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 31, 2003
Messages
1,662
You guys think the LG G6 TV will be the best PC gaming display that's coming out this year? I wanted to get it but didn't know if you guys had any opinions on it.
 
1770610934362.png
 
Last year G5 was imho mediocre TV at best. Bright and a bit better gamut than before but had regression in viewing angles and worse near-black overdrive artifacts with that last thing being total deal breaker to me.
If WOLED doesn't match perfect viewing angles and zero artificing (also things like gradation which is notoriously an issue on WOLED panels) then it isn't a consideration for me. Otherwise I prefer non-polarized displays but at least for that I could treat it as compromise to QD-OLED's susceptibility to pick up more ambient light - about the only benefit from having WOLED over QD-OLED but also not that important.
 
Personally the viewing angle thing doesn't bother me, especially for PC use as I'd be 3.5' away directly in front of it (55" 16:9) where it would be near the 60 to 50 degree human central viewing angle, without pushing the screen out into your periphery (not pushing the screen into the area where side screens would be tilted toward you so that their pixels remain on axis to you).

screen.optimal.viewing.angle_flat.screens_near-and-far_1.png


. . .

VRR flicker will hopefully be reduced as multiframgen grants higher effective frame rates, where vrr's rollercoaster of frame rates beneath the Hz that the gamma is pinned at is what is causing the flicker. On a 120hz to 165hz screen, that would mean having a post MFgen rate that is at the top end of that in fpsHz.

. .

The G5 , and probably the G6, are neck and neck with samsung's flagships in real world usage, and unlike all samsung's 2025+ OLEDs and LCDs now that have abraded/etched screen treatments, the LG is glossy. (y) So the samsungs are out of the running for me entirely.



. .

The potential problem and concern I had about the G5, probably the G6, and some of the other recent LG OLED gaming tvs for PC use is that there are reportedly more pronounced dithering lines when viewed near. I have an eye for detail so that could be a deal-breaker at 3.5 foot viewing distance.


. . .

Lg G5 dithering lines


Here below are a few examples people posted from their G5 gaming tvs. It's more obvious viewing these images in a decent sized window rather than for example, on a phone. The videos are close-ups to show what it is doing. The question is, how far away it is noticeable to someone with an eye for detail (v.s various screen sizes, for my purposes, a 55" G5 at 3.5 feet viewing distance, screen surface to eyeballs).

That is a PC usage scenario. Most people viewing a G5 from typical living room view distances would be viewing them from farther than my 55" 4k at 3.5 foot scenario or the referenced in some threads distance of 3 to 5 feet visibility of the dithering lines.
Click to expand...

*that's a leather jacket, not a denim jacket. Her hair, face, and neck, etc. also looks especially bad.


View: https://imgur.com/yJKsrOB

. . .


View: https://imgur.com/jYQCqIv

. . .
 
elvn said:
Personally the viewing angle thing doesn't bother me, especially for PC use as I'd be 3.5' away directly in front of it (55" 16:9) where it would be near the 60 to 50 degree human central viewing angle, without pushing the screen out into your periphery (not pushing the screen into the area where side screens would be tilted toward you so that their pixels remain on axis to you).

View attachment 785630

. . .

VRR flicker will hopefully be reduced as multiframgen grants higher effective frame rates, where vrr's rollercoaster of frame rates beneath the Hz that the gamma is pinned at is what is causing the flicker. On a 120hz to 165hz screen, that would mean having a post MFgen rate that is at the top end of that in fpsHz.

. .

The G5 , and probably the G6, are neck and neck with samsung's flagships in real world usage, and unlike all samsung's 2025+ OLEDs and LCDs now that have abraded/etched screen treatments, the LG is glossy. (y) So the samsungs are out of the running for me entirely.



. .

The potential problem and concern I had about the G5, probably the G6, and some of the other recent LG OLED gaming tvs for PC use is that there are reportedly more pronounced dithering lines when viewed near. I have an eye for detail so that could be a deal-breaker at 3.5 foot viewing distance.


. . .

Lg G5 dithering lines




*that's a leather jacket, not a denim jacket. Her hair, face, and neck, etc. also looks especially bad.


View: https://imgur.com/yJKsrOB

. . .


View: https://imgur.com/jYQCqIv

. . .
Click to expand...


I'm thinking that unless LG removes the white subpixel, they will always have some issues with near black. The upcoming RGB stripe monitor coming out from Asus should confirm whether or not removing the white subpixel from WOLED resolves all the near black problems, BUT even if it does, I highly doubt LG would be willing to remove it from their TV lineup as that would mean sacrificing a huge amount of brightness capability and they would lose their competitive edge against QD-OLED. So the way I see it you pretty much have no choice but to bite the bullet and either get a matte QD-OLED, or a glossy WOLED with it's near black problems. If you're waiting for an upgrade that has neither matte or near black issues then I'm afraid you're out of luck and will be waiting until past 2030.
 
MistaSparkul said:
I'm thinking that unless LG removes the white subpixel, they will always have some issues with near black. The upcoming RGB stripe monitor coming out from Asus should confirm whether or not removing the white subpixel from WOLED resolves all the near black problems, BUT even if it does, I highly doubt LG would be willing to remove it from their TV lineup as that would mean sacrificing a huge amount of brightness capability and they would lose their competitive edge against QD-OLED. So the way I see it you pretty much have no choice but to bite the bullet and either get a matte QD-OLED, or a glossy WOLED with it's near black problems. If you're waiting for an upgrade that has neither matte or near black issues then I'm afraid you're out of luck and will be waiting until past 2030.
Click to expand...

Yep. I'll get a glossy LG eventually. Too bad the 45gx950a is matte, and using some weird hdr lift curve for high brightness mode as well. Samsung can keep their matte abraded screens in their LCD and OLED gaming tvs, too.
 
Last edited:
Seems that the G6 (gee-six) has some sort of abraded/etched surface matte.

=====================================================

This is a google result about the G5 (gee-five) AG coating:

----------------------------------------------

The LG G5 OLED TV features an advanced anti-reflection coating that
significantly reduces glare, making it effective for bright rooms while maintaining high-contrast, deep black levels. While it handles light dispersion well, some user reports indicate that direct, bright light sources can still produce a slight purple hue in dark scenes or become visible, though it maintains superior contrast compared to some competitors.

Anti-Glare and Contrast Performance:
  • Reflection Handling: The G5 uses a specialized, often described as "glare-free," coating that minimizes direct reflections, dispersing light rather than causing sharp, mirror-like reflections.
  • Dark Room Contrast: In dark rooms, the G5 excels, providing near-infinite contrast and inky black levels, even with its anti-reflection coating.
  • Reflections in Dark Scenes: While the screen is excellent at suppressing reflections, some users have noted that in very dark, cinematic scenes, a subtle purple hue or faint reflection of the room might still be visible if a direct light source is present.
  • Comparison to Competitors: The LG G5's coating is designed to maintain high contrast, unlike some other "glare-free" screens that may appear washed out or raise black levels.
In summary, the LG G5 provides excellent anti-reflective performance without heavily sacrificing the deep contrast required for high-quality dark room viewing.

--------------------------------------------------

This is a result about the LG G6 (gee-six) AG coating :

. .

Yes, the 2026 LG G6 evo OLED TV (G Series) features advanced anti-glare technology designed to minimize reflections
, marketed as "Reflection Free Premium". It is specifically engineered to improve performance in lit rooms while maintaining deep black levels.
Here is how the anti-glare affects contrast in dark rooms based on reports:
  • Dark Room Performance: Because the G6 uses self-emissive OLED pixels and a new polarizer, it maintains "perfect blacks" even with the anti-reflection coating, making it excellent for dark room viewing.
  • Minimal Impact on Contrast: The "Reflection Free" coating is designed to handle bright environments without the significant, noticeable loss of contrast or raised black levels that can occur with some matte screen coatings.
  • Reduced Reflections: The coating reduces screen reflectance to below 0.5%, which is a significant improvement in reducing ambient light glare.
  • Improved Brightness: Combined with the 20% brighter Tandem OLED panel (Brightness Booster Ultra), the screen handles bright, ambient light well without sacrificing the picture quality in dark scenarios.
In summary, the anti-glare on the G6 is highly effective at reducing reflections without destroying the deep blacks and high contrast that OLEDs are known for in dark rooms.

---------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...

=========================================================

.

If you read between the lines, they both sacrifice some contrast as a trade-off for the "coating" - by whatever application, the abraded outer screen surface - but some people have deemed just how much that is as "insignificant" to you. No mention of if it makes blacks look flat, makes solid bright fields of color look granulated, film noise or ambient light filters in games (often green or yellow) fog, etc. look much more noisy - which matte screens usually do. I'd have to see one I guess, but between that and potentially seing the diagonal dithering lines from 3.5 foot viewing distance, it's not sounding like a smart choice for the price point to me, personally.

Also worth noting that some of the sub-65" sized models in various gaming TV lines lack the full features and specs of the larger models. I think that applies to the LG C (see) series in regard to tandem stack in 2026, but it's also true of a lot of sub 65" or sub 55" FALD LCD gaming TV models' specs, too.

For example, Rtings on the different S90F specs between models:

We bought and tested the 65-inch Samsung S90F (QD-OLED, QN65S90FAFXZA), and these results are also valid for the 55-inch and 77-inch models that use QD-OLED (FXZA) panels. In North America, the 42-inch, 48-inch, and 83-inch models use a WOLED panel (EXZA) instead. Our results don't apply to any WOLED version of the TV.

Internationally, most model sizes use a WOLED panel, but typically at least one size uses a QD-OLED panel, which can be identified by the last four digits of the long model code in your particular region; if the fourth last digit of the model code is an 'E,' the TV very likely uses a WOLED panel. For example, in the UK the 65-inch model ends with TXXU, so you should end up with a QD-OLED panel if you buy that size.

The TV is also sold with a slightly different model code at warehouse stores like Costco and Sam’s Club, with a longer warranty.

SizeUS ModelCostco ModelShort Model CodeDisplay Technology (North America)Maximum Refresh Rate
42"QN42S90FAEXZA-QN42S90FWOLED144Hz
48"QN48S90FAEXZA-QN48S90FWOLED144Hz
55"QN55S90FAFXZAQN55S90FDFXZAQN55S90FQD-OLED144Hz
65"QN65S90FAFXZAQN65S90FDFXZAQN65S90FQD-OLED144Hz
77"QN77S90FAFXZAQN77S90FDFXZAQN77S90FQD-OLED144Hz
83"QN83S90FAEXZAQN83S90FDEXZAQN83S90FWOLED144Hz
Click to expand...

I feel like the manufacturers are serving bright windowed living room users and not home theater, reference HDR environment, and (PC) gaming TV users anymore in most of their product lines in the last few years, between the AG coatings and the fact that some manufacturers don't sell 42" to 48" tvs in the usa anymore. The one standout probably being the samsung S90F in 2025 which is glossy, but who knows whether samsung will ever make another glossy gaming TV or a glossy large format monitor/UW.

I think ASUS mentioned making some sucessor to the "BFG" though, so maybe there is some hope there for a good, fairly high hz large format glossy gaming screen (at asus price point though I'm sure). Edit: I think that turned out to be some 1080p XR glasses or something, I forgot about that.

.
 
Last edited:
I'm leaning towards the Samsung S95f solution a bit more lately, I figure that while it is matte, in my dark room it should not actually be that bad (a perfectly useless coating still, but whatever...). My understanding is that matte issues mostly rear their heads when light hits the screen, though I'm sure I could see it with a white background too, and text, but since I'd have to push it further than my 48" CX and that my eyes aren't that good.... maybe?!

But then the latter argument can also apply to the LG dithering crap, so whelp!

I just wish Samsung didn't do a WOLED/QD-OLED panel lottery (especially severe outside the USA) on models below the s95f cos that's absolute BS and I'd have instantly bought a glossy QD-OLED from a slightly older gen (and accepted the lower peak brightness) if I could.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
kalston said:
I'm leaning towards the Samsung S95f solution a bit more lately, I figure that while it is matte, in my dark room it should not actually be that bad (a perfectly useless coating still, but whatever...). My understanding is that matte issues mostly rear their heads when light hits the screen, though I'm sure I could see it with a white background too, and text, but since I'd have to push it further than my 48" CX and that my eyes aren't that good.... maybe?!

But then the latter argument can also apply to the LG dithering crap, so whelp!

I just wish Samsung didn't do a WOLED/QD-OLED panel lottery (especially severe outside the USA) on models below the s95f cos that's absolute BS and I'd have instantly bought a glossy QD-OLED from a slightly older gen (and accepted the lower peak brightness) if I could.
Click to expand...

Good luck. I thought I might be able to do ok with the matte on the 45" gx950a in a controlled media/gaming environment - but the overall presentation / PQ of that screen was a downgrade. I get it though, not many glossy options the last few years. Really sucks. I don't want to drop $1k + on something just because they refuse to provide a glossy option though. vote with my wallet , even if it's a drop in the ocean.

.
Edit: I could get a glossy 55" samsung S90F, which is a QD-OLED panel, for $ 1080 usd after discount, + $100 tax, but meh. The size would be a stretch, even with my gap between desk to gaming tv setup, and it's last years tech yet still not far from this year's pricing tiers for a lot of screen upgrades. The 55" G5 is currently $1475 + tax at BB, and may drop a bit once the G6 is out. Still salty over the 45gx950a PQ. The format was really great otherwise.
.
 
Last edited:
It's a huge hassle for me, but I could get the Samsung s95f in my local area and return it if I don't like it. We will see if I gather up the courage this year, I don't even have a car anymore (not needed for my day to day life) so while deliveries at home are fine of course, returning huge products is not fun (and possibly not doable on my own).

I'm also not happy with 55 over 48 to be honest, I would have to rearrange things in the room :D But I did measurements and it is doable at least, though it is sad to make the room smaller, due to having to push the desk further away from the wall with such size.
 
These two articles from TFTC highlights two issues with WOLED that QD OLED does not suffer from which is the gamma shifting being tied to refresh rate and grey banding.

https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/d...esting-oled-shadow-detail#Conclusion-and-TLDR

https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/e...anufacturing-quality-control-and-improvements

IMO, getting a WOLED and dealing with these issues all for the sake of avoiding a matte screen makes absolutely no sense to me. You would be avoiding a small problem (some don't even consider the matte to be a problem at all btw) by living with two bigger problems instead.
 
I have seen the same thing as them (with a small sample size though, haha) and I do love how my QD-OLED monitor looks.

The only downside (potentially) is the VRR flicker is a bit different on QD-OLED (they have another article on that: https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/exploring-and-testing-oled-vrr-flicker ), and can happen at any refresh rate - you really want to find a realistic and stable framerate cap (and don't shy away from frame gen if you are targeting a high refresh rate number). I would not expect to have to worry about that on a 120-165hz panel though, that's a pretty easy number to hit nowadays. But on my 360hz panel? Yeah I can get flicker easily.

But since there is no gamma shift, you can actually play at VRR 60fps on QD-OLED with perfect colours and zero flicker if the frametimes are stable. That is not possible on WOLED with VRR, dark games look terrible at 60fps.
 
MistaSparkul said:
These two articles from TFTC highlights two issues with WOLED that QD OLED does not suffer from which is the gamma shifting being tied to refresh rate and grey banding.

https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/d...esting-oled-shadow-detail#Conclusion-and-TLDR

https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/e...anufacturing-quality-control-and-improvements

IMO, getting a WOLED and dealing with these issues all for the sake of avoiding a matte screen makes absolutely no sense to me. You would be avoiding a small problem (some don't even consider the matte to be a problem at all btw) by living with two bigger problems instead.
Click to expand...



Matte is a big downgrade in PQ, at least on the screens I've seen in the past, and most recently the gx950a OLED.I had for a few weeks. It's there constantly on bright uniform fields of color making them look granulated. It makes anything with film grain in movies or environmental lighting in games and fogs, etc. look way more noisy than it should, annoyingly so. It also made blacks look flat, more like dry paper printed image or flat paint, which is a huge downgrade to me. No lush, "wet" OLED color and blacks.

I can't say on the others until I see them, but if it's abraded, it's likely the same etched/abraded surface cons that I don't want to see, especially on oled and viewing up close. Maybe I'll be shocked and they'll look just as good as glossy, but I suspect not.

I have two glossy WOLEDs,48" and 77".. a glossy tablet and phone. To each their own, but I don't like 1.5 years of product offerings being abraded only and with no end in sight.

I'll check them out in the store at some point, but if anything like the gx950a then they can keep their surface abrasions - because that screen looked like I described above. I ran several games for days on it, and viewed a lot of high detail, high color + contrast images and art. I have two glossy oleds that I was comparing the same content on. The AG effects, as described above, were ugly to me. I'll probably just wait it out or go glossy LG... though the G6 has some kind of AG, too, in addition to potentially seeing diagonal dithering lines up close like you may in the G5, and the other issues (noisy hdr10 for one thing according to avs forum thread posts lately).

Overall, the product offerings across the board have been a turnoff. I'd rather just not buy anything than drop $1.3 - 2.3k on forced compromises like those, including AG on most flagships now. I don't like "this is all we're offering, so just keep buyin despite" . I know there are always compromises by tech/model differences but all of the factors I find most egregious in 2025+ ~> 2026, both screwups and intentional things like from manufacturers, go beyond that I think, to my sensibilities.

=========================================

kalston said:
I have seen the same thing as them (with a small sample size though, haha) and I do love how my QD-OLED monitor looks.

The only downside (potentially) is the VRR flicker is a bit different on QD-OLED (they have another article on that: https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/exploring-and-testing-oled-vrr-flicker ), and can happen at any refresh rate - you really want to find a realistic and stable framerate cap (and don't shy away from frame gen if you are targeting a high refresh rate number). I would not expect to have to worry about that on a 120-165hz panel though, that's a pretty easy number to hit nowadays. But on my 360hz panel? Yeah I can get flicker easily.

But since there is no gamma shift, you can actually play at VRR 60fps on QD-OLED with perfect colours and zero flicker if the frametimes are stable. That is not possible on WOLED with VRR, dark games look terrible at 60fps.
Click to expand...


not interested in 60fps personally. Maybe mfgen could keep the frame rate up near the peak Hz that the gamma is pinned at, though, on a 4k display - depending on the gpu, game, and settings.

. .

If it's another year (2027) of AG-only and/or my OLED dies, then I may have no choice I suppose, but hopefully gaming tvs will get tandem stack phosophorescent blue oled and hit 4k 240Hz.. and maybe some other larger format uw will hit eventually. The only other option I can see is a 55" S90F, but at ~ $1200 out of pocket, idk if its advanced enough compared to 2026 - 2027 gaming tvs. Maybe it will drop more at some point before it goes OOS forever, though.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Matte is a big downgrade in PQ, at least on the screens I've seen in the past, and most recently the gx950a OLED.I had for a few weeks. It's there constantly on bright uniform fields of color making them look granulated. It makes anything with film grain in movies or environmental lighting in games and fogs, etc. look way more noisy than it should, annoyingly so. It also made blacks look flat, more like dry paper printed image or flat paint, which is a huge downgrade to me. No lush, "wet" OLED color and blacks.
Click to expand...

Not a bigger downgrade than WOLED problems IMO.
 
I'm not interested in 60 fps either :D But those who use a console or have no way to use frame gen might be interested though.

But nowadays yeah I have frame gen if needed and never play at less max refresh on my 120hz CX.
 
I used to have an LG C2 OLED and it was so awesome I miss selling it. Once I get another desktop PC again I'm definitely going to go the G Series route. Seems like a good display for PC gaming but really not much has changed from a C2 in desktop PC enjoyment in my opinion
 
Grainy look on matte displays is a hallucination. Not real phenomena.

People hallucinate a lot of nonsense related to matte vs glossy. I have good eyesight and to me except diffused glare vs sharp reflections (which are imho much more distracting) everything looks the same and this include the same grain. There is literally no difference.
 
Delusion can go in either direction. People claim to "not see" a lot of problems in displays, or "can't see" benefits of modern features, etc.

.
 
RTings on S95F:

-----------------------------------------

"Black levels are significantly raised in a bright room."

. .

"It's not perfect, though, and a few of Samsung's design decisions, like the Slim One Connect box and the matte anti-glare screen finish, are just as controversial in 2025 as they were when they were first introduced."

. .

"Unfortunately, the matte screen coating comes with some significant downsides, as this TV does a poor job of displaying deep blacks in a bright room. Since it reduces reflections by scattering light across the screen, blacks look increasingly gray as your room becomes brighter."

---------------------------------------------------


. .



It works by scattering light via abrasions on the outer surface of the screen, but that works both ways, creating a film granulated surface above a clear lush screen output That can make blacks look flat, can make solid fields of bright color have granulated look, and can make film noise and ambient light filters in games look way more noisy than they should.

I'll reserve judgements on the S95F and G5, G6 until I see them, which will be in a bright showroom but I'll try to shade them a little on a quadrant if I can or hit the store near close and see what the staff can do for me (maybe a carboard box sheet held over it or something , lol).

I suspect in order to be effective at scattering light into ghost blobs instead of pristine reflections, their matte will still have the above effect on content. It probably has to in order to be effective at making reflections into diffused ghost light blobs. However, I can't say for sure how bad they are until I see them. I can say the gx950a OLED picture quality suffered the above cons (along with some hdr and brightness tech implementation/limitations, hdr curve , etc. issues), and the AG look was not "the same" as a glossy OLED--- at all.

. .
 
Raised blacks in a bright room has nothing to do with the matte coating, that is just QD OLED in general, even the non matte S90F has the same problem. Maybe matte makes it worst but it's a moot point regardless because QD OLEDs are unusable in a bright room anyway so you should only be using them in a dark room in which the matte coating no longer has the problem of "scattering light via abrasion". Some youtuber already peeled the matte film off his S95D and said the image quality improvements are so minor that it wasn't even worth it and he wouldn't do it again. This whole matte thing is the most overblown issue that even the most diehard enthusiasts over on AVSForums have become either total converts or simply ended up not giving a shit about the matte in the end.
 
I'm also not trying to say that glossy isn't better than matte btw, it still is. What I am saying is that the difference between glossy and these newest matte coatings is very minor and not worth being deal breakers anymore. I compared my matte PG32UCDP to my glossy CX and yeah sure if you REALLY scrutinize the two displays then you can definitely tell there is some haze on the matte that isn't there on the glossy, but at that point you are just doing image analysis and not simply enjoying your games anymore.
 
I'll have to check it or them (S95F + G5, or the 2026 models) out eventually. Like I said though, if the effect is that of the gx950a's AG, it would be a big downgrade imo and would always bother me. That screen also had some other picture quality limitations though, so it was doubling down.

.

MistaSparkul said:
Raised blacks in a bright room has nothing to do with the matte coating,
Click to expand...


According to RTings, the ag is a factor in making the screen look more grey as the lighting level of the room increases, on the S95F.

""Unfortunately, the matte screen coating comes with some significant downsides, as this TV does a poor job of displaying deep blacks in a bright room. Since it reduces reflections by scattering light across the screen, blacks look increasingly gray as your room becomes brighter.""

Which sounds stereotypical of matte abraded screen "sheen" / granulation effects. Like I said, I can't say that it's as bad as the gx950a without seeing one though, and in medium and dim ambient light settings.

. .
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
I'll have to check it or them (S95F + G5, or the 2026 models) out eventually. Like I said though, if the effect is that of the gx950a's AG, it would be a big downgrade imo and would always bother me. That screen also had some other picture quality limitations though, so it was doubling down.

.




According to RTings, the ag is a factor in making the screen look more grey as the lighting level of the room increases, on the S95F.

""Unfortunately, the matte screen coating comes with some significant downsides, as this TV does a poor job of displaying deep blacks in a bright room. Since it reduces reflections by scattering light across the screen, blacks look increasingly gray as your room becomes brighter.""

Which sounds stereotypical of matte abraded screen "sheen" / granulation effects. Like I said, I can't say that it's as bad as the gx950a without seeing one though, and in medium and dim ambient light settings.

. .
Click to expand...

Read what I said afterwards. If it does make it worst than glossy then it's still a moot point anyway, you shouldn't be using QD OLED in a bright room to start with.
 
I gave my son my 48cx and I got a 45GX950A. I hate it, the coating is terrible. Picture is no where near as good as my CX. Everything just looks mute. Blacks are not the inky deep im use to. So now I'm trying to figure out if I should go get the C5 for 800 bucks right now or wait for the C6 in a month or so. 48 inch is the max I can do with my desk. Its about 36 inches deep and fixed to the wall. Saw the Samsung is doing a coating on the screen also , so thats a no go on the new one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
Glossy coating on OLEDs is the same tech they used on LCDs to make them appear to have deeper black.
Matte coating is the same matte they use on professional monitors where you have to clearly see dark details.
Switching from one to the other can be a bit jarring.

When I got my matte WOLED I had used matte IPS for literal decade+ and on LG panels no less (since in the past it was very high end panel it had the same coating pretty much) so this aspect wasn't jarring at all and black level seemed like an improvement. Only issue I had with WOLED is too much blue light but that is another less relevant can on worms and even this is something I could in the end get used to when I stopped obsessing about it and just let my eyes adjust. These days I don't really see any issues regarding that as my brain automatically switches how it looks at any display and they all look virtually the same.

There is a lot of user "being used to" to given look of display which can make any sudden changes jarring and especially if something in some way better changes to worse.
Here I am not saying so much glossy is better than matte but in some aspects glossy is more forgiving. On the other hand if you used matte for a long time you might be more bothered by reflections - which is something you need to get used to also.

Makeroflostsouls said:
I gave my son my 48cx and I got a 45GX950A. I hate it, the coating is terrible. Picture is no where near as good as my CX. Everything just looks mute. Blacks are not the inky deep im use to. So now I'm trying to figure out if I should go get the C5 for 800 bucks right now or wait for the C6 in a month or so. 48 inch is the max I can do with my desk. Its about 36 inches deep and fixed to the wall. Saw the Samsung is doing a coating on the screen also , so thats a no go on the new one.
Click to expand...
TBH you should get glossy QD-OLED instead.
Just not necessarily the current models as this year they will have models with RGB subpixels and even darker screens picking less light. These will wipe the floor with anything you can buy today and especially for desktop/text use.
Currently on newest panels WOLED has subpixel advantage using RGWB subpixels vs triangular RGB on QD-OLED. This year from what I gathered Samsung goes normal RGB (the best) as is LG but LG will drop W subpixel - which should in my view make these displays much better but one side effect apparently is dropped maximum luminance so less bright HDR - in this case some of the advantages and some issues W subpixel causes will be gone. Hard to say which will be truly better and it also depends on use case but I would say QD-OLED.
 
XoR_ said:
Glossy coating on OLEDs is the same tech they used on LCDs to make them appear to have deeper black.
Matte coating is the same matte they use on professional monitors where you have to clearly see dark details.
Switching from one to the other can be a bit jarring.

When I got my matte WOLED I had used matte IPS for literal decade+ and on LG panels no less (since in the past it was very high end panel it had the same coating pretty much) so this aspect wasn't jarring at all and black level seemed like an improvement. Only issue I had with WOLED is too much blue light but that is another less relevant can on worms and even this is something I could in the end get used to when I stopped obsessing about it and just let my eyes adjust. These days I don't really see any issues regarding that as my brain automatically switches how it looks at any display and they all look virtually the same.

There is a lot of user "being used to" to given look of display which can make any sudden changes jarring and especially if something in some way better changes to worse.
Here I am not saying so much glossy is better than matte but in some aspects glossy is more forgiving. On the other hand if you used matte for a long time you might be more bothered by reflections - which is something you need to get used to also.


TBH you should get glossy QD-OLED instead.
Just not necessarily the current models as this year they will have models with RGB subpixels and even darker screens picking less light. These will wipe the floor with anything you can buy today and especially for desktop/text use.
Currently on newest panels WOLED has subpixel advantage using RGWB subpixels vs triangular RGB on QD-OLED. This year from what I gathered Samsung goes normal RGB (the best) as is LG but LG will drop W subpixel - which should in my view make these displays much better but one side effect apparently is dropped maximum luminance so less bright HDR - in this case some of the advantages and some issues W subpixel causes will be gone. Hard to say which will be truly better and it also depends on use case but I would say QD-OLED.
Click to expand...
Bad thing is all the good pannel tech is going to be in the 55inch and above. I'm just not sure if I can do a 55inch on my desk. Mounted flush to the wall I would be like 44 inches eye's to screen distance. Desk is a little over 36 inches deep. Also..... And to minimize distractions across bright and dark rooms, proprietary Samsung Glare Free technology is applied to the S95H and S90H models, reducing reflections without compromising OLED picture quality. So they are putting the damn coating on both..
 
Last edited:
You could get a 55" S90F since it's glossy, even if it's specs aren't quite 2026 screen's incrementally advanced specs. I've considered it. Maybe if the price drops a bit more before they go OOS (new) forever.

The main problems for my scenario are:

- Most large format OLED gaming tvs have matte now, especially samsung's.
- Most of the more advanced OLED gaming displays Hz wise, and which may be glossy, are monitors and which are smaller 27" with some 32".

- General cons/screwups in newer display's PQ that are supposed to be better than previous ones.

.. the 55"+ size thing is annoying, but I could probably swing a 55, max at my setup with the screen mounted separately like my 48" cx is. The PPD would be a little less though, even at my max distance.
. .

In the past it seemed like some of the advancements in the smaller screens eventually came to the larger gaming tvs, but where those gaming tvs had higher peak brightness / HDR color volume and detail. So maybe it's a matter of time. The 2026 marketing+spec rollout has been disappointing to me.

. .
 
2025 models are a massive upgrade over 2024 models (Specifically for the LG G series and Samsung S95 series), it was highly doubtful that 2026 would provide the same leap again.
 
Makeroflostsouls said:
Bad thing is all the good pannel tech is going to be in the 55inch and above. I'm just not sure if I can do a 55inch on my desk. Mounted flush to the wall I would be like 44 inches eye's to screen distance. Desk is a little over 36 inches deep. Also..... And to minimize distractions across bright and dark rooms, proprietary Samsung Glare Free technology is applied to the S95H and S90H models, reducing reflections without compromising OLED picture quality. So they are putting the damn coating on both..
Click to expand...
55 inch at 44 inches is a bit much to imagine for my standards using unscaled 27 inch 4K monitor from larger distance at >50 inch and often I would want to lean back but desk is not deep enough.

Issues with current panels:
Tandem WOLED - worse viewing angles. At such distance it will be noticeable. Nothing bad like LCDs had but still.
Also not sure they have better RGWB subpixel layout on big panels. I mean CX didn't work with clear type either but would be better to have this issue solved when upgrading.

QD-OLED also had bad supixel layout for text. Doesn't clash with ClearType so much but in this case if its ClearType or grayscale rendering text will be a bit fuzzy. WOLEDs at least work ok with grayscale font rendering - which is a downgrade but not that big.
Viewing angles on QD-OLED are perfect and you don't have polarization and great uniformity.
QD-OLED as is I would recommend for smaller monitors. This year they will come in proper RGB subpixel layout - but no idea if they will use that in their TVs. If they do then glossy QD-OLED might be option.
Too close but maybe you can move desk away from the TV?

Maybe go with something like you got but glossy QD-OLED?
Though I would say to wait for RGB subpixels and not rush it. If that is used for desktop it makes zero sense to have bad subpixels. Especially since this year Samsung will also improve coating to pick up less light.
 
I went and bought a LG 48 C5 last night lol.. 850 bucks. I can't really tell a difference in it and my CX honestly. It's so much better then the 45gx950a-b. I'll just keep this till they start putting the better tech in the smaller models. There is now way I can do a 55 inch.
 
MistaSparkul said:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SyirT_ZiFQ

This guy is the biggest hater of matte coatings and yet even he says the QD OLED matte coatings are useable and that LG's latest coatings are trash.
Click to expand...


yeah I watched that right after it came out. Glad you linked it for everyone. He said it wouldn't be a constant bother on the samsung so would be usable to him, but that glossy was still better. He did say LG's matte made his eyes vomit. :ROFLMAO:

.
 
Makeroflostsouls said:
I went and bought a LG 48 C5 last night lol.. 850 bucks. I can't really tell a difference in it and my CX honestly. It's so much better then the 45gx950a-b. I'll just keep this till they start putting the better tech in the smaller models. There is now way I can do a 55 inch.
Click to expand...

With you 100% about the 45gx950 if you read any of my replies about it, so I always upvote your comments on it when I see them.

The 45" 5120x2160 800R format was perfect, which makes it even more disappointing that the PQ was such a downgrade.

.

I also agree with you that they just aren't hitting with the releases and all the cons/bugs in the end result picture quality on a lot of what's available. There are also some considerable advancements due out in the next year or two (pixel structure wise, phosphorescent blue oled, tandem stack in more displays, maybe some fixes or amelioration for some of the known display issues in current models, etc). I'll probably wait to see if the 55" S90F drops in price a bit more before it winks out of existence (new), and just wait it out a year or two until someone offers something I really want instead of begrudgingly "going with" something for well over $1k. I think the matte 55" samsung s95F is around $2000 (+ tax) at the moment.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
With you 100% about the 45gx950 if you read any of my replies about it, so I always upvote your comments on it when I see them.

The 45" 5120x2160 800R format was perfect, which makes it even more disappointing that the PQ was such a downgrade.

.

I also agree with you that they just aren't hitting with the releases and all the cons/bugs in the end result picture quality on a lot of what's available. There are also some considerable advancements due out in the next year or two (pixel structure wise, phosphorescent blue oled, tandem stack in more displays, maybe some fixes or amelioration for some of the known display issues in current models, etc). I'll probably wait to see if the 55" S90F drops in price a bit more before it winks out of existence (new), and just wait it out a year or two until someone offers something I really want instead of begrudgingly "going with" something for well over $1k. I think the matte 55" samsung s95F is around $2000 (+ tax) at the moment.
Click to expand...

You have some insane patience to wait it out so long for a proper upgrade and that deserves respect. Don't look at one of the flagship sets in person though since it might just change your mind about waiting lol. No Rest For The Wicked is an absolute blast on a high end HDR screen.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2706.jpeg
    IMG_2706.jpeg
    359.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
I upgraded my whole rig outside of the screen, and a decent peripheral upgrade, and some networking stuff, room, desk accessories/cable managment, etc. .. overall at decent expense.

The 48cx still looks pretty nice. Deep, lush, glossy oled blacks, no matte noise on things, and while it's nowhere near modern hdr color volume, the difference between sdr and a proper HDR or renodDX mod applied HDR game is still pretty drastic and very enjoyable.

And I did try to jump into a new screen with the 45gx950a. I really wish the 45gx950 was more like a 45" 5120x2160 800R version of this 48cx or C series, but with higher hdr color volume, but that wasn't the case. The matte was bad, and their peak HDR brightness mode was a lift/stretch of some perversion. Each of those alone was a downgrade, but their HDR presentation combined with that LG matte made it a deeper downgrade in PQ, despite the dimensional format being practically perfect. I'm definitely happier with my 48CX than that screen.

I'll keep an eye on the 55" S90F price. I don't know if I could suffer the matte on the newer ones, plus that would be over $2k out of pocket for one that will just hold me over for a year or two until something I really want comes out. I'll have to rearrange my screens a bit to get a more definite idea of how a 55" (S90F I'm eyeballing atm) may or may not work out.


This is the Rtings side by side of S95F (left) and S90F (right), in game mode running HDR with static tone mapping/hgig, ( and not taking any screen abrasion effects into consideration in general ). They both seem pretty nice, especially going by the "Real Scenes" . . but the S95f 50% window especially, and the 100% window, are notably higher as a standout. (for over $1000 more , + matte, to my sensibilities)

firefox_EabxzPPUWo.png


.
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
I upgraded my whole rig outside of the screen, and a decent peripheral upgrade, and some networking stuff, room, desk accessories/cable managment, etc. .. overall at decent expense.

The 48cx still looks pretty nice. Deep, lush, glossy oled blacks, no matte noise on things, and while it's nowhere near modern hdr color volume, the difference between sdr and a proper HDR or renodDX mod applied HDR game is still pretty drastic and very enjoyable.

And I did try to jump into a new screen with the 45gx950a. I really wish the 45gx950 was more like a 45" 5120x2160 800R version of this 48cx or C series, but with higher hdr color volume, but that wasn't the case. The matte was bad, and their peak HDR brightness mode was a lift/stretch of some perversion. Each of those alone was a downgrade, but their HDR presentation combined with that LG matte made it a deeper downgrade in PQ, despite the dimensional format being practically perfect. I'm definitely happier with my 48CX than that screen.

I'll keep an eye on the 55" S90F price. I don't know if I could suffer the matte on the newer ones, plus that would be over $2k out of pocket for one that will just hold me over for a year or two until something I really want comes out. I'll have to rearrange my screens a bit to get a more definite idea of how a 55" (S90F I'm eyeballing atm) may or may not work out.


This is the Rtings side by side of S95F (left) and S90F (right), in game mode running HDR with static tone mapping/hgig, ( and not taking any screen abrasion effects into consideration in general ). They both seem pretty nice, especially going by the "Real Scenes" . . but the S95f 50% window especially, and the 100% window, are notably higher as a standout. (for over $1000 more , + matte, to my sensibilities)

View attachment 787252

.
Click to expand...

Is the price difference really over $1000 nowadays? The main reason why I chose the S95F over the S90F was because the price difference between the two was very little, it was $2100 for the S95F while the S90F was $1800 at the time of my purchase I believe so a measely $300 price difference. For a $1000 savings I would easily go with the S90F, not only is it glossy but it can also do 4k 144Hz without DSC while the S95F has to resort to DSC for anything above 4k 120Hz so that's a small bonus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: elvn
like this
For me, out of pocket, after qualifying discount, it's currently :

$1076 (after tax) .... S90F 55"

vs.

$1958 (after tax) .... S95F 55"


I think the S90F might drop a tiny bit more though. Holding for now while I figure things out.

.
 
Makeroflostsouls said:
I went and bought a LG 48 C5 last night lol.. 850 bucks. I can't really tell a difference in it and my CX honestly.
Click to expand...
Either the CX is one of the GOAT TVs, or the improvements in the C-series are helluva disappointing over the past 5 years. Could be both.

I'm still rocking the CX 48" as my rather small living room's TV for gaming/media. I just find very little incentive to upgrade even to the G5 when it's main improvements are just higher HDR brightness and marginally higher refresh rate. With many modern games struggling to push 120 fps on my 4090, it would do very little for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top