Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: slaapliedjeIt's kind of amusing to me that CRTs started off as 50/60hz, then higher end monitors started getting really high refresh rates (like the one I have that'll do 1600x1200 at 85hz). Then when we started with LCDs, we were back to having crappy refresh rates, with the added disadvantage of any non-native resolution looking like trash... Many years later, they're finally getting better.

You're forgetting or ignoring the fact that we mostly wanted higher refresh rates for CRTs to reduce the eye destroying flicker, not to make games run smoother or whatever. Whereas an LCD doesn't really have a flicker problem, even with the old fluorescent backlights.

CRTs didn't either, except when you'd try to do foolish things like interlace. Well, or if you were someone not in the 60hz locations... While there are benefits of PAL, a higher refresh rate is not one of them, and there is definitely flicker to most people at 50hz vs 60hz.

There are definitely benefits and disadvantages to each tech. Older stuff though, was designed for a CRT, so on occasion can look like utter trash on an flat screen. Especially when you're looking at 8-16bit stuff.

speaking of it do you (or anyone) know if old games work fine on OLED ? i know they look like crap on CRT, but oled work different so it might look less crapy? i wonder if its harder to make shaders/filters to simulate an CRT on an OLED screen than on an LCD one.

The thing is that those old games where created with the notion that the display was fuzzy and not sharp and detailed as they are now and an OLED is just as sharp and detailed as any LCD. What OLED brings to the table is CRT like (and in some cases like my monitor, better) handling of black and increased color+brightness capabilities.

Also one have to remember that back when we played those 8-bit and 16-bit games a 14" monitor was the default and the viewing distance was the same as it is with our modern 45" monitors so the size difference alone shows imperfections that were not detectable back then.

That said, I find C64 games using VICE looking quite good actually both on my OLED and on my old LCD.

Interestingly, I currently have my A4000 connected to an LCD monitor (via a zz9000, which has an HDMI output, but a pass through for native resolutions), plus a Commodore 1084 monitor (CRT). Watching a demo, I could see a square blue area around the main part of the demo running on the LCD screen, whereas on the CRT, it was very dark and you couldn't see it, making it look much better.

A lot of the old pixel art and such, just looks better with scanlines, which is why most emulators try their damnedest to recreate such things with shaders, etc. Ha, in a lot of ways, the computations to do just the shaders are more powerful than what it the original platforms were...

For the record, my Atari Jaguar does actually look quite amazing on my 77" OLED through an OSSC...

Yes the graphics (just as it is today ofc) was created with the display used at the time so scanlines and other imperfections where used to enhance the image where the GPU of the time couldn't provide the color or resolution needed/wanted. Btw which demo was it on the A4000? I would like to see the blue rectangle to try and make out what it was.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: F.UltraThe thing is that those old games where created with the notion that the display was fuzzy and not sharp and detailed as they are now and an OLED is just as sharp and detailed as any LCD. What OLED brings to the table is CRT like (and in some cases like my monitor, better) handling of black and increased color+brightness capabilities.

well that's not strictly true. You personally may not perceive a softness to an image (and im sure on a small low res screen like the steam decks it might be even harder to tell) but there are many threads on OLED monitors (perhaps not so much on a large TV as you sit further back) that comment on the sub pixel layout of OLED and how for desktop use it is softer and much better for gaming than desktop productivity. And that this is something that is not likely to be fixed any time soon. Right now LCD is sharper.

Yes I have seen lots of such claims, especially from people online vomiting over my LG 45GR95QE-B since it's both a WOLED and 45" UW 1440p and thus have a DPI that is just slightly above that of a 27" 1080p but to me this is mostly BS. At work I have a high end 32" 4K LCD from Samsung and it is by all means not that much sharper than my OLED at home.

Online people claim that it is impossible to work with text on my monitor while I as a programmer do tons of work with text (and often in terminal windows) with zero issues. If this means that they are all wrong or that Gnome happens to be better at text on this sub pixel layout than Windows is I don't know since I don't run Windows but text and/or sharpness is a complete non issue.

Plus to get back to context, even if that would be true it would be nothing compared with the fuzziness that existed even on the really high end CRT:s (and I used seriously high end CRT:s at work back before LCD:s took over) due to their analogue nature (#1 the signal was analogue and #2 the ray painting the image can not hit the exact same spot with infinite precision). Combine that with the low resolution of 8-bit monitors of 320x200 / 320x160 depending on PAL/NTSC fed over analogue composite.

* lower lifespan was an issue before 2016 as already discussed, the OLED panels since then have 2x the lifespan of a LCD one
* fans are a problem on some models, mine not at all, completely silent
* visible ABL, can be an issue the few times it hits but IMHO beats the bleed from LCD:s backlight every single day of the week.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BrokattI don't see "Improve the state of VRR."

Very few people care about VRR, which is also why it have taken so long to get it implemented.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: slaapliedjeIt's kind of amusing to me that CRTs started off as 50/60hz, then higher end monitors started getting really high refresh rates (like the one I have that'll do 1600x1200 at 85hz). Then when we started with LCDs, we were back to having crappy refresh rates, with the added disadvantage of any non-native resolution looking like trash... Many years later, they're finally getting better.

You're forgetting or ignoring the fact that we mostly wanted higher refresh rates for CRTs to reduce the eye destroying flicker, not to make games run smoother or whatever. Whereas an LCD doesn't really have a flicker problem, even with the old fluorescent backlights.

CRTs didn't either, except when you'd try to do foolish things like interlace. Well, or if you were someone not in the 60hz locations... While there are benefits of PAL, a higher refresh rate is not one of them, and there is definitely flicker to most people at 50hz vs 60hz.

There are definitely benefits and disadvantages to each tech. Older stuff though, was designed for a CRT, so on occasion can look like utter trash on an flat screen. Especially when you're looking at 8-16bit stuff.

speaking of it do you (or anyone) know if old games work fine on OLED ? i know they look like crap on CRT, but oled work different so it might look less crapy? i wonder if its harder to make shaders/filters to simulate an CRT on an OLED screen than on an LCD one.

The thing is that those old games where created with the notion that the display was fuzzy and not sharp and detailed as they are now and an OLED is just as sharp and detailed as any LCD. What OLED brings to the table is CRT like (and in some cases like my monitor, better) handling of black and increased color+brightness capabilities.

Also one have to remember that back when we played those 8-bit and 16-bit games a 14" monitor was the default and the viewing distance was the same as it is with our modern 45" monitors so the size difference alone shows imperfections that were not detectable back then.

That said, I find C64 games using VICE looking quite good actually both on my OLED and on my old LCD.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: Pengling

Quoting: F.UltraWhere does the pain come from? I understand that OLED usually have higher brightness, but since that is a setting I guess that we are talking about something else?

Eyestrain and migraines. I'm told that OLEDs flicker like CRTs did (I had the same problem with those - LCDs were a godsend! :tongue:), which would both explain it and suggest that it can't be avoided.

Ah, was about to ask if you had the same issues with CRTs. Yes OLED:s "flicker" to control brightness so I can see why that might be an issue, probably different from model to model since the frequency of the flicker differs and once the frequency goes high enough I suspect that the issue should go away from sensitive people (the current issue is that the frequency is just above the detectable threshold and not way above, prob to save on power).

It's kind of amusing to me that CRTs started off as 50/60hz, then higher end monitors started getting really high refresh rates (like the one I have that'll do 1600x1200 at 85hz). Then when we started with LCDs, we were back to having crappy refresh rates, with the added disadvantage of any non-native resolution looking like trash... Many years later, they're finally getting better.

True, though the flkickering from OLED comes from a completely different frequency than the display frequency. However I'm just still amazed that we still since we moved on from a moving electron beam in a CRT to technology like LCD/LED/OLED where you can update any pixel at any time that we still have update frequencies. Monitors should basically by VRR as in the GPU sending "here is an image, and here is another" and only the capability of the monitor determinging the min time between such full frames.

Display frequencies have increased quite a lot though, I mean my OLED is 240hz and there exists 540hz in stores right now. And as others have already stated, the reason for the 85Hz CRT was to give a more stable image, not to handle high FPS in games.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Pengling

Quoting: F.UltraWhere does the pain come from? I understand that OLED usually have higher brightness, but since that is a setting I guess that we are talking about something else?

Eyestrain and migraines. I'm told that OLEDs flicker like CRTs did (I had the same problem with those - LCDs were a godsend! :tongue:), which would both explain it and suggest that it can't be avoided.

Ah, was about to ask if you had the same issues with CRTs. Yes OLED:s "flicker" to control brightness so I can see why that might be an issue, probably different from model to model since the frequency of the flicker differs and once the frequency goes high enough I suspect that the issue should go away from sensitive people (the current issue is that the frequency is just above the detectable threshold and not way above, prob to save on power).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Pengling

Quoting: F.UltraNow this is hard for us consumers to reliably test without simply waiting and see but LG announced already back in 2016 that their panels had a life expectancy of 100k hours (which is more than double that of LED and LCD) so it sounds like nothing to worry about anymore.

And the ongoing Rtings test shows that burn-in worries is mostly overblown (yes they experience burn-in but they do run their tv:s on for 24x7 with static images), with LED:s actually performing worse when it comes to uniformity.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/longevity-burn-in-test-updates-and-results [External Link]

If it's true that they've fixed these things, I'm glad to hear it. :smile:

However, it doesn't change that fact that, for me personally, I simply can't look at these displays without pain! I really hope that LCD remains an option with the eventual Deck 2.

Where does the pain come from? I understand that OLED usually have higher brightness, but since that is a setting I guess that we are talking about something else?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Pengling

Quoting: slaapliedjeIsn't everything guaranteed to die?

To a degree, but not like this - being organic is a major downside of Organic-LEDs. :wink:

Though they're not quite as short-lived today, the first ones to market were dying off within months to a year, and often not fully, with huge chunks or lines suddenly going missing.

Anyone remember the original PS Vita? The OLED was such a problem that the "Lite" revision replaced it with a standard LCD.

Quoting: slaapliedjeHa, after buying a 77" OLED TV, I definitely get annoyed by light bleed. Never bothered me before...

But for sure, OLED screens can be obnoxiously bright, especially for someone who has gotten lasik surgery.

I haven't had any eye-surgery, but I just can't look at those bloody things. They're completely unusable for me. :sad:

Now this is hard for us consumers to reliably test without simply waiting and see but LG announced already back in 2016 that their panels had a life expectancy of 100k hours (which is more than double that of LED and LCD) so it sounds like nothing to worry about anymore.

And the ongoing Rtings test shows that burn-in worries is mostly overblown (yes they experience burn-in but they do run their tv:s on for 24x7 with static images), with LED:s actually performing worse when it comes to uniformity.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/longevity-burn-in-test-updates-and-results [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: AnanaceThe thing that I like the absolute most about this, is that there's not a hint of Electron in the new code, instead just regular C# and Avalonia (which has Linux as a first-class citizen)

Oh boy... at least it's open source and starts its life as a CLI tool.

Still, it's Nexus. A modding site that requires a login for downloads and throttles free users. Why not use IPFS if bandwidth is so expensive for them?

Because the goal is to sell access, not that the bandwidth is too expensive for them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 14

Quoting: WorMzyI haven't bought a Razer mouse since 2013, shame to hear they're still just as poorly made as they were back then.

I used to use Roccat up until Stefan stopped updating roccat-tools (unofficial Linux userspace tools), I guess Roccat themselves didn't want to pick up maintaining them (or else didn't want to commit to first-party support), but I jumped ship to Corsair (using ckb-next) in 2019. Not had any complaints.

1) I disagree about being poorly made. They're good. As good as Logitech? I haven't had one for many years because they don't make a mouse I want. I agree Logitech sets the standard.

2) I really liked my Roccat Nyth, however it started experiencing a problem with the main click button. That's core functionality. I've never had that happen before. As the Nyth isn't made anymore, I had to find another mouse with lots of side buttons while still having grip space for the thumb. After trying a few from eBay and then reselling the ones I didn't want, I landed with the Razer Naga Pro (v1). I don't like wireless, so I don't plug in the receiver and I keep the cable attached. I love the feet and the optical clicks. It feels like good quality to me. The only thing I'd change is make it a bit longer like the Nyth was since I have large hands and got used to that.

Razer software? Well, I cheated and installed the Razer stuff onto a work Windows machine, plugged my mouse in once and configured it; now it's set forever.

I think people tend to forget that modern gaming mice is extremely lightweight, e.g my DeathAdder V3 Pro is 63g, regardless of the quality of components there is only so much stress + wear and tear that something weighing that little can withstand.

Compare that with the first mouse I owned, the original tank mouse for the Amiga 500, that beast weighed in at about 200-300g and the buttons on it had a very short life.

View this comment - View article - View full comments