Over the years, television sets and PC monitors have evolved significantly, transitioning through various technologies to reach the present state. In the past, both TVs and monitors had considerable thickness, poor color quality, massive edges, and low resolution. Today, OLED technology is the most advanced in both monitors and TV sets. However, it suffers from Burn-In, which can be compensated with software and implementations, as we will see in a comparison between OLED and QD-OLED after 10 months.
Burn-In is an issue we must expect when purchasing an OLED display since the organic light-emitting diodes degrade over time and can die. As they degrade, the pixels begin to lose brightness until they eventually turn off. Natural death should occur uniformly across the panel, but Burn-In may appear when elements remain in the same area. A way to accelerate Burn-In is by using static elements while the background changes.
Comparison between OLED TVs and monitors vs. QD-OLED after 10 months of Burn-In
There’s nothing new so far, but it’s essential to review this theory. TV brands add several features to ensure that even static elements avoid premature Burn-In. We have short compensation cycles, lasting less than 10 minutes and activated every 4 hours. Technologies such as LG’s Pixel Cleaner/Refresher, Sony’s Panel Calibration Cycle, and Samsung’s Screen Optimization are included in this category.
On the other hand, we have long compensation cycles, varying in duration from 1 minute in new screens to 1 hour in older panels. These cycles occur between 500 and 2,000 hours of continuous use and are called Pixel Refresher/Refresh or Panel Refresh by LG, Samsung, and Sony, respectively. Although the names resemble each other, their functionality will differ depending on the brand and model. Starting with the Sony A80J, A90J, and A90K TV tests, the first model experiences severe Burn-In when using short compensation cycles, but it’s almost imperceptible with the long compensation cycle.
Similar results are observed with the Sony A90J and A90K TVs, although the improvement is slightly less. With the Sony A95K, however, the result does not improve with this cycle. The latest LG WOLED TVs do not show signs of Burn-In, but it should be noted that the long and short compensation cycles share the same name.
21:9 Samsung QD-OLED panels in monitors suffer more from Burn-In
After examining OLED TV results, it’s time for Samsung QD-LED technology TVs. Samsung reports that its TVs don’t use long cycles automatically and instead use “enhanced real-time compensation.” The Samsung S95C TV with this technology achieves better results than the Samsung S95B, which does show signs of Burn-In. Samsung released a firmware update that added automatic long cycles, but the results were not optimal for the S95B.
Samsung’s first-generation QD-OLED TVs have the worst results compared to Sony’s OLED TVs. Now, it’s time to look at OLED vs. QD-OLED monitors to see if there are differences in these 10 months. An LG 27GR95QE-B monitor using LG WOLED panel, a Dell Alienware AW3423DWF, and a Samsung Odyssey OLED G8 with Samsung QD-OLED panels were tested.
As seen in the comparison, Burn-In is more noticeable in the 5% gray captures than in the 50%, which is typical. Monitors with Samsung panels experience considerably more noticeable marks, while LG achieves better results. It’s also important to consider that the other monitors have a 21:9 aspect ratio, and viewing static 16:9 content leaves long-term marks on the panel.
The final verdict: after 10 months of Burn-In, who has a better panel, Samsung or LG? It seems LG is the winner in this comparison, thanks to better Burn-In prevention and compensation features.