[EsaT]

Not sure how many have found this “worst case torture testing” done by that channel, but it has now reached 9 months mark.

While having this wear sure isn’t good thing, it’s definitely positive that increase from 6 month mark is minimal.
And that monitor is under high stress with very high brightness of 200 nits.

Not really sure what’s the actual nits value, but I’m running my Acer X32 FP below 25% brightness setting.
So pretty likely it’s good amount lower and in my use wear would be significantly slower.

Though one big question is if rate of pixel wear is in linear relation to brightness, or in exponential/logarithmic.
Linear would be safer assumption, but could see wear increasing at exponential rate at least when pushing brightness in warmer room.

[PCM2]

Yeah, I’ve been following along this series of testing with interest and I feel the latest results are quite reassuring. I’d also be interested in seeing how things would fare with a lower brightness. Most people won’t be running at the maximum brightness (roughly 250 nits for a QD-OLED) so they can expect better results because of this – but exactly how much better is a great question.

Edit: Test is being run at 200 nits, not 250 (sorry).

[EsaT]

Found one article hinting that wear accelerates exponentially with brightness:

How does this factor into brightness? You can’t avoid degradation, but that process is sped up by feeding the diodes more current and increasing their brightness. “You basically make the choice of either going brighter or having a longer lifetime,” says Qiu. “It’s typically a trade-off.”

As an example, Qiu pointed to theoretically increasing the brightness by 20%. “The end consumers want it to be 20% brighter, right? So it could be, instead of it needing to be 20% brighter, it could have 1.5x longer lifetime.”

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/brighter-isnt-better-for-oled-monitors/#dt-heading-unintended-consequences

[sblantipodi]

For PCM2, the test at HwUnboxed has been made at 200 nits.
I would consider a very “normal” brightness this days for normal lit environment.

In daylight environment, 200 nits is too few for my tastes.
I use my monitor at 250 nits for day and night for example.

[PCM2]

Yes, you’re absolutely correct. I had forgotten that aspect of the test conditions laid out in the first video, having watched the initial video a while ago and having RTINGS testing methodology in my mind. Have corrected my initial post.

[PCM2]

At the one year mark there remains limited burn-in without any obvious additional issues encountered. Really it’s similar to the 9 and indeed 6 month mark, arguably not a lot of change since the 3 month mark for that matter. Tim also noted a slight shift towards a slightly warmer colour temperature (a drop of ~100K) over time.

[sblantipodi]

OLED is still an excellent choice for people who wants to use the monitor for gaming, multimedia in general and light productivity,
if you use the monitor 8 hours a day all the OLED gimmicks are not that acceptable, at least they are unacceptable to me.

leave alone the fact that you need a screensaver, a pixel cleaning cycle that breaks your balls when you are using the monitor, you need to hide the windows taskbar, you need to use a dark theme, you must accept the low brightness for SDR (and HDR) ecc. ecc…

in any case a monitor that presented even a small sign of burn in after only three months can’t be considered burn in free.
that test will change day and night with different brightness and even when switching from dark mode to light mode in Windows.

night mode is much easier for OLEDs, light mode will give much more trouble.

[Author]

Posts