And the price, Asus-typical, 2 kidneys. No, just buy from LG, it's better to buy from the original vendor, and LG has good quality/prices. They are bringing 2 new good OLED gaming monitors and I bet they will be payable.

windwhirlI doubt even the ultra competitive guys at e-sports events or whatever can tell the difference between 240 Hz and anything substantially higher.

You are wrong. Just like people who says you can't see the difference btw 64 and 128 ticks servers. It has been debunked with blind tests and pros could tell the diff 100% of the time. Not 99% but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

I assume the monitor will do integer scaling instead of blurry filtering?

I actually like the way 1080p with integer scaling (feature in the NV Control Panel) looks on a 4K TV. Small text does look a bit pixelated, but the overall image looks great, especially if it's well anti-aliased (TAA/DLAA).
It would also be useful for older console games. I don't understand why integer scaling isn't available as an option in every monitor and TV on the market.

PapaTaipeiYou are wrong. Just like people who says you can't see the difference btw 64 and 128 ticks servers. It has been debunked with blind tests and pros could tell the diff 100% of the time. Not 99% but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

Care to share a source for that?

No 640p@960Hz mode?
No go.

THU31I assume the monitor will do integer scaling instead of blurry filtering?

I actually like the way 1080p with integer scaling (feature in the NV Control Panel) looks on a 4K TV. Small text does look a bit pixelated, but the overall image looks great, especially if it's well anti-aliased (TAA/DLAA).
It would also be useful for older console games. I don't understand why integer scaling isn't available as an option in every monitor and TV on the market.

I also prefer to run 1080p on a 4K monitor because windows DPI scaling is far from perfect and text in particular is too thin.

I honestly don't know why more people don't notice it, but 200% scaling in Windows fails to scale all aspects of the UI and fonts. All the 1-pixel lines in the UI halve in size, changing how the UI actually looks, both the text characters and drop shadows fail to scale their line-weights so you end up losing readability at distance, lose contrast of desktop icon labels against a photo background, and then - as a final sin - you have to suffer the blurry bilinear-filtered mess of non-integer scaling for any applications that don't support scaling.

Integer scaling fully fixes every single one of these issues, so I'll continue to use it until Windows' own inbuilt scaling isn't a dumpster-fire of inconsistencies with no tuning options to correct them.

PapaTaipeiYou are wrong. Just like people who says you can't see the difference btw 64 and 128 ticks servers. It has been debunked with blind tests and pros could tell the diff 100% of the time. Not 99% but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

64 and 128 ticks are believable - your interaction with a server is a two-way relay so even 128-tick servers have a minimum of a 1/64th second delay.

As for refresh rates, we are well into diminishing returns beyond 120Hz and as a 240Hz advocate I still struggle to tell the difference between 165Hz and 240Hz. Even on OLED where the pixels are fast enough to actually give you all 240 of those Hz, you'd need to be looking at two panels side by side with a contrived high-motion, high-contrast comparison.

Dirt ChipNo 640p@960Hz mode?
No go.

Honestly? 720p @ 960 Hz would be interesting. There would be enough bandwidth, so it's just a question of getting the panel to refresh that fast.
720p integer-scales perfectly to 4K.

I would definitely like to see it. 1000 Hz is supposedly the target for perfect motion clarity on digital displays without strobing. Maybe some kind of quad frame generation can get us there one day.

Chrispy_I also prefer to run 1080p on a 4K monitor because windows DPI scaling is far from perfect and text in particular is too thin.

I honestly don't know why more people don't notice it, but 200% scaling in Windows fails to scale all aspects of the UI and fonts. All the 1-pixel lines in the UI halve in size, changing how the UI actually looks, both the text characters and drop shadows fail to scale their line-weights so you end up losing readability at distance, lose contrast of desktop icon labels against a photo background, and then - as a final sin - you have to suffer the blurry bilinear-filtered mess of non-integer scaling for any applications that don't support scaling.

I'm on a TV, so I don't really have an issue with 200% DPI scaling, for the most part.
But indeed there are programs that don't scale well, usually older ones. Compatibility settings often help.
The most annoying thing is when some programs don't scale while they're open when I change the desktop resolution. Like when I switch from 4K to 1080p, some apps will be twice as big (Afterburner, NV Control Panel).

This is silly, not only is the difference between 240hz and 480hz hardly percetible, there's barely a handfull of games that will be able to make use of that refresh rate and only with top tier hardware (which I guess you have if you're buying into this).

Monitor ui's always suck to navigate through, If I wanted to hit the 240hz consistently I'd just set the game to 1080p with integer scalling and enjoy 1080p 240hz 100% of the time as at 4k that will be pretty unattainable.

This 480hz dual mode stuff is another marketing gimmick no one should really care about and we don't even know yet how it will be handled - the correct way would be to change the monitor EDID which would show a different display to the computer and allow you to set things accordingly, some of these monitors in the name of ease of use and/or compliance with hdmi/dp specs will use some kind of scaling that i don't see being a benefit at all.

Why complain about a 32" 1080p screen when you don't have to use fullscreen?

lolwowmage1080p at 32 inches…lol

Tbh, at 240Hz+, you wouldn't notice the missing details anyway...

OLED as PC monitor has too many shortcomings: Brightness, prone to burn-in, weird subpixel layout. But no, it's the refresh rate that manufacturers are focusing on, rather than fixing these problems.

silapakornOLED as PC monitor has too many shortcomings: Brightness, prone to burn-in, weird subpixel layout. But no, it's the refresh rate that manufacturers are focusing on, rather than fixing these problems.

Brightness and burn-in go hand in hand. For a monitor, you want 120 nits. OLED can easily do that without any danger of but in. Fwiw, TVs have 3 layers of defense against burn-in. It's not clear monitors carry the same measures, but I'm not sure why you seem to think nobody's bothering to fix burn-in.
Weird subpixel layout... I'm not sure why it's manufacturers' problem software is drain dead and can only handle RGB or BGR.

silapakornBrightness

Yesn't. Really depends on your environment. Brightly lit environments can be problematic.

silapakornprone to burn-in

This is pretty much a problem of the past for most new models, unless you really like leaving a static image on the monitor for thousands of hours non-stop. And if you're gaming, which is the primary use-case for this particular monitor, the only thing that could come close to that is in-game HUDs that remain static on the screen for hours on end, which is a concern if you only play a single game every time you make use of the display.
arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/11/why-oled-monitor-burn-in-isnt-a-huge-problem-anymore/
arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/03/staggering-nintendo-switch-oled-test-safe-from-burn-in-for-over-3000-hours/

Tho, there are some other cases where burn-in might happen more often:
arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/11/ultrawide-monitors-remind-us-theres-still-much-to-learn-about-oled-burn-in/

And some image retention issues aren't OLED-specific, but rather stem from the TFT-layer.
arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/10/not-burn-in-scary-oled-tv-image-retention-may-stem-from-buggy-feature/

silapakornit's the refresh rate that manufacturers are focusing on,

While I don't think the other stuff is super concerning, I do think the race to go as high as possible with the refresh rate is definitely stupid at this point. 240 Hz is enough for pretty much anyone alive.

windwhirlI doubt even the ultra competitive guys at e-sports events or whatever can tell the difference between 240 Hz and anything substantially higher.

You don't have to be a pro to see/feel it, especially in the case of an 540 Hz display.

SynthwaveYou don't have to be a pro to see/feel it, especially in the case of an 540 Hz display.

I have yet to see the source for that.

windwhirlI have yet to see the source for that.

I used to think like that until I convinced myself. I was running a 4K 60Hz panel and playing Division the Machine Gun would shake like crazy and made a scope unnecessary. I get a 120HZ 1440P panel and with the Machine gun can get head shots using the scope on the machine Gun. If your card can push the frames a high refresh monitor is a real experience. I can't speak to higher rates but it is hard to tell the difference between 120/144 and 165hz. Even though 165 does feel really smooth in just about everything.

kapone32I used to think like that until I convinced myself. I was running a 4K 60Hz panel and playing Division the Machine Gun would shake like crazy and made a scope unnecessary. I get a 120HZ 1440P panel and with the Machine gun can get head shots using the scope on the machine Gun. If your card can push the frames a high refresh monitor is a real experience. I can't speak to higher rates but it is hard to tell the difference between 120/144 and 165hz. Even though 165 does feel really smooth in just about everything.

Yeah, that I have no questions about. What I'm asking about is the exceedingly high refresh rate of 480 hz vs 240.

windwhirlYeah, that I have no questions about. What I'm asking about is the exceedingly high refresh rate of 480 hz vs 240.

I am sure at some point we will see a noticeable difference. I agree though it is kind of foolish to release a monitor that maybe 2 or 3 GPUs can handle in older Games.

windwhirlI have yet to see the source for that.

Two eyeballs in a skull.

SynthwaveTwo eyeballs in a skull.

An actual article. So far I'm seeing witty comments and no facts.

PapaTaipeiYou are wrong. Just like people who says you can't see the difference btw 64 and 128 ticks servers. It has been debunked with blind tests and pros could tell the diff 100% of the time. Not 99% but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

And still waiting for you to put up your facts with a proper source.

windwhirlAn actual article. So far I'm seeing witty comments and no facts.


And still waiting for you to put up your facts with a proper source.

I'm not your dog, going on Google you can find it in less than a minute.

PapaTaipeiI'm not your dog, going on Google you can find it in less than a minute.

The rules of a civilized conversation say the one making as assertion is the one that has to prove/defend it.
Otherwise, don't be surprised if people treat you like you've just said "Elvis is alive". (And yes, I can Google "Elvis is alive" and get a ton of hits.)

bugThe rules of a civilized conversation say the one making as assertion is the one that has to prove/defend it.
Otherwise, don't be surprised if people treat you like you've just said "Elvis is alive". (And yes, I can Google "Elvis is alive" and get a ton of hits.)

And no wonder why people tend to stay in the dark. Laziness. If I'm interested in something, I don't wait for others to do the work for me.

You should trust your own research, not others'; that's how you really learn.

SynthwaveAnd no wonder why people tend to stay in the dark. Laziness. If I'm interested in something, I don't wait for others to do the work for me.

You should trust your own research, not others'; that's how you really learn.

I didn't say the conversation ends when somebody making an assertion argues in its favor. Quite the contrary, it's where it starts. Without a shred of evidence, there is no conversation. It's a rant.
But thank you for showing us @PapaTaipei isn't the only one oblivious to the rules of a civilized conversation around here.

bugI didn't say the conversation ends when somebody making an assertion argues in its favor. Quite the contrary, it's where it starts. Without a shred of evidence, there is no conversation. It's a rant.
But thank you for showing us @PapaTaipei isn't the only one oblivious to the rules of a civilized conversation around here.

Is this some kind of a catchphrase of yours? It's time to put in some effort. I know the silver platter is way more comfortable, but not doing so won't make the stuff less good for anyone, who already did their homework.