AOC Announces the AGON AG493UCX Monitor: 49" VA, 5120 x 1440, 120 Hz, 1ms, 32:9, FreeSync and DisplayHDR 400

[BorisDG]

Nowadays panels quality is so low. 80%+ are coming with some kind of pixel defects.

 

[kapone32]

My experience with two high-refresh AOC monitors (one Agon, one AOC) is that their black response times are utter garbage.

I returned both in disbelief, the second one, a CQ32G1 I though would be better based on an RTINGS review but it turns out they based their measurements on the 27" variant and had the cheek to simply copy and paste the 27" article for the 32" version with a completely different panel and completely different firmware behaviour.

Mid-year RTINGS updated their review for the 32" model and holy cow the performance is utterly inexcusable. How the hell can AOC call something a gaming monitor when it is a smeary blurry mess incapable of even attaining the 33ms response times for 30fps console-quality framerates? That 91.4ms translates to a maximum of 11Hz before smearing kicks in.

View attachment 179058

In short, I can't trust AOC to get it right. I know tuning a VA panel is a delicate balance but they managed to somehow make the transitions that VA is typically very good at awful, without fixing the 0-20% that it's always bad at, having some pretty bad overshoot halos in the process, all whilst having some of the jankiest firmware I've used in a while that forgets some settings between power cycles. Really important settings like UMLB or Freesync, too - Having to turn one of those on every damn boot was infuriating - and yet more evidence of a complete lack of actual testing and thought from AOC.

Sorry for the rant, but VA panels have such an enormous amount of variance depending on the manufacturer tuning the firmware and I feel that AOC's stunningly-poor firmware for two out of two gaming panels is something worth mentioning in this context.

Now that I think about it I remembering seeing an AOC 32 1440P panel from about 2 to 4 years ago in Canada Computers the price was very compelling at the time $339 I think but if you looked at it you would swear it was a TN panel even though it was VA.

 

[Valantar]

I'm still wondering where on earth the HDMI 2.1 UHD120/144 panels are at. It's a damn shame when the most sensible high end monitor purchase - by far! - is a TV.

 

[InVasMani]

Help me, OLED. You're my only hope.

 

[Chrispy_]

Help me, OLED. You're my only hope.

Your hope appears to have burn-in and faded blue subpixels

There's hope for inorganic LED but that's probably five years out.

 

[Valantar]

Your hope appears to have burn-in and faded blue subpixels

There's hope for inorganic LED but that's probably five years out.

At monitor sizes and densities? I'd be very surprised if we saw microLED TVs at remotely accessible sizes and prices in that time frame. Monitors, being much smaller and denser, would take a lot longer.

 

[Chrispy_]

At monitor sizes and densities? I'd be very surprised if we saw microLED TVs at remotely accessible sizes and prices in that time frame. Monitors, being much smaller and denser, would take a lot longer.

Large-Area MicroLED Display Startup Makes Gallium-Nitride Transistors Too

iBeam plans roll-to-roll microLED display manufacturing, bypassing large-screen production problems

spectrum.ieee.org

Like I said, probably 5 years out, but if they can get gallium nitride microleds bulk produced, roll-to-roll then we're looking at a tech better than OLED and similar price.
Certainly right now, OLED is flawed and the best hope we have currently is monocolour OLED using quantum dots to produce colours, specifically the blues that still die/dim early.

 

[InVasMani]

This feels like a ZIG ZIG ZIG all your base are belong to OLED slow burn...

 

[Valantar]

Large-Area MicroLED Display Startup Makes Gallium-Nitride Transistors Too

iBeam plans roll-to-roll microLED display manufacturing, bypassing large-screen production problems

spectrum.ieee.org

Like I said, probably 5 years out, but if they can get gallium nitride microleds bulk produced, roll-to-roll then we're looking at a tech better than OLED and similar price.
Certainly right now, OLED is flawed and the best hope we have currently is monocolour OLED using quantum dots to produce colours, specifically the blues that still die/dim early.

I don't know if we read the same article, but nothing there says we'll be seeing PC monitor size microLED displays within 5 years. The parts about scaling up the display tech to me makes me think of laptop and tablet display sizes, not high end monitor sizes. Given that Samsung has just announced a 110" 4k microLED TV, and the other expected products are smartwatch size displays, we're looking at a significant challenge either scaling up small-scale production tech or scaling down large-scale tech. Growing 24-32" displays on a single substrate doesn't sound very feasible, while tiled display tech for PC uses is much more challenging than large TV uses as you'll need insane precision when aligning whatever pieces the display is made out of. I have no doubt that Samsung can shrink their tech down to more normal TV sizes in a few years, but even if they hit 4k microLED 65" or 55" at high end TV prices (~$2-3000) in 2-3 years (which I think is very optimistic), that would still make for a 1080p 27-32" monitor, which I don't think anyone would want to pay that kind of price for (monitors don't have close to the economies of scale of TVs, so they inevitably cost a lot more per cm².

OLED is definitely flawed, but I think we'll have to live with the choice between IPS, VA or OLED with their respective pros and cons for a while yet.

(Of course blue subpixel dimming is much less of a problem given that most current OLEDs (at least LG's ones) are WOLED, with only white subpixels and a color filter in front.)

 

[Chrispy_]

I don't know if we read the same article, but nothing there says we'll be seeing PC monitor size microLED displays within 5 years. The parts about scaling up the display tech to me makes me think of laptop and tablet display sizes, not high end monitor sizes. Given that Samsung has just announced a 110" 4k microLED TV, and the other expected products are smartwatch size displays, we're looking at a significant challenge either scaling up small-scale production tech or scaling down large-scale tech. Growing 24-32" displays on a single substrate doesn't sound very feasible, while tiled display tech for PC uses is much more challenging than large TV uses as you'll need insane precision when aligning whatever pieces the display is made out of. I have no doubt that Samsung can shrink their tech down to more normal TV sizes in a few years, but even if they hit 4k microLED 65" or 55" at high end TV prices (~$2-3000) in 2-3 years (which I think is very optimistic), that would still make for a 1080p 27-32" monitor, which I don't think anyone would want to pay that kind of price for (monitors don't have close to the economies of scale of TVs, so they inevitably cost a lot more per cm².

OLED is definitely flawed, but I think we'll have to live with the choice between IPS, VA or OLED with their respective pros and cons for a while yet.

(Of course blue subpixel dimming is much less of a problem given that most current OLEDs (at least LG's ones) are WOLED, with only white subpixels and a color filter in front.)

The limitation on size is down to cost. If they can get these to the same cost as OLED, then it'll be commercially-viable to make them the same size as current OLED screens. If I read between the lines a bit, it looks like successful yields are down to mechanical accuracy rather than substrate and crystal purity so potentially it could be easier to make large panels without dead subpixels. They've already produced superconductors on a printable roll 'by the kilometre' so in theory with this tech it may be possible to print an InorganicLED screen on a huge flatbed printer - the large-format OCe printer our company uses (outsourced) can handle 600dpi on a bed that is meters by meters wide.

Five years is a complete guess based on roughly how long it has taken other display technologies to go from this PoC phase to commercial roll-out. It could be ready in under 3 years, it could be more than 10 or not at all! Educated guesses are still only guesses so the word "probably" cannot be omitted.

 

[Valantar]

The limitation on size is down to cost. If they can get these to the same cost as OLED, then it'll be commercially-viable to make them the same size as current OLED screens. If I read between the lines a bit, it looks like successful yields are down to mechanical accuracy rather than substrate and crystal purity so potentially it could be easier to make large panels without dead subpixels. They've already produced superconductors on a printable roll 'by the kilometre' so in theory with this tech it may be possible to print an InorganicLED screen on a huge flatbed printer - the large-format OCe printer our company uses (outsourced) can handle 600dpi on a bed that is meters by meters wide.

Five years is a complete guess based on roughly how long it has taken other display technologies to go from this PoC phase to commercial roll-out. It could be ready in under 3 years, it could be more than 10 or not at all! Educated guesses are still only guesses so the word "probably" cannot be omitted.

I get where you're coming from. I think five years could be reasonable in terms of getting reasonably sized TVs on the market, but I still don't see monitors like this getting out any time soon. We've been promised cheap, good inkjet-printed OLEDs for a decade now, after all, and the only OLED PC monitors out there (except for a few 15" laptops) are a 48" TV and a $2000 22" portable monitor, so ... yeah, that didn't happen. This might of course be down to monitor manufacturers recognizing just how poor a fit OLED is for PC usage (even with WOLED I can't help but think the taskbar and its icons would burn in within a year), so I guess there is hope for quicker adoption of a more suitable tech.

There's still the manufacturing issue though, and I don't think it's purely down to cost - aligning subpixel grids on a micrometer scale is bound to be extremely challenging. Growing them monolithically in monitor or TV sizes would likely massively increase the defect/error rate simply because of the increase in area (if you're making a narrow strip you're not wasting much material per defect, and can reasonably cut them out), and aligning multiple panels on a scale like this is inevitably going to look off for close-up viewing - aligning the panels perfectly enough to make them seem entirely uniform at ~75cm viewing distance is likely next to impossible. And seams stand out a lot more visually than the inherent inconsistencies of LCDs or OLEDs, of course. And of course placing the LEDs isn't the only challenge, as you also need power and control circuitry to align just as perfectly. They'll probably figure it out at some point, but I'm not holding my breath for that to happen at even remotely accessible prices in the next decade.

 

[MikeSnow]

Why does TechPowerUp insist on calling 1440p monitors 4K monitors? Just stop. It's not even mentioned as 4K in the original Chinese press release, because, newsflash, IT'S NOT A 4K MONITOR.

It's DQHD. Not 4K. DQHD. Not 4k. Say it with me. DQHD. Not 4K.

OK, it's not 4K. It's 3.5K. Are you happy now?

 

[Nater]

OK, it's not 4K. It's 3.5K. Are you happy now?

Now don't star that again!

 

[texas64]

Now don't star that again!

I'll keep it going.... I have (2) 28" 4K Samsung side-by-side, what resolution is that (ignore that it's 2 panels and not one! )

 

[Nater]

I'll keep it going.... I have (2) 28" 4K Samsung side-by-side, what resolution is that (ignore that it's 2 panels and not one! )

We're gonna call it "Dud". DUHD. Dual Ultra High Definition.