Been beating the shit out of my OLED for a long time now and zero problems to report. It is fucking gorgeous and worth every penny. If it succumbs to burn-in 5 years from now then oh well, the quality and performance was worth it. I highly doubt it will be a problem though, I have a 2007 plasma that is still going strong.

Redmask wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 21:52:

Ozmodan wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 20:45:
Well is it enough of a problem for Samsung to get out of the business.

Samsung was never truly in the business of making "OLED" panels for TVs. They are pushing their aging LED line with a bullshit Q in front of it to confuse people for as long as possible until they can mass produce Micro LED panels.

Frankly the only TV maker other than LG making anything worth a damn is Sony, they have the best motion processing tech in the business and source panels from everyone. They even have a truly incredible OLED sets.

Pretty much.

They had no answer for OLED (and couldn't compete in manufacturing) so they let their marketing team have at it... and thus QLED was born.

* Derp.

Ozmodan wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 20:45:
Well is it enough of a problem for Samsung to get out of the business.

Samsung was never truly in the business of making "OLED" panels for TVs. They are pushing their aging LED line with a bullshit Q in front of it to confuse people for as long as possible until they can mass produce Micro LED panels.

Frankly the only TV maker other than LG making anything worth a damn is Sony, they have the best motion processing tech in the business and source panels from everyone. They even have a truly incredible OLED sets.

Osc8r wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 21:21:
Will likely buy a 65" LG OLED when the 2018 versions with the new alpha chipsets hit.

For the record, mine was the 4k 65" version. Hadn't heard about the "new alpha chipsets" yet -- guess I'll Goggle that and see what's up...

ViRGE wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 17:56:
To be clear here, there's a massive difference between RGB OLED (Samsung's tech) and WOLED (LG's Tech). The former uses OLEDs as the complete display; red, green, and blue OLED subpixels are directly emissive and generate the picture seen. WOLED on the other hand just uses white OLEDs, with filters in place to generate the necessary RGB subpixels.

https://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_images/WOLED.GIF

Traditional OLED burn-in has not been solved; blue subpixels still age noticeably faster than red or green. LG's method gets around this because there's only one type of OLED subpixel, so while it degrades they all do so fairly evenly.

The trade-off is that filters screw up viewing angles and block a lot of light, driving up heat and power consumption (this being why it can't be done on phones). The color gamut is also a bit weaker, because the gamut can only be as wide as a white subpixel, as opposed to the combined widths of separate RGB subpixels. It's a neat hack though, and while it has its drawbacks it does solve some of the biggest problems with the tech.

Great splanation, thanks Virge.

Yep, another one here... went through two top of the line Samsung LED's 2 years back with horrid uniformity and banding before ditching them and going with an LG OLED.

Even though it's 2k vs 4k and 55" vs 65" it blows the LED's away in picture quality. It probably gets used an average of 5-6 hours a day over the past 2.5 years and not a single burn in issue.

Only fault i can find is to do with motion, though i wouldn't say it's any worse than the Samsung.

Will likely buy a 65" LG OLED when the 2018 versions with the new alpha chipsets hit.

Mr. Tact wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 18:54:
Another anecdotal testimonial:

My LG OLED TV is approaching 2.5 years old, and since I am a retired single person, it is on A LOT. In fact, it is on (with The Avengers playing) at the moment I am typing this post. If there is any burn in, I can't detect it. And that's even with me carelessly leaving it paused for 30 minutes or more while watching things a lot more often than I probably should, including occasionally channels with "banners".

So, there might be some problems, but they certainly aren't universal.

Well is it enough of a problem for Samsung to get out of the business. My brother has a 2 year old OLED from LG and it is now showing signs of burn in. Since the set cost over $2500 he is most unhappy about it.

Another anecdotal testimonial:

My LG OLED TV is approaching 2.5 years old, and since I am a retired single person, it is on A LOT. In fact, it is on (with The Avengers playing) at the moment I am typing this post. If there is any burn in, I can't detect it. And that's even with me carelessly leaving it paused for 30 minutes or more while watching things a lot more often than I probably should, including occasionally channels with "banners".

So, there might be some problems, but they certainly aren't universal.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 14:49:
Good. As soon as it was clear that they will never fix burn in issues, OLED was dead anyway. Sad, but Im not ever going to spend that much money on devices that burn in that easily. Not even phones. Have been avoiding OLED phones like the plague since my first experience with one.
But I do realize that many people simply dont see the burn in. No idea why. Probably as subjective for some, as the dreaded 30 vs 60 FPS argument, that still pops up from time to time.

Huh, my Samsung Galaxy 4 is 5 years old, used daily, no burn in. I use my TV a lot less than that.

To be clear here, there's a massive difference between RGB OLED (Samsung's tech) and WOLED (LG's Tech). The former uses OLEDs as the complete display; red, green, and blue OLED subpixels are directly emissive and generate the picture seen. WOLED on the other hand just uses white OLEDs, with filters in place to generate the necessary RGB subpixels.

https://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_images/WOLED.GIF

Traditional OLED burn-in has not been solved; blue subpixels still age noticeably faster than red or green. LG's method gets around this because there's only one type of OLED subpixel, so while it degrades they all do so fairly evenly.

The trade-off is that filters screw up viewing angles and block a lot of light, driving up heat and power consumption (this being why it can't be done on phones). The color gamut is also a bit weaker, because the gamut can only be as wide as a white subpixel, as opposed to the combined widths of separate RGB subpixels. It's a neat hack though, and while it has its drawbacks it does solve some of the biggest problems with the tech.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 15:12:
Ive seen burn in after a few weeks. Hundreds of forum posts also confirm it. I have many friends who say they dont have burn in, but when I look at their phone (one even has a TV), burn in is clearly visible. As I said, to some its very subjective. Even more so since Apple uses them. But enough people complain to make it obvious. And no, I am not going to do another 30 vs 60 FPS discussion here. Its happening in normal usage, manufacturers axe them because of it. Nuff said.

From your comments claiming vague experience then attempting to assert others knowledge, I doubt you've even personally seen burn in on an OLED TV. The rtings ongoing stress test didn't even product visible results in 2 weeks and theirs is quite literally a torture test that few people will ever re-produce in their viewing activities. Phones are a different story and have different degradation rates for various reasons. Either way anyone getting an OLED TV today is fine and burn in isn't a serious concern. It has nothing to do with subjective perception of burn in. But go ahead and link some forum posts, as if every other TV tech didn't have its own set of problems, flaws and defects too. No one said OLED is perfect, just that it's pretty damned good and much like plasma, a different emissive tech, burn in is an overblown concern from people who are repeating things they haven't even experienced and probably couldn't even properly explain.

No one asked you to do a 30 vs 60 fps discussion by the way but go ahead and keep arguing with yourself about it I guess.

Redmask wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 15:02:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 14:49:
Good. As soon as it was clear that they will never fix burn in issues, OLED was dead anyway. Sad, but Im not ever going to spend that much money on devices that burn in that easily. Not even phones. Have been avoiding OLED phones like the plague since my first experience with one.
But I do realize that many people simply dont see the burn in. No idea why. Probably as subjective for some, as the dreaded 30 vs 60 FPS argument, that still pops up from time to time.

You're going to want a new TV long before you ever see burn in with an OLED. The only real exception is the people who have the OLED light at 100 and just watch CNN 24/7 or static HUD element games non-stop for literal months on end...but of course why are they buying an OLED for that purpose anyway? Get a cheap TV.

2 years gaming hardcore with my OLED and no issues with burn in. I vary up my content usage and have sane settings. By the time the actual degradation happens in 7-10 years I'm going to be drooling over the next tech and planning a purchase.

Ive seen burn in after a few weeks. Hundreds of forum posts also confirm it. I have many friends who say they dont have burn in, but when I look at their phone (one even has a TV), burn in is clearly visible. As I said, to some its very subjective. Even more so since Apple uses them. But enough people complain to make it obvious. And no, I am not going to do another 30 vs 60 FPS discussion here. Its happening in normal usage, manufacturers axe them because of it. Nuff said.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Feb 25, 2018, 14:49:
Good. As soon as it was clear that they will never fix burn in issues, OLED was dead anyway. Sad, but Im not ever going to spend that much money on devices that burn in that easily. Not even phones. Have been avoiding OLED phones like the plague since my first experience with one.
But I do realize that many people simply dont see the burn in. No idea why. Probably as subjective for some, as the dreaded 30 vs 60 FPS argument, that still pops up from time to time.

You're going to want a new TV long before you ever see burn in with an OLED. The only real exception is the people who have the OLED light at 100 and just watch CNN 24/7 or static HUD element games non-stop for literal months on end...but of course why are they buying an OLED for that purpose anyway? Get a cheap TV.

2 years gaming hardcore with my OLED and no issues with burn in. I vary up my content usage and have sane settings. By the time the actual degradation happens in 7-10 years I'm going to be drooling over the next tech and planning a purchase.

Good. As soon as it was clear that they will never fix burn in issues, OLED was dead anyway. Sad, but Im not ever going to spend that much money on devices that burn in that easily. Not even phones. Have been avoiding OLED phones like the plague since my first experience with one.
But I do realize that many people simply dont see the burn in. No idea why. Probably as subjective for some, as the dreaded 30 vs 60 FPS argument, that still pops up from time to time.

Huh, that's a weird move on Samsung's part. Am I the only one that will be getting an OLED as my next TV, or have the C-levels over at Samsung been smoking too much weed? Pretty sure MicroLED isn't ready for prime time yet.