Poor guy probably has psoriasis.I thought that guy is all dress up for Halloween or clown car driver
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Poor guy probably has psoriasis.I thought that guy is all dress up for Halloween or clown car driver
I have to ask, what 45" C2, did you mean 48"?I ordered the 42" C2 since the 45" Price tag is bananas, and $899 - 10% amazon card credit is an enticing price
I have to ask, what 45" C2, did you mean 48"?
I meant this one here: https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-45gr95qe-b (not a c2)
"45" WQHD (3440 x 1440) 21:9 Curved (800R) OLED Display"
Oh lord. 1440p on 45" and 800R. Kill it with fire
I am fine with it, my eyes are getting old . I have to use my glasses with the C2 42" now at about 24-32", scaling is at 125%
You probably want it about eye level 2/3rds up depending how close you sit.Just ordered one of these, and wondering if the stock stand will be good enough. My only concern is it will be sitting pretty low - top of the panel will be slightly above eye level for me. Anyone w/ the stock stand happy with how low it sits? I know ergonomics theory is to have the top of a monitor at about eye level, but I'm not sure it applies to such large screens.
Depends on your desk height. I cut 2 pieces of 2x4 to the exact length of the stand and painted them black. Adds a little over an inch and a half height which was perfect for meJust ordered one of these, and wondering if the stock stand will be good enough. My only concern is it will be sitting pretty low - top of the panel will be slightly above eye level for me. Anyone w/ the stock stand happy with how low it sits? I know ergonomics theory is to have the top of a monitor at about eye level, but I'm not sure it applies to such large screens.
I saw someone's reply recently in thread saying they got a set of glasses with a prescription specifically for their desk setup and display which seems to work out better for them. I use my regular daily driver glasses and have no prob with 60PPD - 80 PPD at default text sizes but considering the amount of time I'm at my desk I wouldn't be opposed to doing a specific prescription pair for my setup. My laptop is 16" so around 15.5" at 2560x1600. That's around 64 PPD at 18" and a little higher if nearer and I use it at 100% scaling. I'm farsighted so I need glasses for seeing nearer. Pointing out the laptop because I can see over 60PPD at default text sizes at 18" or nearer as well as my 48" cx at 38 - 40".
The point in my previous reply was that I feel the criticism of 1440p 45" is warranted but that a 42" 4k at 24" view distance is comparable to a 1500p screen's density and more fringed PQ - and if upscaling text/interface then in the desktop real-estate aspect as well, but at the near distance the viewing angle additionally making more of the sides of the screen off axis creating a larger "eye fatigue zone" and color shift gradient zone on each side. Sitting at the radius or focal point of a curved screen and the whole screen surface would be equidistant from you and not off-axis. So it's not as simple to compare that 45" 1440p (negatively) to 4k PQ and real estate imo unless you are using the full PQ a 4k screen is capable of. Otherwise it's more like 1400p with uniform viewing angles vs 1500p with off axis viewing problems.
Realistically, I only ever use my monitor sitting Infront of it, and I prefer curved, even with the 42" at 3 feet away I feel like the edges are bent outwards (I know they're not) but my eyes are picky now that they have been spoiled with a curved display. I would probably be happy with the 42" in a curved format, but that is $2500+ now. I get the PPD issue, and while I would prefer higher PPD I am just not seeing anything yet that fits what I am looking for better than that 45" (apart from cost, which will come down eventually)
I feel like the edges are bent outwards (I know they're not) but my eyes are picky now that they have been spoiled with a curved display.
. . .
They are definitely off axis which isn't optimal and it also makes uniformity issues a larger area and more obvious on VA and OLED screens. The edges of the screen are off axis as much as if you were viewing the screen from an equivalent distance outside of it.
View attachment 530230
Made even larger when sitting at sub-optimal nearer view distances. Larger the nearer you sit, as the degrees of area beyond the middle 50 to 60 degrees grows since your viewing angle is larger in degrees. It's also a larger area outside of your viewpoint so results in a lot more eye darting and to larger distances ~ larger "eye fatigue zone".
View attachment 530243
With curved screens, at least when sitting at the R value distance (e.g. 1000R = 1000mm= ~ 39.5" view distance), you'll be equidistant from every point on the screen surface with them angled directly at you like the focal point of a lens.
View attachment 530239
View attachment 530235
View attachment 530234
While true, this comes with the downsides of also requiring a specific optimized distance that if you don't meet means a far greater image area will look incorrect (distorted and likely suffering greatly from "off axis" viewing). If "bendable" displays existed in the consumer market and you could control the curve as you note in the various "R curve" chart, then viewing distances could be interchangeable. A flat display will never have these problems.. . .
They are definitely off axis which isn't optimal and it also makes uniformity issues a larger area and more obvious on VA and OLED screens. The edges of the screen are off axis as much as if you were viewing the screen from an equivalent distance outside of it.
View attachment 530230
Made even larger when sitting at sub-optimal nearer view distances. Larger the nearer you sit, as the degrees of area beyond the middle 50 to 60 degrees grows since your viewing angle is larger in degrees. It's also a larger area outside of your viewpoint so results in a lot more eye darting and to larger distances ~ larger "eye fatigue zone".
View attachment 530243
With curved screens, at least when sitting at the R value distance (e.g. 1000R = 1000mm= ~ 39.5" view distance), you'll be equidistant from every point on the screen surface with them angled directly at you like the focal point of a lens.
View attachment 530239
View attachment 530235
View attachment 530234
While true, this comes with the downsides of also requiring a specific optimized distance that if you don't meet means a far greater image area will look incorrect (distorted and likely suffering greatly from "off axis" viewing). If "bendable" displays existed in the consumer market and you could control the curve as you note in the various "R curve" chart, then viewing distances could be interchangeable. A flat display will never have these problems.
And this is of course not discussing any of the other obvious problems such as things like straight lines for those of us that work in visual mediums and not just "gaming" or "productivity". Given the tradeoffs and the fact that I edit photo and video, I doubt I'll ever move to a curved display other than if I have the disposable income for a "gaming only" display. And even then, because the distance has to be so controlled, I'd have to be VERY convinced that the size, curve, and distance, were all optimal before pulling the trigger (not to mention other important specs like refresh rate, display tech, etc).
the downsides of also requiring a specific optimized distance
There’s a new review at TFTCentral for the KTC G42P5, a new 42” OLED which looks decent
https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/ktc-g42p5-oled
They’ve got a comparison video too comparing it to the LG and Asus models
Think it’s covered on the site too. A quite well known manufacturer from China, but they’re expanding outside of that region now to US and Europe. Seems a decent screen tbhWho on earth is KTC?
The technology wing of KFC of course!Who on earth is KTC?
so it's really a generic brand. It's like saying is AOC a brand? nothing but the cheapest quality components out there.Think it’s covered on the site too. A quite well known manufacturer from China, but they’re expanding outside of that region now to US and Europe. Seems a decent screen tbh
Edit: this gives background and round up of their display range https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/i...national-expansion-and-gaming-monitor-line-up
Well it doesn’t seem so if you look at the products on offer. Their 42” OLED seems pretty decent, robustly built, metal enclosure, decent stand etc. not cheap and tacky reallyso it's really a generic brand. It's like saying is AOC a brand? nothing but the cheapest quality components out there.
I need at least 10 yr. of track record for me to consider buying a given brand, this brand just pop out of a rock
Fair or not, a substantial number of Americans will not buy a brand that is entirely Chinese. Especially if that brand is not well known outside of China. For the record I am not one of those.If you read the article then you should know that the brand didn't just "pop out of a rock" but has been around since 1995. They are just barely starting to expand into different markets that's all.
very true. and all new brands start somewhere. i mean we've seen Gigabyte, Corsair, Asrock and Cooler Master all release monitors in recent years and none of them were in this space until recently. Even "big" monitor brands like Asus and Acer haven;t been around that long relative to Dell, Samsung, LG and the likesPeople used to buy Yamakasi Catleaps and not complain.
They were Korean not Chinese. Korean products have a better reputation than Chinese ones.People used to buy Yamakasi Catleaps and not complain.
Those were originally considerably cheaper than their brand name counterparts and used the same panels, just lower graded.People used to buy Yamakasi Catleaps and not complain.
They were Korean not Chinese. Korean products have a better reputation than Chinese ones.
No to 120FPS reliably at 4K. Some titles yes. All titles no. But it’ll be good enough with the VRR that you won’t have any issues with that setup. I have a very similar setup and some of my games run 70-80FPS at 4K with maxed out settings and DLSS set to quality.Would my system in sig handle playing games @ 4k 120hz?
- i9 13900k
- Z790 motherboard
- 32GB DDR5-5600mhz
- RTX-3080
I mostly play World of Warcraft, done Halo Infinite, might get New World MMO and for sure will play Diablo IV
No to 120FPS reliably at 4K. Some titles yes. All titles no. But it’ll be good enough with the VRR that you won’t have any issues with that setup. I have a very similar setup and some of my games run 70-80FPS at 4K with maxed out settings and DLSS set to quality.
For true 120FPS at 4K you need a 4090
For less demanding games like WoW and possibly Diablo IV, you should be fine for 4K120. For more demanding titles, not a chance. If you're willing to run DLSS or FSR on some newer titles, you will be fine.Would my system in sig handle playing games @ 4k 120hz?
- i9 13900k
- Z790 motherboard
- 32GB DDR5-5600mhz
- RTX-3080
I mostly play World of Warcraft, done Halo Infinite, might get New World MMO and for sure will play Diablo IV
Yes thank you. I was referring to the whole quality of the Yamakasi Catleap monitors - even the max refresh rate wasn't guaranteed, while coming from the same region as the LG panels. Well, originated from, given the location of the company headquarters. Many would just brake within months of use. Mine for example went from 106hz max down to 101hz max, if I remember correctly now, within a year or smth... And so, people from US wouldn't mind that at all.I don't think he's referring to that. Pretty sure he's referring to the complaints about uniformity on the LG C2 and then mentioning how people bought Catleaps which used lower grade IPS panels that were rejected by Apple and never complained about such issues. And both LG and Yamakasi are Korean so this has nothing to do with Korean vs Chinese products.
No to 120FPS reliably at 4K. Some titles yes. All titles no. But it’ll be good enough with the VRR that you won’t have any issues with that setup. I have a very similar setup and some of my games run 70-80FPS at 4K with maxed out settings and DLSS set to quality.
For true 120FPS at 4K you need a 4090
Yeah a 4080 is minimum to play at 4k ultra settings in newer games, I just refuse to pay the $1200+ tax price on that thing.
I'll just stick with my 38" Ultrawide for now
The viewable height on a 48" 16:9 in 21:10 uw rez of 3840x1600 ends up having about a 17.5" tall viewable screen resolution.
A 42" 16:9 is around 36.7" wide so maybe 36" viewable width (not diagonal). At 21:9 it would be ~ 15.5 inch viewable height and ~39.x " diagonal. .
so at 21:10 a 42" diagonal 16:9 screen in 3840x1600 uw resolution might be more like ~ 39.5" uw diagonal with a ~ 16" tall viewable.
The black bars on oleds are the emitters off entirely so it's ultra/"infinite" black and down the pixel display area wise so no glow/dim halos on the edges. If you put some black soundproofing tiles or tapestry behind there (don't let tapestries hang so low that they are over electric plugs and power units though) - then you'd be black on black. Also just in general if you are viewing in dim to dark theater like viewing conditions for HDR, the ambient lighting would be quite dark. You won't really be noticing the inf black bars and you'd be getting a much larger uw viewable screen compared to some of the shorter height models. Even viewing material with ultra black oled bars and not taking any other steps with the area behind the screen - it's not a big deal on OLEDS imo, for example on a big OLED tv in a living room running a movie with some letterboxing. Also you can swap back to 4k 16:9 for videos and certain games that might benefit from 16:9 more like rts overhead maps and maybe some platformers and other overhead games.
For true 120FPS at 4K you need a 4090
Korean made, such as Samsung has higher than failure than stuff made in Taiwan. I had 2 x Samsung 30", they failed 5 times in 2 yr. under warranty. Especially Samsung, their hard drive, their cellular phone, never buy anything from them againThey were Korean not Chinese. Korean products have a better reputation than Chinese ones.