LG Reveals Full Specifications and Pricing for the 4K UltraGear 32GS95UE-B OLED Monitor

[TheLostSwede]

Just before Christmas, LG unveiled the UltraGear 32GS95UE-B OLED gaming monitor with what the company is calling Dual-Hz, which allows for different refresh rates at different resolutions. In this case, 240 Hz at 4K and 480 Hz at 1080p. However, LG only provided basic specs and didn't reveal pricing back then, both of which now have been revealed. The 31.5-inch OLED panel used doesn't really stand out from the crowd with a typical brightness of 275 cd/m², a color depth of 1.07 billion colors (10-bit panel), a contrast ratio of 1.5 million to one a gray to gray response time of 0.03 ms and DisplayHDR True Black 400 certification.

As far as connectivity goes, some of you will be disappointed, as the 32GS95UE-B only sports DisplayPort 1.4 as well as HDMI 2.1. There isn't even a USB Type-C port on this monitor, instead a USB Type-B input and standard USB-A outputs, as well as a headphone output is all you get. LG has also kitted out the 32GS95UE-B with what the company called Pixel Sound speakers, i.e. the speakers are hidden behind the display panel. Both FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync compatibility is included, as well all the usual gaming features you'd expect. LG also includes a stand that supports tilt, height, swivel and pivot adjustments. In the US, the 32GS95UE-B comes with a two-year warranty, a US$1399.99 price tag and a mid-April shipping date.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Onasi]

Putting a number on a contrast of OLED seems a bit weird, but okay. The DP 1.4 is a complete non-issue, although a bit weird to see on a 1400 dollar monitor. Irrelevant in practice though. What's more egregious is the "FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync compatibility". Like, really? You could not have stuffed a GSync Ultimate module there for the price? Are we cutting costs on everything even in premium products now?

 

[Upgrayedd]

can it do 1440p 360Hz?

Putting a number on a contrast of OLED seems a bit weird, but okay. The DP 1.4 is a complete non-issue, although a bit weird to see on a 1400 dollar monitor. Irrelevant in practice though. What's more egregious is the "FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync compatibility". Like, really? You could not have stuffed a GSync Ultimate module there for the price? Are we cutting costs on everything even in premium products now?

So the thing about DP and LG is in that screen HDMI is faster. I have a really good feeling using HDMI with any recent high end LG will result in the display switching to 4K 120Hz when starting to play games. It's what happens to LGs when using HDMI. You have to use a 3rd party tool to delete TV resolutions from the displays HDMI metadata or else you will be constantly forced into 4K 120Hz whenever you start a game.

There's no good reason NOT to include DP 2.1 for a brand new $1K+ PC monitor in 2024 but also include the royalty demanding HDMI interface unless it's really meant for consoles.

 

[human_error]

Putting a number on a contrast of OLED seems a bit weird, but okay. The DP 1.4 is a complete non-issue, although a bit weird to see on a 1400 dollar monitor. Irrelevant in practice though. What's more egregious is the "FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync compatibility". Like, really? You could not have stuffed a GSync Ultimate module there for the price? Are we cutting costs on everything even in premium products now?

If they stuck a Gsync module there they couldn't advertise Freesync Premium Pro support, even if they unlocked the VESA VRR support in the module (AFAIK). A lot of extra cost to remove the ability to advertise directly to AMD users.

 

[Dammeron]

What's more egregious is the "FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync compatibility". Like, really? You could not have stuffed a GSync Ultimate module there for the price? Are we cutting costs on everything even in premium products now?

With G-sync Ultimate (that requires the in-build nV chip) You can't use HDMI 2.1 (only 2.0 is supported), also forget about using FreeSync, which means no advantage in some games that use it.

There is a reason why there are so few true g-sync displays on the market - rarely anyone buys them.

 

[jesdals]

Thats a rather thick monitor?

 

[sephiroth117]

Nice set of features and screen overall

Contrary to the others 4k/240hz we have been seeing, this one is an LG WOLED with MLA i think

1080p/480Hz will be maybe interesting for the professional esport world. By professional I mean the 0.1%, I don’t mean the bloke who thinks he will be ranked immortal in Valorant with that screen

A little too expensive compared to the AW and MSI qd-oled rival panel from Samsung tho

The matte layer also is, for me, a big cons too, a shame LG doesn’t offer semi-glossy alternatives, after all their bestselling oled TV are semi-glossy

 

[dir_d]

This monitor seems straight garbage feature to price wise compared to the QD-OLEDs right now.

 

[Space Lynx]

1400 huh? I probably will pass honestly. maybe I will get the LG C4 42" OLED when it inevitably hits $800 on black Friday.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Where are the newer 28" 4K monitors at ffs?

 

[bug]

Putting a number on a contrast of OLED seems a bit weird, but okay.

It's more honest than going "OLED = infinite contrast", because, while OLED can turn completely off for black, that doesn't mean those pixels will turn into black holes. They will still "shine" with whatever ambient light they will reflect.

The DP 1.4 is a complete non-issue, although a bit weird to see on a 1400 dollar monitor. Irrelevant in practice though.

For the asking price, DP2.1 would still have been better.

What's more egregious is the "FreeSync Premium Pro and G-Sync compatibility". Like, really? You could not have stuffed a GSync Ultimate module there for the price? Are we cutting costs on everything even in premium products now?

Not to mention the absence of USB-C ports. In 2024 or 2025, when these will see the light of day.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Where are the newer 28" 4K monitors at ffs?

I think those are next year, at least for high refresh rates.

 

[Darksword]

MSI, ASUS, Dell, and Gigabyte are offering better 32" 4K/240Hz displays for much less than this.

I have no idea who would opt for this monitor at $1,399.99. Given the specs, it should be $999.9.

 

[bug]

MSI, ASUS, Dell, and Gigabyte are offering better 32" 4K/240Hz displays for much less than this.

I have no idea who would opt for this monitor at $1,399.99. Given the specs, it should be $999.9.

It depends on what you mean by "better". QD-OLED uses blue light and blue is the LED that dies faster than other variants.
I say the proof is in the pudding, so let them release first and talk about them a few years down the road.

 

[Metroid]

No dp 2.1 then no buy from me. Do not give in, minimum manufactures should do is dp 2.1. You as the people have the power to say no to the BS. Buy the ones with dp 2.1 only. Next time they will think twice before doing the BS.

 

[Onasi]

With G-sync Ultimate (that requires the in-build nV chip) You can't use HDMI 2.1 (only 2.0 is supported), also forget about using FreeSync, which means no advantage in some games that use it.

Uh, what? HDMI stuff might be true, I am not sure about that, but GSync modules had an Adaptive Sync fallback for a while now, you can absolutely use them with non-NVidia cards. And I have no idea what you mean by "advantage" in "games that use FreeSync". It's VRR. It either works if its on or does not if its off. Properly working FS and GS have no significant differences and games do not support one over the other, it isn't an in-engine thing.

 

[bug]

No dp 2.1 then no buy from me. Do not give in, minimum manufactures should do is dp 2.1. You as the people have the power to say no to the BS. Buy the ones with dp 2.1 only. Next time they will think twice before doing the BS.

It's not really BS, DP1.4 has enough bandwidth to do almost anything this monitor can do. What DP2.1 would add, would be 4k@240Hz (not sure whether the rest of the electronics would be able to handle that) and the ability to play 10bpc movies @120fps (but where would you find any?).
But like others have pointed out, for the asking price it would better come with the kitchen sink.

 

[Metroid]

It's not really BS, DP1.4 has enough bandwidth to do almost anything this monitor can do

DSC is not lossless, but If you believe lies, go ahead, do not include me.

 

[bug]

DSC is not lossless, but If you believe lies, go ahead, do not include me.

It only needs DSC when displaying 10bpc@120Hz or above. Anything below that works without DSC.

 

[Onasi]

DSC is not lossless, but If you believe lies, go ahead, do not include me.

So wait, is this all some giant conspiracy? DSC is actually visually lossy, but nobody, not the independent experts who tested the algorithm, not the respected reviewers like TFTcentral, RTings or MonitorUnboxed, not the thousands of users all over the world who run these screens daily, not a single one noticed and blew the whistle? Really? That’s what you are saying?

 

[Metroid]

It only needs DSC when displaying 10bpc@120Hz or above. Anything below that works without DSC.

Yeah true but why buy this monitor then if not 4k 240hz or 480hz 1080?

So wait, is this all some giant conspiracy? DSC is actually visually lossy, but nobody, not the independent experts who tested the algorithm, not the respected reviewers like TFTcentral, RTings or MonitorUnboxed, not the thousands of users all over the world who run these screens daily, not a single one noticed and blew the whistle? Really? That’s what you are saying?

Yes "DSC is actually visually lossy" but anyway, some reviewers do not recommend DSC, others are silent about it, some comply with it. The issue here is that people need to always fight for a better product no matter what, if you accept this, next time, it will be an even worse practice. DP 2.1 is available, do not cost a fortune for them to implement, theory is that they always want to give less and less while charging more and more, Nvidia is at top doing that, used to be Intel.

 

[Onasi]

Yes "DSC is actually visually lossy" but anyway, some reviewers do not recommend DSC, others are silent about it, some comply with it. The issue here is that people need to always fight for a better product no matter what, if you accept this, next time, it will be an even worse practice.

Interesting. Do you have any links as a proof? This isn’t a gotcha, by the way, I am genuinely curious since this really goes against everything that I have heard from reputable sources or have witnessed myself.

 

[Metroid]

Interesting. Do you have any links as a proof? This isn’t a gotcha, by the way, I am genuinely curious since this really goes against everything that I have heard from reputable sources or have witnessed myself.

Just google it, you will find many, this is one https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/yq39qf
I do believe more in users than actually reviewers, many reviewers are in the payouts. Anyway, a good example would be mp3 x flac, many people dont hear any difference, I do.

 

[Onasi]

@Metroid
But you are making a claim here that goes against the consensus. You’d think that you’d have better proof than just a random Reddit thread. Which, by the way, have you even read? Most people agree that there is no visual difference, some quotes Tim from MU where he said the same. The most relevant thing there was the citing of the much bandied around paper (this one) which is old now (the algorithm and compression standard have been improved since then) and presents the absolutely worst case scenario. And even in THAT worst case scenario most people could not find a difference. In fact, THE VERY CONCLUSION OF SAID PAPER states that DSC is pretty much visually lossless for all intents and purposes.
In short, DSC isn’t some boogeyman. I haven’t seen such obsessive paranoia over DSC and “muh DP” in a while. Come on people, the tech community should be better than this.

 

[Metroid]

@Metroid
But you are making a claim here that goes against the consensus. You’d think that you’d have better proof than just a random Reddit thread. Which, by the way, have you even read? Most people agree that there is no visual difference, some quotes Tim from MU where he said the same. The most relevant thing there was the citing of the much bandied around paper (this one) which is old now (the algorithm and compression standard has been improved since then) and presents the absolutely worst case scenario. And even in THAT worst case scenario most people could not find a difference. In fact, THE VERY CONCLUSION OF SAID PAPER states that DSC is pretty much visually lossless for all intents and purposes.
In short, DSC isn’t some boogeyman. I haven’t seen such obsessive paranoia over DSC and “muh DP” in a while. Come on people, the tech community should be better than this.

If you want to believe in it, do not include me, DSC is lossy just like MP3.