Corsair 45WQHD240 ultrawide 45” 1440p 240Hz OLED with LG panel

Joined
May 30, 2016
Messages
47
Holy frak. Even if it's slightly worse then the AW3423, I'll take it. If I can afford it, that is. This isn't going to be cheap.

Also, 1440p at this size is crappy, but at least I won't need scaling.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
The PPI on this is just so damn low. It's close to a 27" 16:9 1080p display. Even putting more distance is probably not enough to mitigate it. Had this been a 3840x1600 display I'd probably buy it.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
PPI won't be an issue. Sitting further away from the monitor might even help mitigate the eye strain caused by OLED flickering.

The problem is OLED has less color and less brightness in both SDR and HDR. There is no point to have 80 nits sRGB SDR on an OLED with supposed infinite contrast.

Unless the camera captures enough colors, most content are still graded from SDR to HDR, which means the color in SDR needs to be expanded, adjusted, saturated to HDR level. And certain expanded color only looks natural at higher brightness regardless if it is SDR or HDR.

OLED SDR should've looked similar to HDR with 400 nits Adobe colorspace long time ago. But so far whatever OLED always failed to do so.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
PPI won't be an issue. Sitting further away from the monitor might even help mitigate the eye strain caused by OLED flickering.
Eye strain from OLED is just not something I have ever experienced with any OLED display I've used but I concede that this can be personal. Likewise have never seen any visible flickering.

The PPI on this display is so low that it cannot be effectively mitigated. If I put my LG CX 48" 4K OLED TV at 1m distance to make it a comfortable size, just imagine how far something this big, this low res would have to be put, considering the main physical size difference is less height. Not to mention WRGB OLEDs benefit from DPI scaling to mitigate text rendering issues and 3440x1440 doesn't have enough resolution to effectively use that.

It's a weird product. I would not be surprised if this never makes into production or is a niche product that is way too expensive.
 

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
9,660
Eye strain from OLED is just not something I have ever experienced with any OLED display I've used but I concede that this can be personal. Likewise have never seen any visible flickering.

The PPI on this display is so low that it cannot be effectively mitigated. If I put my LG CX 48" 4K OLED TV at 1m distance to make it a comfortable size, just imagine how far something this big, this low res would have to be put, considering the main physical size difference is less height. Not to mention WRGB OLEDs benefit from DPI scaling to mitigate text rendering issues and 3440x1440 doesn't have enough resolution to effectively use that.

It's a weird product. I would not be surprised if this never makes into production or is a niche product that is way too expensive.
Me neither. With 6k hours on my C9 and nearly 2k hours on my CX that I use as a monitor I have never experienced flickering or eye strain.
 

cvinh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
2,003
Ohh a bendy boy. Was anyone really asking for a display where they could customize their own curvature?
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
Ohh a bendy boy. Was anyone really asking for a display where they could customize their own curvature?
There's plenty of complaints about the 32" Samsung VA panels being too curvy. So having it adjustable does sound like a nice feature.

In reality I find hard to figure out true practical usecases. I think if I were to buy something like this, I would set it at a preferred viewing distance, adjust the curve for that and then never touch it again. If I can't be bothered to even move my monitor back and forth on its arm then I sure as hell won't be bending my display regularly.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
Eye strain from OLED is just not something I have ever experienced with any OLED display I've used but I concede that this can be personal. Likewise have never seen any visible flickering.

The PPI on this display is so low that it cannot be effectively mitigated. If I put my LG CX 48" 4K OLED TV at 1m distance to make it a comfortable size, just imagine how far something this big, this low res would have to be put, considering the main physical size difference is less height. Not to mention WRGB OLEDs benefit from DPI scaling to mitigate text rendering issues and 3440x1440 doesn't have enough resolution to effectively use that.

It's a weird product. I would not be surprised if this never makes into production or is a niche product that is way too expensive.
You haven't experienced the flickering on AW3423DW combined with ABL. That monitor is not comfortable to look at. The limitation is that LG hasn't made a smaller one yet. When it becomes smaller, the flickering has to be dealt with.

27" 1080P exists. So 45" UWQHD makes sense. The mechanism looks cheap. No buffed cooling solution. It is very likely a mid-tier at $1200 price.

I put 3 points: 1.flickering 2.brightness 3.colorspace.

LG probably fail at the brightness and colorspace. It won't be a HDR display but it could be a fast-paced SDR display if LG doesn't have flickering issues.

OLED SDR performance needs to be improved. It cannot jump to HDR but at least it should have the proper Adobe colorspace with 300 nits
 

MistaSparkul

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,302
PPI sucks as a monitor but it's not the end of the world. I'm actually more annoyed that it's ultrawide, I would've easily settled for a low PPI screen if it was like a 16:9 55" 4K screen which would have similar PPI to this. The fact that is the world's first 240Hz OLED monitor is what has me really excited for it. That refresh rate combined with OLED response times makes for an epic gaming monitor.
 

ND40oz

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
12,763
Corsair's monitor naming scheme is terrible, xeneon needs to be retired and they should start over with something new. Just like they need to do with this monitor, how far away are you going to need to sit for that resolution on a 45" screen?
 

MistaSparkul

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,302
Corsair's monitor naming scheme is terrible, xeneon needs to be retired and they should start over with something new. Just like they need to do with this monitor, how far away are you going to need to sit for that resolution on a 45" screen?

I mean they could've just copied Asus and release their own 42" 4k 138Hz panel but at least they are offering something different. Lately it seems like all monitor makers are all just releasing the exact same screens under their own branding, which I guess isn't completely unreasonable because they all have to pick from the same pool of existing panels to use. Point is, seeing something that's new and different is at least exciting, even if it doesn't manage to tick all the boxes for everyone.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
7,020
Dang this would have been an instant buy from me if it were 1600P instead of 1440P.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
You haven't experienced the flickering on AW3423DW combined with ABL. That monitor is not comfortable to look at. The limitation is that LG hasn't made a smaller one yet. When it becomes smaller, the flickering has to be dealt with.

27" 1080P exists. So 45" UWQHD makes sense. The mechanism looks cheap. No buffed cooling solution. It is very likely a mid-tier at $1200 price.

I put 3 points: 1.flickering 2.brightness 3.colorspace.

LG probably fail at the brightness and colorspace. It won't be a HDR display but it could be a fast-paced SDR display if LG doesn't have flickering issues.

OLED SDR performance needs to be improved. It cannot jump to HDR but at least it should have the proper Adobe colorspace with 300 nits
I can't speak for the AW but have not seen any issues with LG OLEDs no matter how close I've sat to them.

As for OLED SDR performance, it is fine for sRGB in my experience and I don't see any need why it would have to be 300 nits brightness when I'm not going to ever need that much for desktop use. I use 120-130 nits day and night. If you are a photo editor relying on AdobeRGB then yeah, OLED is probably not the best choice for you unless you go for the 27/32" LG RGB OLED models which are aimed at that market. The consumer WOLEDs are great do-it-all displays for most regular users if you can deal with the size. Like anything we are talking about compromises. I have found LG OLEDs to perform well for my uses.

But getting back to this model, the equivalent of 27" 1080p displays are pretty terrible. I had to work with one at one short-term consultation project because that's what the client provided for me and it was awful as you could easily see the gap between pixels even at a moderate distance. I really can't fathom why Corsair and LG have ended up with this particular size/res. Is it that LG cannot make a smaller one with their current tech?
 

MistaSparkul

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,302
I didn't even hear of this coming down the pipe.. who is making the panel for this thing???


LG Display.

“With the help of LG Display, XENEON OLED FLEX is the beginning of a whole new class of gaming monitor, with the performance and literal flexibility to exceed the needs of even the most discerning gamers.”

This panel really slipped under the radar. I don't recall ever seeing this on any of TFTC's panel roadmap articles or anywhere else for that matter. I hope LG can surprise us with even more panels soon, how about a 32" 4K 240Hz?
 
Last edited:

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
9,660
This monitor might already dethroning the AW AW3423DW. It is going to be easily over 2k.
 

undertaker2k8

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
1,933
Changing the curve yourself = lots of issues, just gimme a 38" OLED 3840x1600, 5120x2160 be better though. For now my 3423dw works, may try the 42" ones too just for giggles.
 

Necere

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Messages
2,783
Very cool monitor, but 1440p and lack of VESA mounting make this overall a less versatile option vs. the 42" OLEDs. I was just posting about the reasons for keeping the PPI relatively low on OLED monitors in the near term; lower PPI is more efficient, which = higher brightness and longer lifespan. Maybe in a couple of years LG will incorporate microlens arrays and/or TADF or phosphorescent blue for higher efficiency and we'll see these hit 3840x1600 or perhaps even 5k2k (the ideal IMO).
 

Enhanced Interrogator

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,338
This monitor is great. Adjustable curvature means they don't have to make multiple SKUs. One monitor fits all

I bet you could remove the "v" part of the stand then jerry rig a VESA mount with some sort of clamps. At less than 8lbs, it's not going to break any mounting arms.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2021
Messages
780
This thing has some pretty sweet features. The only issue is the 3-year warranty which definitely means it will burn it or else they should have had a 5-year warranty to instill some confidence in the customer but no It will definitely melt itself over time. That's $2500 for 3 years which is kind of poor value. The curve is fantastic and so is the 240hz even the PPI is acceptable right? How many PPI is it since it is widescreen?
 

DoubleTap

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
2,901
If they had just made it 3840x1600 - I'd be all over it.

But at least we're seeing more / bigger / faster OLED monitors.

I'm going to keep waiting.
 

kramnelis

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2022
Messages
224
I can't speak for the AW but have not seen any issues with LG OLEDs no matter how close I've sat to them.

As for OLED SDR performance, it is fine for sRGB in my experience and I don't see any need why it would have to be 300 nits brightness when I'm not going to ever need that much for desktop use. I use 120-130 nits day and night. If you are a photo editor relying on AdobeRGB then yeah, OLED is probably not the best choice for you unless you go for the 27/32" LG RGB OLED models which are aimed at that market. The consumer WOLEDs are great do-it-all displays for most regular users if you can deal with the size. Like anything we are talking about compromises. I have found LG OLEDs to perform well for my uses.

But getting back to this model, the equivalent of 27" 1080p displays are pretty terrible. I had to work with one at one short-term consultation project because that's what the client provided for me and it was awful as you could easily see the gap between pixels even at a moderate distance. I really can't fathom why Corsair and LG have ended up with this particular size/res. Is it that LG cannot make a smaller one with their current tech?
Every time people imagine a do-it-all monitor is just made for their regular uses for the office-like image in sRGB 80 nits. And they worry about the PPI hammers the image quality. It is the least concern considering what kind of image sRGB can bring at most. The actual do-it-all monitor is a competent HDR monitor that displays the most range. It will be the monitor you use all the time.

I have said unless the camera/footage has enough colors, most contents are still graded from SDR to HDR. The color in SDR needs to be expanded, adjusted, and saturated to HDR level to have a natural, realistic look. In a scene, certain color only looks natural at higher brightness regardless if it is SDR or HDR.

The below HDR video shows how SDR is graded to HDR by adding contrast and expanded color. Simply adding brightness and contrast will look washed out. Without brightness or contrast, it might look oversaturated.


The problem with the most distribution is that processing two-layer videos, one for SDR, one for HDR, doubles the workload. So it is only one layer with cheap tone mapping, which means if a video is mainly focused on SDR grading, it won't look good in HDR. If a video is graded for HDR, it looks the best, however, SDR will depend on tone mapping.

The reason why sRGB 80 nits is a standard is that 99% of monitors are not gaming monitors, nor HDR monitors, they are office monitors. That is what sRGB 80 nits are used for as the lowest standard for image quality.

But a gaming monitor or an HDR monitor is more capable of better images. What this means is if the monitor with decent contrast is capable of 400+nits in SDR, with expanded Adobe colorspace or Rec 2020 color space plus further expanded by using YCbCr, it has an auto HDR function to turn SDR similar to HDR in SDR mode. Photographers are never satisfied with dull sRGB, if every monitor is capable of wider color space at higher nits other than sRGB 80nits, they will jump to that immediately.

A few monitors can do this. PG27UQ, PG32UQX, PA32UCX, PA32UCG. They are all FALD LCDs. I won't say OLED can turn SDR footage in the video straight into the 3rd on the way PA32UCG does in its HDR Preview mode, but OLED should be at least capable of doing 300 nits wide colorspace in SDR. It is a very nice feature to have. Current OLED has limited colorspace and brightness in SDR, all that "infinite" contrast is wasted.
 

Blackstone

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
3,404
Really a bummer the resolution is so low. Nonstarter for me. Atleast they see a market for it though.
 

Decko87

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
2,067
This thing will cost atleast 1500 and it's 83 ppi, what a joke. Love how we're always an after thought to the TV market. This is clearly scrap from a TV being sold at a premium. Junk.
 

Enhanced Interrogator

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,338
I think "glass" is like shorthand or something. More like a substrate.

I say that because I can't imagine LG cranked up a different production line for flexible WOLEDs
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,802
Then it's still not really scraps or leftovers at all. It's not like LG used up all the good stuff then gave whatevers left to this monitor.
It's basically leftover area from the substrate. Let's say in a hypothetical "motherglass" substrate of area X, LG can cut three 55" 4K TV panels out of it, but then there's leftover material for something smaller so they can use that leftover area for two 45" ultrawide panels, thus improving how many panels they get from the same material which lets them sell more product. Makes no sense to not utilize it. Calling it scraps isn't exactly fair as they are not using worse parts here.

What I don't really understand is how pixel density works for these leftover areas. If it can fit a 45" panel, couldn't they use e.g a 3840x1600 pixel structure there? Or maybe it's as simple as "these 3440x1440 sell better than our 38" 3840x1600 screens, let's make a display with the better selling resolution" while totally ignoring the reasons why those 3840x1600 sell less (lack of proper HDR and high prices).
 

elvn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
4,581
Anything over 80 is perfectly fine in my opinion.


For me I'd say 60PPD to 80PPD. You can't go by ppi since your viewing distance is dependent upon whatever curve you set it to. I doubt this will bend more than 1000R (and much after that you might be pushing the extents of the screen too far around you).

For reference:

RNngvaI.jpg



G9 , 1000R curved ultrawides

The G9 has a fixed curve which like a lens, has a focal point so you still have to sit a good distance away to be at the focal point. Neither a 42"/48" 16:9 OLED or a G9 are made for sitting at traditional desktop distances of 1.5' to 2'.

60PPD to 80PPD on 42" 4k = 29.0" to ~ 41" view distance

60PPD to 80PPD on 48" 4k = 33.5" to ~ 48" view distance

the focal point of a 1000R curvature screen is 39.37" view distance ~ 83PPD

Since it is curved, much like a lens it has a fixed focal point.

The curve is 1000R which means the focal point is 1000mm or 1 meter - which is a 39.37 inch viewing distance.

That is the distance it's fixed curvature makes as your viewpoint. Since it's not bendable you can't change this on the fly. If you sit at a different distance than this the curve isn't equidistant to you anymore.


RNngvaI.jpg


39.37inch view distance on a 49" diagonal 5120x1440 ends up being around ~ 83 PPD which is a good PPD for a screen (pixels per degree, which is a measurement of the perceived pixel density of a resolution at any given distance).


Beneath 60 PPD

It's not that the screens are unusable at sub-60PPD or anything, it's just that the pixels / pixel grid will appear much more granular and aggressive. Interfaces, bars, menus, HUDs etc will all be larger by default on lower resolution screens as well (less desktop "real-estate"). Text will also look much poorer in general at low PPD and you won't be able to use as small of a font/text size or interface size without it looking bad (you can't get more desktop real-estate by just scaling things down more - there won't be enough pixels and sub-pixels to do it with a clean result). Nearer than around 60 PPD: AA in games and text subsampling on the desktop (where AA is not available) won't be able to compensate enough anymore.

. .
I'd be more interested in a large curved 4k screen like the odyssey ark (or a 42 - 48" version) that was bendable. Assuming the bendable factor didn't cause problems somehow over time. Another huge issue for me is any screen that lacks vesa mounting. Both this corsair 45 and the odyssey ark lack vesa mounting.

. . .

I just looked it up and apparently it can curve all the way up to 800R, 800mm, .8meter = 31.496" view distance.

800R: 31.5" view distance. 67 deg viewing angle. On a 45" 3440x1440 that is 51.4 PPD. That's not good imo.

1000R: 39.37" view distance. 56 deg viewing angle. On a 45" 3440x1440 that is 61.7 PPD which I think is the minimum for when AA and text sub-sampling begin to be able to compensate enough.

1500R: ~ 59" view distance. 39 deg viewing angle. On a 45" 3440x1440 that is 88.4 PPD.

On this screen you hit 80 PPD at 53" view distance which would be a 1345R , 1345mm. Also a 43 degree viewing angle which is within what is usually considered an optimal 45 - 55deg viewing angle. Though the curve might muddy that factor a little.

I'd say 60PPD is decent for gaming with more aggressive AA at a performance cost. Sitting approaching 80PPD is where I like to be personally, depending on the game and if I'm running uw rez.
 
Last edited:
Top