The next best thing to OLED is getting cheaper

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/02/the-next-best-thing-to-oled-is-getting-cheaper/

by rbanffy • 4 years ago

125 161 4 years ago

fredley• 4 years ago

Mini LED, but it's rather hamstrung by only being 2560×1440.

binkHN• 4 years ago

"Cooler Master also announced a 4K 160 Hz version of this monitor, the GP27-FUS. This device is also cheaper than other mini LED monitors. With similar specs to the GP27-FQS, save for a bump to HDMI 2.1, the monitor will cost $1,100 when it debuts alongside its lower-res sibling."

rektide• 4 years ago

The price for a modest bump in specs feels absurd. There's plenty of really decent 1440p144 monitors, but you want FALD (full-array local dimming)? $300 just became $600+. Similarly a ~$600 nearly doubles in prices when you add FALD. This tech commands such an unreasonably vast premium, for not much added build cost.

MrFoof2• 4 years ago

This. I've been using multiple 1440p displays since 2010, and actually had a 2560x1600 LED back in 2004.

I'd do anything for 5K, 120Hz, Mini-LED or Micro-LED displays with 10-bit color and HDR. I don't want 4K: 5K has over 77% more logical area.

They don't have to be cheap. I'll pay well. I just want them to exist. I've been waiting over a decade at this point!

Teever• 4 years ago

I don't want 4K: 5K has over 77% more logical area.

Can you elaborate?

5/4 = 1.25

adtac2• 4 years ago

my favourite thing about 5K is that you can do 2x scaling and still have plenty of space on your screen to display multiple windows (effectively 2560x1440)

but with a 4K screen, you have three options: 1. no scaling and tiny fonts (ugh), 2. fractional scaling (ugh), or 3. 2x scaling and settle for 1080p real estate (ugh)

IMO 5K > 1440p > 4K > 1080p

wffurr2• 4 years ago

There’s the LG Ultrafine 5k monitor, but I suppose it doesn’t have HDR or 10-bit color?

ksec6• 4 years ago

So basically the Apple Pro Monitor but with 120Hz?

Unfortunately 200+PPI are extremely expensive. So 5K panel at 27"+ are partially speaking an Apple only SKUs.

zuwvcfxanh• 4 years ago

I've been waiting for basically the same thing in 3:2 or 16:10 although I'd settle for 4K, given real-world constraints. For what it's worth, that's a tremendous amount of bandwidth that even _new_ protocols such as HDMI 2.1 or DisplayPort 2.0 don't support, except DP2.0 in it's maximum bandwidth mode that hasn't been implemented anywhere as far as I know. If you take your requirements down to 4K, then both HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 2.0 at UHBR10 can do it.

badsectoracula• 4 years ago

For me even that is too much :-P. I have a 27" 2560x1440 monitor and i consider it too large.

At least when i upscale older (or very demanding) games from 640x480 or 1280x720 they look crisp enough instead of the blurry mess that was before a few years when this became possible outside of emulation.

But i bought it because of the VA panel, 165Hz refresh rate and flat surface since i couldn't find any smaller monitor with those characteristics. So if that next-best-thing-to-OLED tech is actually good, i'll most likely get one since i doubt i'll see a real OLED PC monitor in not-gargantuan sizes.

KennyBlanken• 4 years ago

2.7k for gaming is not particularly hamstrung.

TylerE• 4 years ago

and, for it's gaming target audience, much more hamstrung by being 60hz.

grishka• 4 years ago

For macOS users like me, 4K on 27" is weird. Running it at 1x dpi would make everything too small, running it at 2x "retina" dpi would make everything too huge. And macOS can't do non-integer UI scaling nicely. Apple uses the term "5K" when describing its iMacs with 27" retina-1440p displays, but monitors with that resolution are very rare it seems.

Macha2• 4 years ago

Yeah, Linux has similar issues with non-integer scaling. I'm sticking with 1440p for now as 4k at 1x for a desktop monitor is too small and 4k at 2x is sacrificing too much screen space, so I just do 1440p at 1x. 5k at 2x would be similar but with the advantages in text/etc sharpness.

jerlam• 4 years ago

I just discovered the same dreadful thing with 27" 4K monitors, and found this site which explains what Macs are doing:

https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/

TLDR: use monitors that are around 110 or 220 PPI. The 27" 4K is right in the middle at 163 PPI.

beltsazar• 4 years ago

I agree that 5K 27" monitors with 2x scaling would be perfect for macOS, but I still like 4K 27" with 2x scaling. It's only slightly larger if the monitor is placed at arm's length.

Matthias247• 4 years ago

It's not perfect, but it's far better than 1440p on 27" - which is either super tiny or super blurry for my eyes.

The way I'm running 4k 27" on Mac is setting scaling to 2x ("looks like 1080p) - which gives the crispest UI, and set scaling appropriately in a small set of applications so that they are not too huge. Just running the browser at 90% default scaling makes things pretty decent. And then maybe reducing the font size by 1pt on one or two text editors.

willis936• 4 years ago

Mini LED has a marketing issue in my opinion. Afaict it is a rebranding of FALD. Rumors several years ago made it seem like "mini LED" would be LCD with per-pixel backlighting. "Mini LED" turned out to be a nothingburger. We have nearly the same number of dimming zones as we did 5 years ago. It's woefully insufficient.

The real story in monitors this week was the alienware QD-OLED 32" ultrawide (ugh) curved (ugh) for only $1300.

shadowoflight3• 4 years ago

Eh, the only "ugh" thing about that new Alienware monitor, to me, is the low resolution - 1440p at 27"/34"? No thank you, 2160p or better + fractional scaling just looks so much better for those of us editing text and/or code all day.

Filligree• 4 years ago

200% scaling might be fine, but fractional scaling still isn't well supported on Linux. I'd prefer such a monitor, yes, if it wasn't going to limit what systems I can run.

kongolongo• 4 years ago

It's probably more geared towards the gaming market then. 1440p/27 inch is a sweet spot for gaming because you can actually drive that resolution at a decently high fps. Even the latest (if you can get your hands on then) gfx cards still struggle at 2160p for upwards of 100fps, whereas you can hit that in most games at 1440p even on several years old hardware now. For 34 inch I think 1440p will start to look a bit cramped, but at least it's not the usual 2560x1440, it will be 3440x1440.

babypuncher• 4 years ago

1440p at 27" still seems like the sweet spot to me. Image looks crisp, I don't have to turn on any janky DPI scaling features, and games actually run well.

That Alienware monitor is clearly targeted for gaming. Regular 4k is already difficult enough to achieve in AAA games, expanding that to an ultrawide aspect ratio would only make getting acceptable performance harder.

deergomoo• 4 years ago

Rumors several years ago made it seem like "mini LED" would be LCD with per-pixel backlighting

That has since become “micro LED”. Samsung makes a micro LED TV, but it costs six figures, and is only available in something like 80” and above.

When it’s finally affordable it will almost certainly unseat OLED as quality king though. All the upsides with no burn in or peak brightness issues.

pkulak• 4 years ago

Seems like the transition is from OLED to QD-OLED to micro LED. Mini-LED seems to really have no place to live here, as far as I can tell.

wmf• 4 years ago

It looks like QD-OLED with a heatsink is actually better than MicroLED in almost every way. The MicroLED hype "forgot" to mention that it consumes kilowatts of power.

fomine35• 4 years ago

Micro LED is completely different to LED LCD TV. It use tremendous amount of RGB LED to make display, without LCD. Mini LED is improved FALD LCD.

valcron1000• 4 years ago

For me that's the perfect gaming monitor. Ultrawide is just chef kiss and the resolution is high enough to be sharp but not so high that you need a 3090 to run it.

sp332• 4 years ago

Mini LED is FALD, but the LED parts are physically smaller. Roku's current FALD TVs top out at 80 zones. This monitor has over 500.

alvarlagerlof• 4 years ago

The "per-pixel" one is now called micro led

ksec6• 4 years ago

Rumors several years ago made it seem like "mini LED" would be LCD with per-pixel backlighting.

It never did. Not on any reputable rumours site and as far I am aware not even on non-reputable ones like wccfTech.

Afaict it is a rebranding of FALD. We have nearly the same number of dimming zones as we did 5 years ago.

You will need to find me a 500 local dimming zone in a 27" Monitor 5 years ago. I can assure you there is none.

diffeomorphism• 4 years ago

made it seem like "mini LED" would be LCD with per-pixel backlighting.

I thought that was microled? Which does all that and seems like a strict upgrade over oled. However, there are currently just about 4 models on the market and starting prices are at 100k.

mark-r2• 4 years ago

I hate the way the term LED was usurped by monitor makers. I would expect a LED monitor to have one LED per pixel, not use a single LED to backlight a whole bunch of normal LCD pixels.

skavi• 4 years ago

LED self emissive is called microLED.

layer85• 4 years ago

Well, it was to distinguish them from the old power-hungry, thicker (and often buzzing) CCFL backlights.

mark-r2• 4 years ago

They could have invented a better term. It's almost like they wanted to confuse people.

wowokay• 4 years ago

Honestly if I were to do it over again, I'd go for 1080p, or maybe 1440p for a bigger monitor. When it comes to optimizing graphics usage more frames ovee resolution tends to be where I gravitate. At the same time I don't think I need 240hz, 100 seems fine, 60 was good too.

n00bface3• 4 years ago

Monitors are a depressing set of products. Every consumer has a slightly different set of priorities, and for me, the continuous cycle of compromises to arrive at a monitor that checks just over 50% of my requirements feels punitive. The lack of satisfaction is compounded further by the tour de force of reasonably priced and high-end display technologies packed into a sexy af piece of art hanging in my living room. Stepping from the living room into the office feels like a trek into the past.

I'm hopeful that QD-OLED will make that a less jarring transition. Mini-LEDs may help modernize the market, but I don't see them making a significant dent in my disappointment.

user_78325• 4 years ago

If you have the time and technical expertise of basic electronics (mainly soldering) and maybe 3d printing/basic CAD design, you can make your own monitor and that too at a decent price.

Step 1: Go to panelook.com (or directly https://www.panelook.com/modelsearch.php?op=resolution if you have a resolution in mind)

Step 2: Find the model number of your desired monitor and put it into your desired search engine (Google works)

Step 3: Buy the monitor WITH THE DRIVER* from AliExpress/Alibaba/TaoBao/eBay/wherever you get Google search results from

Step 4: Wait (???)

Step 5: Design a 3d model and print it, or use acrylic and cut it by hand, or whatever you want. Profit!

* - the display connects to the display driver. The driver is the one with an HDMI/DP/USB-C port.

zamadatix2• 4 years ago

The problem is precisely the selection of appropriately sized "TV quality and price" panels to make a monitor with not the lack of physical construction of such panels into monitors.

madsushi• 4 years ago

Thanks for sharing panelook; just spent 30 minutes browsing around. I love niche sites like this!

userbinator• 4 years ago

They're usually called scaler boards, not drivers. Ones with LVDS outputs are common, but a lot of the new panels use VbyOne which seems to be rarer and more expensive to find a scaler for.

NavinF11• 4 years ago

This. 3 years ago I built a 1mm thick 4K monitor by just mounting a bare panel to a thin laptop stand and hiding the eDP to DP board underneath. It was better than anything on the market and cost literally 3/4 as much as a normal fat and ugly monitor.

I’ll just add “Message several sellers and ask for a datasheet and 1pc price+shipping from each one” to Step 3.

epicureanideal• 4 years ago

Sounds like it could be a good business. Custom monitors, no Alexa or spyware. Choose the specs you care about.

gryn2• 4 years ago

here's a video a youtuber showing how to do it, in case someone want a visual example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrqdHVeBkp4

ayushnix2• 4 years ago

I've been going crazy and frustrated with the lack of HiDPI monitors on the market which can do integer scaling (27 inch 5K, 32 inch 8K) and here's a website that lists panels for such monitors.

I have no idea how to go about making a custom monitor but if it's feasible to solve my problem, I'm willing to learn.

So let's say I want to buy the LM270QQ1-SDA2, should I order that panel from an e-commerce website? Or should I find a monitor with that specific panel? Why is 3d printing needed here? Any article or detailed guide you can point me to?

jnwatson3• 4 years ago

The solution is simple: use the “sexy af” piece of art in your office.

I’ve used one for 4 years. The only compromise is I have to power it on/off by remote.

n00bface3• 4 years ago

I've considered it, but can't play FPS effectively on anything over 34" due to biology and $ per sqft of real-estate. The seating position to keep the game in focus would be half way across the room.

OLEDs under 40" aren't TVs and almost all OLED monitors target revenue generating use-cases and are priced to match.

ianmcgowan• 4 years ago

What brand/model are you using?

after_care• 4 years ago

I really enjoy the 49" ultra-wide curved form factor Samsung has pioneered and is on the second generation of.

AtlasBarfed• 4 years ago

I'd be curious as to the differing priorities you are thinking about.

For me, I want real estate. At this point I'm looking forward to 8k in a 50-55" TV, good DPI, and 60Hz. Not a twitch gamer, I'm a developer. I use TVs.

Gamers want response time/Hz, decent appearance. They are the prime target of "Monitors"

Then there's the professional editors and the like. They used to be high-end monitors, but I think high-end 8k TVs will serve them as well.

What else is there?

NavinF11• 4 years ago

Sure you’re not a gamer, but have you tried using a 120hz/240hz monitor for a week? I think you’ll find that it’s almost as massive an upgrade as going from 1080p to 4K.

Going back to 60hz is painful. You’ll see the cursor moving in a rotating square pattern when you’re moving your mouse in a circle. The lag is palpable.

What else is there?

Well HDR is nice to have.

layer85• 4 years ago

Not the GP, but my current dream monitor would be a 3:2 or 16:10 OLED in the 24"-27" range with roughly 200 PPI and 120 Hz, preferably slightly curved, with hardware calibration for at least sRGB gamut. There’s nothing close to that in the market.

gryn2• 4 years ago

one of the jarring things about using a TV as a monitor is that some TV models don't have the option of disabling the image processing that blurs the text so you end up with blurry text that gives headaches. I remember encountering this problem in the past with a specific samsung TV model where the processing was only disabled for the VGA port but not the rest of the ports (it was hard coded and couldn't be disabled).

account422• 4 years ago

What I am looking for is a large (at least 37.5") ultrawide OLED (or something with comparable contrast) with at least 3840x1600 pixels and a >= 120 Hz refresh rate. Basically something that is a straight upgrade from my current monitor [0] that improves the contrast without compromising on other factors (size and resolution are hard requirements, refresh rate, pixel response and color gamut are negotiable as long as they are good enough, brightness I don't care - have the current one set to 10%). Oh, it also needs to support FreeSync, but that seems to be less of a problem these days.

There are no panels that fulfil that at the moment. The nearest option woulb be getting a 4K OLED and then just not using part of the panel but that is hardly ideal.

[0] https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-38gn950-b-gaming-monitor

skhr0680• 4 years ago

What are your priorities? A lot of pro photographers I know use iMacs because they are a cheap way to get an adequate computer attached to a monitor with high resolution and OK (for the price) color space

zippergz• 4 years ago

This is currently challenging because the 5K iMac is still on Intel which I’d be hesitant to buy into at this point. Hopefully resolved soon but we don’t know exactly when or what form it will take (e.g. will the 5K iMac be an “iMac Pro” and have a higher price than the Intel version?).

n00bface3• 4 years ago

System agnostic (not an all-in-one), <35", HDR, OLED or OLED-backlight, >144hz, 1440p+ or higher, G-sync, 16:9, >=99% DCI-P3, doesn't look like a F-117 fucked a ferris wheel at an EDM festival, <$2k.

Prioritized in that order.

jimmaswell• 4 years ago

What are your requirements? I had no issue finding one that met all of mine at a reasonable price a few years ago. 144Hz, low latency, decent size, 2k resolution.

cercatrova• 4 years ago

miniLED is not that great compared to OLEDs. The real innovation is getting quantum dot OLEDs to be much cheaper on average. They're brighter than traditional OLEDs and burn in more evenly (if they ever do) so you don't see the burn in of specific sections of the screen (like a taskbar) like with traditional OLEDs either.

killion• 4 years ago

I had a hard time with that article because it kept swinging between two very different display technologies. OLED and Mini LED are not related and the monitor they are talking about is Mini LED, so why even talk about OLED?

valine• 4 years ago

Probably because both displays are associated with deep blacks. Mini LED has halo issues but it’s the obvious comparison.

floatboth• 4 years ago

This HDR obsession makes me want to abandon color entirely and switch to E-Ink.

Koshkin2• 4 years ago

The problem with e-ink is no so much the poor gamut as the low speed of switching the pixels.

genewitch• 4 years ago

Technology connections had a video showing a large e-ink playing video, and it was 3-5FPS, so unless your use case is "videos and games" e-ink is already plenty fast.

It's even faster if you let it manage its own pixels and only update parts of the screen that need to be redrawn. Can't play videos like that but scrolling a spreadsheet becomes much faster.

robinsoh3• 4 years ago

The problem with e-ink is no so much the poor gamut

I don't understand what you mean by "poor gamut". Gamut of grayscale?

uejfiweun• 4 years ago

Could someone explain to me why we have OLED smartphones (which are awesome) and OLED TVs (which are awesome), but no OLED monitors?

yzmtf2008• 4 years ago

OLED monitors do exist, just at a very much unreasonable price and size:

- https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-32ep950-b-oled-monitor

- https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B07XTZ45T2 (this one is more of a laptop screen than a monitor)

I’m simplifying here, but essentially no one has figured out how to make OLED panels affordable at a reasonable form factor for monitors yet. The type of panels used in phones (and tablets/laptops) are very different from those used in TVs. LG is making inroads with their 42 C2s, but those will also have a high price and is still way too big for normal monitor use cases.

elabajaba• 4 years ago

There's a 34" ultrawide Alienware QD-OLED (Samsung's new OLED tech for TV panels) coming this year for $1300, which is still expensive but nowhere near as expensive as monitor OLEDs have been.

Zekio• 4 years ago

I seem to recall smartphone OLED screens being made by one company and tv sized OLED screens being made by another, with the smartphone OLEDs being better with burn-in but very difficult to scale up

Macha2• 4 years ago

Yeah, Samsung makes most of the smartphone OLEDs and LG makes the TV OLEDs.

Sophistifunk• 4 years ago

My understanding: They still can't get big enough sheets without defects. The bigger the end product, the more failed sheets have to be thrown out or cut down for smaller displays, and the price rises rapidly because double the diagonal means 4x the pixels.

account422• 4 years ago

They can make sheets large enough for TVs and both TVs and phones do come with high enough pixel counts for monitors. You don't need phone pixel densities on their monitor but TV pixel densities might be too low.

theNJR• 4 years ago

Lots of people game on the LG C1. 55in is $1300ish.

ksec6• 4 years ago

There are no high PPI TV OLED that fits the monitor market. TV OLED panel ( or WOLED by LG ) only gets down to ~40" TV size and with 4K resolution. Meaning you get sub 2K resolution in 20-30" size.

Smartphone OLED by Samsung or BOE or other maker are too expensive to scale to Computer monitor size.

And burn in. OLED just isn't well suited for computer monitor usage. ( Apart from QD-OLED )

lostmsu• 4 years ago

Wait, 40" @ 4k is exactly what I want. Where can I get one?

boondaburrah• 4 years ago

I'm still annoyed that I can't buy an OLED panel anywhere between 128x128 and full HD resolutions. The HD ones are too big and difficult to interface with and 128x128 is too small to make an interface on.

aiilns3• 4 years ago

Will this be using PWM like almost all OLED screens for dimming? I feel that the answer is probably yes and it's quite frustrating.

But my wants are probably a bit different than everyone else's: ideally a touch (w/ pen input), high resolution (integer scaling), matte monitor that uses DC dimming.

I've lost hope on such a thing existing (closest thing I have seen is the latest thinkpad yoga x1, gen6 I think, I'd be into buying just the screen, but not really possible). Instead I'm hoping for better e-ink panels which will be even better by eliminating backlight completely.

marcosdumay• 4 years ago

A PWM with a capacitor and a load is an adjustable DC supply. What problems are you having with it?

neogodless• 4 years ago

I may be an edge case, but after getting a concussion, all my screens need to be higher refresh rate. 144hz works; my phone is 90Hz and it's borderline. But more importantly they all use DC dimming. Had to sell a laptop with PWM dimming.

I suspect others are just sensitive to it (sans concussion) and prefer DC dimming.

NavinF11• 4 years ago

PWM+capacitor is not an adjustable DC supply. You also need an inductor to do that: https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/31714/15654

Of course the wires have resistance so it would technically “work” as an RC filtered PWM until it overheats.

PWM dimming means turning the LEDs on and off without any smoothing.

ksec6• 4 years ago

Will this be using PWM like almost all OLED screens for dimming?

But the article is about Mini LED LCD?

aiilns3• 4 years ago

Yeah sorry. Most LCDs, at least up to a couple of years ago, use PWM for dimming & all OLED do AFAIK.

I don't know much, to know if mini LEDs dimming in different sections mean PWM, but I suppose they might since it would be probably easier to change the speed of the rapid on&offs of some LEDs rather than the current to dim part of the screen.

chrismorgan• 4 years ago

Do you get touch (with or without digitiser) and matte? I don’t recall ever having seen the combination outside of e-paper devices like reMarkable, though it certainly could exist and I just haven’t seen it. I know there are after-market solutions for things like iPads where you stick an extra sheet on top, screen protector style. I have no idea how pleasing they are.

aiilns3• 4 years ago

Look at thinkpad x1 yoga gen 6 for matte with touch & pen input. And other non yoga thinkpads have had matte with a touchscreen.

Ballas• 4 years ago

What is the matter with PWM dimming? Would it be resolved by using a higher frequency for PWM? The main reason you use PWM for dimming LEDs is because DC dimming (or filtered PWM) causes color shift. By using PWM, you can drive the LEDs with the same current, but effectively switching them on and off. Driving LEDs at different currents produce slightly different color outputs.

fomine35• 4 years ago

Weird article. Burn in is never mentioned. I can buy OLED displays if burn in is no longer concern for PC monitor. I wish it lasts at least 5 years without care. I'll buy even if price is high. I don't want to too much care about burn in, and throw away it every two years.

For TV, I don't replace it frequently so I hope it lasts a decade.

layer85• 4 years ago

At least one of the recent OLED monitors (I forgot which one, maybe the LG 32") has a physical resolution of 4K plus an extra width/height of 16 (?) pixels, and uses slow pixel shift to slightly move the image around to prevent/reduce burn-in. That strikes me as a good approach.

fomine35• 4 years ago

Looks great. PC monitors should be made like this.

ksec6• 4 years ago

Burn in is never mentioned.

This is about Mini LED LCD Display, why would burn-in be mentioned? Or you want it to be stated as an advantage?

fomine35• 4 years ago

It's definitely a pros for MiniLED Display compared to OLED. I expect a mention for comparing OLED.

jms552• 4 years ago

I did a ton of research a couple of months ago to find a good 4k monitor mostly for programming (a 4k monitor has been seriously worth it!), and occasional gaming.

I ended up with the LG 32UL500-W (https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/32ul500-w), for about $300 US.

My conclusion was that trying to get a higher refresh rate 4k monitor, or even higher resolution, or OLED or anything else, made it 2-6x more expensive. Prices for these features still have a _ways_ to go before they're affordable.

jxi• 4 years ago

You’re OK with VA instead of IPS?

Nursie2• 4 years ago

I've ended up with this one - https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/benq/ew3270u

Which reviews almost identically apparently. Great for dev work, fine for games. There still doesn't seem to be anything massively better than these two in a 32" 4k screen, without spending multiples of the price

boulos• 4 years ago

You don't find the lack of brightness to be an issue? Both of these monitors only hit 280 nits.

I do find that the intersection of size, resolution, and brightness is nearly empty. I have a pair of U2720Qs, but would love something more in the 500-600 nits range or even 1000 that isn't the Apple XDR. LG has promised a new 40wp95c for over a year now (and amusingly reannounced it at CES this year, since they didn't ship at all in 2021) which maybe works but at $2000 for a monitor, it's not for everyone (and it came in at a much lower brightness than people expected).

cryptonector• 4 years ago

Is there a current display technology that doesn't doesn't implement variable brightness using pulse width modulation?

noveltyaccount• 4 years ago

I'm not buying any TV/monitor until Micro LED is available (each subpixel is an LED). Everything I have (LED backlit) is good enough - and I'll just sit out the OLED and Mini LED (LED backlit zones) generation. It'll probably be a few more years but I think it'll be worth it!

ksec6• 4 years ago

It'll probably be a few more years

Even Samsung QNED is at leat 3-4 years out. MicroLED is definitely further out than QNED.

The next best thing to OLED is getting cheaper

Related Stories