Comments Locked

41 Comments

Back to Article

  • Reflex - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    Is there any info on how they handle screen burn in on PC OLED's? TV's have less of a problem there as they do pixel shifting and have fewer static screen elements, but for computers it seems like it would be difficult to avoid.

    I'm very curious, my LG TV makes me desperately want one of these for my PC (everything looks drab on my current Dell UltraSharps) but afraid to invest in such screens even at reasonable prices if they will have burnin inside of a year or two...
  • SaturnusDK - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    Absolutely zero problems with burn in.

    I have the HP x360 Spectre 13.3" 2560x1440 OLED from CES 2016 as my daily driver. I use it 12-14 hours every single day. Mainly for work or work related tasks that involves having the same type of screen opened for hours on end, and I do not have even a hint of burn in.
    Granted, I've used the dark mode as far as possible because I was also slightly worried about it but I realized that compared to these burn in tests you often see referenced, laptops have a major difference in use. The TVs and monitors you see in those tests run 24/7 at very high brightness, and that's exactly you should avoid. OLED screen needs to rest for a few hours every day 24/7 use is not suited for organic materials, and high brightness means you stress them needlessly.
    My screen is blindingly bright at max and I have no problem reading it outside in the Sun (obvious not with direct Sun light on the screen), and I don't use it over 80% brightness setting in most conditions as it would otherwise simply be uncomfortably bright.
  • Samus - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    I think the real future of OLED is QLED (which is basically just as good while not being organic) because the lifespan is substantially better and it is cheaper to manufacture. OLED was cool but it just isn't cost effective and is going to be replaced by scalable manufacturing technologies.

    That isn't to say OLED isn't superior at many things. In the same way plasma televisions were superior to LCD televisions, they died because the con's outweighed the pro's compared to the general performance on continually improving\evolving LCD displays.

    OLED is no exception. Quantum LED (not to be confused with quantum dot backlighting - completely different!) has many of the benefits of OLED without the cost.
  • Azune - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    I've never heard of Quantum LEDs before. Do you mean MicroLED with quantum dots for wider color space? Or could you link to a site with information about this technology?
  • skavi - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Quantum dots can be electroluminescent. In theory, you could use them directly as subpixels.
  • Death666Angel - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Everything that Google gives me says that QLED/Quantum LED/Quantum dot backlighting is the same thing. And using "LCD displays" does not inspire great confidence in your technical knowledge, mate.
  • skavi - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Before Samsung misappropriated the term, QLED referred to a possible future display tech which utilized the electroluminescent properties of QDs to use them directly as subpixels. Current Samsung "QLED" displays just use QD's photoluminescence to improve backlight quality.
  • Valantar - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    "QLED" is a marketing name for a specific form of LED-backlit LCD displays with quantum dots implemented in the backlighting to expand the reproducible color space. It improves on most other LED backlight systems (though not necessarily other quantum dot systems, as they're all relatively comparable), but that doesn't mean it's an actual OLED competitor, no matter how much Samsung wants to present it as such.
  • skavi - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Before Samsung misappropriated the term, QLED referred to a possible future display tech which utilized the electroluminescent properties of QDs to use them directly as subpixels. Current Samsung "QLED" displays just use QD's photoluminescence to improve backlight quality.
  • FreckledTrout - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Samus you are confusing a few technologies. QLED is not inorganic OLED it is simply Samsung's marketing term for quantum dot LED which just improves the backlight. MicroLED which Samsung is working on is an inorganic OLED.
  • skavi - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    "Electro-emissive or electroluminiscent quantum dot displays are an experimental type of display based on quantum-dot light-emitting diodes (QD-LED; also EL-QLED, ELQD, QDEL). These displays are similar to active-matrix organic light-emitting diode (AMOLED) and MicroLED displays, in that light would be produced directly in each pixel by applying electric current to inorganic nano-particles."

    QD LED was previously known as QLED before Samsung misappropriated the term.
  • edzieba - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    "Quantum LED (not to be confused with quantum dot backlighting - completely different!)"

    Nope, QLED is just Samsung's marketing term for QD backlighting. Same marketing technique as "LED TVs": swap the backlight, pretend it's an entirely new panel technology.
  • skavi - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Before Samsung misappropriated the term, QLED referred to a possible future display tech which utilized the electroluminescent properties of QDs to use them directly as subpixels. Current Samsung "QLED" displays just use QD's photoluminescence to improve backlight quality.
  • Valantar - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Care to share a link to a photo of your display showing a full-screen white image at medium or higher brightness? I'm genuinely curious, especially in the task bar area. There are limits to how effective "rest" is for alleviating color dimming through wear on OLED subpixels.
  • nathanddrews - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    I'd like to see evidence as well. OLED burn-in a question of "when", not "if". I love OLED and have several OLED devices, but even I can admit its flaws. The OP is actually doing himself a disservice by using dark mode due to the higher contrast between off and on pixels. The more unevenly the pixels wear, the more noticeable burn-in will become. For equipment that you're going to replace within 3 years anyway, you probably don't have to worry about it, assuming you keep brightness at medium/low (good job, OP) and get a lot of varied content.

    The most comprehensive burn-in tests (rtings) test both max brightness and regular brightness and run the pixel refresher every power cycle (every 4 hours). 5 hours on, 1 hour to "refresh" pixels, four times per day. They all burn-in - the higher brightness displays burn-in more heavily than the lower brightness displays. LG itself acknowledges that total "on" time is all that matters - doesn't matter if it's 1 hour per day or 24 hours per day. They burn-in, starting with red.

    QLED is the use of quantum dot tech as part of the LED fabrication process. It wasn't too great with the first few generations, but the newer QLED panels with stacked LCDs are more zone control are really starting look significantly better than traditional LCDs.

    These are all stopgaps, I think. The real future of display tech is MicroLED - using non-organic RGB LEDs. Sony CLEDIS, Samsung Wall, etc. Once they get a few more shrinks and energy usage under control, it's going to be the GOAT. I've already got a savings account set up explicitly for buying one in 2024. LOL
  • Reflex - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    "They burn-in, starting with red."

    This statement really isn't true. LG panels don't have individually colored OLED pixels, they are all white with a filter (they call it a 'color refiner') over the top. This is how they avoid the issue of certain colors degrading more quickly or burning in more rapidly.

    https://www.oled-info.com/lgs-8-gen-line-will-prod...

    (hope that image link works)
  • SaturnusDK - Saturday, March 30, 2019 - link

    Apologizes for not seeing the request for picture evidence before but here goes. Please look away from smudges as it is a touch screen and I do use that functionality. This is a close up from the bottom of the screen where the task bar is at 80% brightness.
    https://ibb.co/86qV8Z9
  • Spunjji - Sunday, March 31, 2019 - link

    If I nitpick, I *can* see a line towards the bottom of the screen in that image where the display appears to be brighter, and it corresponds to where the Windows 10 task bar would be.

    Definitely nitpicking, though - and I can't imagine a single scenario where it would be relevant. Consistency across the display is usually quite poor with most LCD displays anyway, so it seems like the problem is less "it's bad" and more "it's no longer perfect".

    Thanks for sharing! :)
  • SSTANIC - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    No problems with burn-in, Samsung Windows tablet, 1440p resolution, bought ~3 years ago, AMOLED screen. After some time of static-on-time it automatically goes off/screensaver, it is completely unintrusive. Picture quality for reading and video is simply spectacular, way beyond any LED laptop screen.
  • ied - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    I despise notebooks with these stupid sized display top/bottom borders. If you're making a machine sized A x B, then the LCD should have the same A/B ratio.

    Cellphones catch hell for a few millimeters of borders, but laptop vendors get a pass. This thing could easily fit a 16:10 panel, maybe 3:2, but nope...

    We get something plain ugly, with a gigantic logo. Uuuggg...
  • mr_tawan - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    While they do look ugly, I think they have function to serve. The top of the screen has web cam and a mic array. The bottom of the screen... help lifting the screen up a little bit so your hands are blocking the screen. Well that are some reasoning I can think of lol.

    I personally don't like the phone that has super narrow bezel on the top/bottom. Just find it difficult to hold when watching video or playing games. Without larger bezel, it has to be hold on the side which I find it a little awkward. It does look good, I admit. If it's just a monitor then I'd have no objections.
  • Dizoja86 - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    I have the 2018 HP Spectre with the same bezels, and I was initially skeptical, but I love it at this point. The bezels are under the same piece of glass as the rest of the display, so it is all a single surface. I also actually purchased this laptop for the 2-in-1 functionality, and the bezels make it far easier to use as a tablet. The bottom bezel also keeps your hands from getting in the way of the screen while you're typing if you're like me and actually use the laptop in your lap or in bed.
  • Samus - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Aside from what other people have said, the other reason the display is lifted above the hinges has to do with heat dispersion. The fans blow heat up onto the screen and direct it at this bezel below the screen to effective deflect the heat away from the surface - Apple was the first manufacture to do this with the Macbook a decade ago in order to remove all vents from the bottom plate of the machine.

    I've also repaired screens and noticed a lot of structural reinforcement in the bottom bezel where the hinges meet, and sometimes a X brace behind the panel. I think the strategic position of the panel could have to do with durability.
  • Tams80 - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    "The bezels are stupid. They should be almost gone."
    Me: "Why?"
    "Because they're ugly."
    Me: *how far can this species fall?*
  • Valantar - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    In a metal notebook there are reasons (beyond cameras): WiFi and Bluetooth (and possibly 4G) antennas. These need a certain amount of non-obstructed area to work. Still, these displays could have been taller even accounting for that. The issue is that making the notebook 16:9 would mean terrible ergonomics (small touchpad, useless wrist rest) and likely a too-small battery (rest of hardware is mostly fixed size) - and there are barely 16:10 display panels being made any more (with Apple's panels being the exception).

    Still, in time I hope laptops in general move to 3:2 as a standard aspect ratio. It's far better suited to what laptops are used for (web browsing and office work), has a good balance of width to height, and is a good balance in terms of ergonomics for the rest of the device.
  • Spunjji - Sunday, March 31, 2019 - link

    I'm very much in agreement here. The thing is, panel manufacturers mostly make 16:9 displays these days - and having a custom panel made for your line of notebooks adds cost that most OEMs are loathe to take on.
  • Vitor - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    I still find 4k overkill for notebooks. I dream of a 2560x1600, I miss 16:10.
  • SaturnusDK - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    I agree. 13.3" for my 2560x1440 screen is a tad too small for my taste as I'm pushing 50. 15.6" would be perfect for 2560x1440 but 4K? No. That's way too small a screen for that.
  • TristanSDX - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    4K / 8K is for quality, not quantity, so many people do not understand this. Use screen scaling
  • SaturnusDK - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    And many people do not understand that many professional programs do not work with screen scaling. Jeez.
  • Spunjji - Sunday, March 31, 2019 - link

    Even at 200% where Windows can just use pixel-doubling on legacy apps? I've not had problems at this setting, but then that could plausibly because I've not used the same software :)
  • Sttm - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    I like the 14 inch Surface laptops with 3:2 2256x1504, it is quite a nice sweet spot.
  • TristanSDX - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    unfortunatelly, all monitor panels are manufactured on equipment and sheets designed to 16:9. Other proportions will create wastage (loss), that's why 16:9 was forcefully popularized in monitors
  • toomanylogins - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Its daft. Just purchased a matebook x pro as it was all I could find that wasnt 16:9. The windows defualt is to scale at 200% so you get exactly the same screen usage albeit nicer images. 15.6 no bezels 1920*1200 would be spot on without scaling or 2560*1600 and I imagine not too expensive. I cant understand why no makes one.
  • Prestissimo - Sunday, March 31, 2019 - link

    Until laptops can go 12 hours with 4K 144Hz, I'll go 1080p all the way and that includes 17.6".
  • boozed - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link

    I like Toucans
  • FXi - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    17.3" OLED would be amazing just to round out the sizes 13.3, 15.6 and 17.3
  • Soulkeeper - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Nice. Hopefully they release an AMD product with this screen.
  • TristanSDX - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    Hopefully ithese notebook will support refresh rate 120/144 Hz and FreeSync (2)
  • Targon - Friday, March 29, 2019 - link

    So they limit premium offerings to Meltdown/Spoiler vulnerable machines. How wonderful for HP and I hope these don't sell at all.
  • talhafaiz021 - Tuesday, June 18, 2019 - link

    Wow Sounds Good. First Time i heared about AMOLED display i think This <a href="https://homeshopping.pk/categories/hp-Laptops-Pric... Hp laptop </a> is best for graphic Designers.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now