Quote from: NikoB on September 11, 2023, 12:59:56This site is full of strange reviews where they claim that there is no low-frequency PWM or it is in the region of 50-100 kHz, although the datasheets for the panels indicated in the review, for example, clearly say that the maximum PWM frequency on them is no more than 20-30 kHz.
[...]
This site is full of strange reviews where they claim that there is no low-frequency PWM or it is in the region of 50-100 kHz, although the datasheets for the panels indicated in the review, for example, clearly say that the maximum PWM frequency on them is no more than 20-30 kHz.

Please explain! What datasheets? Where? How do I understand that there must be PWM? Why is it impossible that the datasheet is wrong and the review is right?

That's all valid but OLED without PWM is highly unusual, especially on a laptop, and yet the reviewer doesn't question or remark about this test result.

It takes nothing more than an iphone app to see that PWM is very present..maybe the review sample was 'rigged' as you say.

This site is full of strange reviews where they claim that there is no low-frequency PWM or it is in the region of 50-100 kHz, although the datasheets for the panels indicated in the review, for example, clearly say that the maximum PWM frequency on them is no more than 20-30 kHz.

So you need to treat these reviews very carefully, and carefully monitor the overall picture, which an ordinary person who grabs one interesting review for reading by chance simply cannot do due to a lack of understanding of the weak points of the reviews.

There are many nuances that only professionals and extremely experienced readers understand.

This site is full of strange reviews where they claim that there is no low-frequency PWM or it is in the region of 50-100 kHz, although the datasheets for the panels indicated in the review, for example, clearly say that the maximum PWM frequency on them is no more than 20-30 kHz.

So, when it comes to these reviews (and not only on this site), you need to be very careful, carefully monitoring the overall picture, which the average person, having grabbed one interesting review for him to read, by chance, simply cannot do, due to a lack of understanding of the weak points and nuances of testing and design of reviews by the authors.

There are many nuances that only professionals and extremely experienced readers understand and which simply remain behind the scenes.

Unfortunately, even specialized forums with threads on a specific product model, hundreds of pages long, sometimes cannot give clear answers due to the fact that more than 90% of their participants are complete amateurs (and mostly idiots), asking the same primitive questions in a circle questions, and when asked to check something, if they suddenly find themselves one of the first to buy a new product, they remain lazy, stupid and selfishly silent, not wanting to help the community, thereby, to their own stupidity, limiting the possibilities of their own choice, subsequently, new products, i.e., "shooting themselves in the foot" in the future. As a result, you can only find out something reliably by conducting a very complex cross-comparison of many reviews on the Internet and carefully, in parallel, analyzing the datasheets of components in order to understand where the authors are clearly lying. Or by purchasing a product, not just one copy, but several with different compositions of components, in order to understand how fraudulent manufacturers manipulate their composition in batches. And who can afford this, even if such sites do not do repeated and multiple random tests in different batches and after a certain time. In fact, all reviews on the Internet are a profanation of professional testing, unless there is a methodical recheck of each subsequent batch, because Even if we exclude the bias of reviews, when the product is clearly transferred by a manufacturer interested in a certain coverage of the product, the absence of random, selective, repeated testing at a certain time interval, in different batches, excludes buyers from understanding the real picture of the quality of the product in batches and in general.

A pity that the review is wrong about PWM - it does infact have PWM - more under 50% but also some still at all brightnesses.
I have to return it for this reason.

I can get MacBook Air 15 for that kind of money.

Quote from: Faris Hanafiah on August 01, 2023, 13:58:18If you care so much about having a taller screen, get yourself a rotating monitor. Taller screen on a laptop is still a complete joke in 2023.

Tall aspect ratios are particularly useful on laptops because they improve the balance between vertical screen space and horizontal footprint. Media ratio differences are real, but media is just one use for a computer.

I would agree that external monitors add to productivity when you can use them, and to that we also need more options for 16:10 and 3:2 desktop monitors.

Great computer but because LG doesn't offer the option with Zen 4 7040 Phoenix in 13" 14" 15" with only RDNA 3 iGPU at prices below $900 this is what everyone expects and if possible with 32Gb of RAM DDR 5 and Wiffi 7 this is already being done by ACER Swift edge 16 (sfe16-43)
Since last year, many expected that LG would give an option with Zen 3 and it could not be now in the professional forums they hope that LG can put Zen 4

All laptops (no exceptions) should have a minimum of 220-230 ppi today. As are smartphones. It looks already simply indecent against the background of muddy fonts in browsers based on chromium and of course in chrome. Due to incorrect black and white anti-aliasing (shadows where they should not be). It is impossible to turn off this nasty wrong anti-aliasing due to the fault of the bastards from Google (pure evil corporation for many years) and M$ neither in Chrome nor in Edge under Windows. Under Linux, this can be done as a command line option.

All people on the planet who use Chrome at ppi much lower than 200, and fhd screens usually have no more than 150 and even less - literally spoil their eyesight and I can easily prove this with screenshots of correct and incorrect anti-aliasing.

The only way to solve this problem in such crappy browsers is to put only 4k panels in all laptops.

On smartphones, this essentially happened - you can't find a smartphone with ppi below 250 anymore. Therefore, bastards from Google don't care about desktops and laptops with low ppi - this is simply not their main monetization platform on the planet. They make money primarily on smartphones, and there is simply no problem due to muddy incorrect anti-aliasing. shadows and blurry text are no longer noticeable at ppi above about 220-230.

In addition, only 4k panels provide a perfectly sharp picture for fhd video - the most common on the planet right now. Because 4k perfectly resizes to fhd - 4 points turn into 1. With stupid 2.5k panels, this will not work - they are not integer divisible by 1920.

Large corporations and TNCs have brought the situation through their fault (and the stupidity of the majority of the world's population) to the point of absurdity.

OLED without PWM?

Looks great, but not so keen on the OLED display. I had mishaps with screen burn-in on my smartphones, so I have my doubts using it on a laptop. I still believe that a high-quality IPS LCD panel can give the most realistic colour gamut if done right.

I'm still content with the 1080p 16:9 screen, but I think 120Hz won't hurt for gaming.

Quote from: Mr Majestyk on August 01, 2023, 03:39:1816:9 instant fail.

Lol, you expect everyone to move on to a taller screen? Not a chance! Even your external monitor still uses 16:9. 💁�♂️

Quote from: Tiermes on August 01, 2023, 12:23:51Low resolution, 16:9, asymmetric keyboard.... What a fail

1080p is still fine for everyday use, though 1440p won't hurt. 16:9 has never been a failure since it's still the most widely-used aspect ratio for mass media. If you care so much about having a taller screen, get yourself a rotating monitor. Taller screen on a laptop is still a complete joke in 2023.

Low resolution, 16:9, asymmetric keyboard.... What a fail

I agree that a higher res / refresh rate / aspect ratio would be nice. Especially if it can be done while preserving the battery life!

However, I am fine with the lack of HDMI if it means more USB-C ports. You can adapt one way but not the other, and the converters don't add all that much bulk when you're already dealing with the cable.

Also oddly low contrast ratio for an OLED. I'd like to see how that actually looks in a dark room. Still higher than non-OLEDs usually provide.

OLED 60hrz ,no 4k ,no HDMI ,2100€      😄😄😄