LG 45' OLED 240Hz Gaming Monitor REVIEW - They ALMOST did it...

Reviewing the LG 45" UltraGear OLED Gaming Monitor (45GR95QE-B) - is this MONSTER Monitor with a 240hz OLED panel worth $1699??

#Gaming #Monitor #OLED

Can't get enough of your TECH? Why not SUBSCRIBE? (it's free!) 😄
🎵 Music by Epidemic & Artlist

[Thetechchap]

Hey Chaps! If you had $1699 to spare...🤑would you buy this??

Update (March 2023)
1. For a brighter display, turn off the "Smart Energy Saving" in the monitor settings.
2. A firmware update for the monitor's Game Mode is coming in April - boosting brightness during gameplay

[HopeNewDay]

Not having built in speakers...




IS ABSOLUTELY INCREIDBLE! THANK YOU LG FOR NOT COMPROMISING THE DESIGN WITH LOW QUALITY SPEAKERS!

[inconvenientfacts]

You really need to observe this monitor in person to see how it fares. I was lucky enough to find a store where it had this monitor next to the LG 48" 4K OLED and the Samsung Neo G9 (which I have).

The PPI is not an issue as I could only see the pixels when I had my nose touching the screen. If anything, the 48" 4K OLED's pixels on text was much more noticeable at close range (which is weird I know).

The Neo G9 is very long but short. The 48" 4K OLED is like a TV, wide and tall but boxy and at 16:9, which is good for watching content, but less immersive for RPGs and too "big" for productivity unless you scale or sit further back. The 45" LG UltraGear is in between the two. The deep curve actually takes up less space (depth) than the G9 Neo because the OLED screen is so much thinner. The G9 is also noticeably hotter with a very significant screen glare.

I'm still undecided as to whether to replace my G9 with the 45" UltraGear - will wait to see how the new G9 OLEDs work out.

[World_of_OSes]

I think they should bring the size down to 42 inch and bring the resolution up to 3840x1600. That would bring the pixel density up to 98 PPI.

[Miyaki]

Something I wish Nvidia would do is enable DLDSR over HDMI 2.1 seeing as how we have the extra bandwidth there. The only way to use DLDSR on this monitor is to us DP 1.4 (not DSC) at 144hz in order to force a higher resolution through the Nvidia Control panel, which could help a little bit with the sharpness of the overall image. I know it's not the same as true PPI with true 3840x1600, but it could be a solid middle ground.

[nickjacobsss]

They definitely should have made this monitor in 34” instead since its 1440p. The bigger 45” size makes total sense if it were a 4k panel though.

[RamaOlama]

The resolution would be for me a nogo either. At least 3840x1600 would be acceptable, but on this size 5k*2k would be more optimal.
If they would bring out a higher resolution with like 165hz refresh rate, that would start to be interesting. But atm the normal small c2 oled TV is simply the best option.

[SH-qwdr]

This monitor would be perfect if it was 40 inch and has less curve like 1500-1800. PPI would then be around decent 93 ppi and with less curve you can push it back little further. Being 800 curve, you are forced to bring in the monitor closer which will make you notice low pixel 82 ppi. Maybe next iteration...

[FZBZ]

I game on this monitor everyday, I literally have 0 complaints about the picture quality. Never seen a pixel on it. I loved it when I first bought it a year and still love it just as much today.

[TheFawz]

The curve is overly aggressive, way beyond what I'd be comfortable with. Still, happy to see OLED UltraWides that leverage HDMI 2.1 for the extra bandwidth to reach higher Resolution/Refresh Rate/12Bit/RGB. At the 1440p resolution it should have been much smaller, or they should have increased the res and lowered the Refresh Rate

[RealDiGiPHiX]

Missed opportunity.
Needed to be 4K at that size, even if they had to drop the refresh rate down to 200Hz or even 175hz it would have been a far more interesting product with those specs.

[dunningkruger]

Great review. It really should be 92 dpi at least, so I do agree that they should shrink it a bit. I have a 32” (31.5”) 2K (2560 x 1440) main monitor and a 24” (23.8”) secondary FHD monitor. Both are IPS and have nearly the same approx 92 dpi pixel density. For my eyes and at my viewing distance, their pixel density is sufficient enough that I don’t notice the pixels. Perhaps on a different panel type, I might notice. In contrast, I have a 27” FHD monitor at the office, and its too pixelated. The small decrease in pixel density makes a huge difference.

[gabrieltossas]

LG C2 42” is the way to go. Heck, my 4090 still fights with some games to reach at least 90-110 fps with ultra settings.

So unless it is a high competitive game, the 42” still wins for that crisp and sharp picture for most story single players games.

[Terreos]

I honestly like it. I use two 32" 1440p monitors side by side and think this would be a nice upgrade. Mostly because of the OLED panel, but still I like it.

[MrFloRolf]

I've been on 3440x14400 for like 7 years now and it's brilliant! However I 'only' have 34" and I really think I'd agree that it's too low for 45" 🤔

[pizzashaman]

I think I would prefer the Alienware 34 inch OLED model. I have the IPS LCD right now and I love it. The curve is more subtle on it and gaming is an absolute joy

[nickmartin]

I think you said it perfectly. The low resolution is a deal breaker. I currently have a lg 38gl950g-b and I was considering this display until I found out about the low res.

[firesidecode]

This monitors price has dropped significantly, do you recommend it more now because of the new price?

[rvs]

Should have made it a 1200R curve, and a 5120 x 2160 resolution.
Even if it was 165Hz, it would have been a lot better than 3440x1440

[nathanhjelm]

The resolution is what stopped me from purchasing this. Looking to upgrade to OLED from my older Samsung 49" (5120x1440) and do not want to give up nearly 2000 pixels on the horizontal. For a monitor this size and aspect ratio I expect at least 1600p if not 2160p. Will likely upgrade to the new Samsung 49" OLED.