Why I upgraded to a 4K OLED PC gaming monitor

Easier to run than in years past – DLSS/MFG/FSR looks good and really improves frame rates

Increasingly affordable – obviously affordable is in the eye of the beholder, but they are a lot cheaper today than even a year ago

Burn-in has improved, too – While it’s still a concern over time, especially for static images like taskbars, manufacturers have implemented mitigations to prevent the phenomenon

There are several reasons to hold off on upgrading to a 4K 240Hz OLED monitor. One is that your current GPU may not keep up. Driving 240 FPS on a 4K monitor isn’t easy. And even with improvements and upscaling from both camps, you can’t make a budget card play like a flagship. Now, if you don’t play games, any video card will output 4K on an OLED, so this reason not to is only for the gamers.

I know burn-in is part of the reason to upgrade, and modern panels handle this better than early OLEDs, but it hasn’t disappeared. If your day is packed with spreadsheets and coding, or you use permanent taskbars/toolbars, those pixels stay in the same place all day. Dark modes and manufacturer mitigations help, but it’s the main risk. Check your warranty, as some brands cover burn-in (think Dell/Alienware, MSI, Corsair, Asus, LG, Acer), while others do not (Lenovo, budget/generic brands), and consider it ‘normal wear’. In short, if you work on static images a lot, you could see burn-in down the road.

Text can look slightly off depending on the panel type. If you work with a lot of text or spreadsheets, both OLED panel types can struggle with text clarity because they use non-standard subpixel layouts instead of the traditional RGB stripes. QD-OLED generally provides sharper overall rendering with ClearType enabled, while WOLED can look a bit hazy if the screen uses a matte coating. The good news is that the pixel density is so high, it’s harder to notice (I don’t on mine, and I write on it in a browser tab for 8+ hours a day).

Here again, we mentioned affordability in the why you should section, but it needs a place here too. For many users, $700+ is still prohibitively expensive. 1440p and 1080p OLED monitors cost much less.

If you’re an esports gamer, especially a competitive one, you likely need less real estate and higher frame rates. So choosing a 24-inch 240Hz+ 1080p IPS/VA panel is the best choice for users who want more FPS and less input lag than they do the highest contrast or saturated colors, for example.

You don’t have a powerful enough video card – If you don’t have an RTX 4080/5070 Ti or greater or AMD Radeon 9070XT, you may want to wait until your next graphics card upgrade. Or, if less than 240 FPS is OK, a lower-end card will work.

If your day is packed with static images on the screen, burn-in can eventually become an issue, regardless of mitigation features from the panel or user.

Text can look slightly off – Coming from someone who writes on their OLED daily, this isn’t a big issue, but it's worth noting just in case. The higher the pixel density, the less of an issue this is.

It’s still expensive – Yeah, they are a lot cheaper than a year ago, but they are still costly. Prices will continue to drop.

Esports gamer – You want a higher refresh rate and less real estate. Smaller, faster panels are ideal for this user.

OLED stands for Organic Light-Emitting Diode. It uses self-illuminating pixels that create their own light and can turn completely off. In other words, each LED creates its own color and, for black, turns off, creating infinite contrast compared to LCDs ( IPS / VA /TN panels).

OLEDs have two subvariants, QD-OLED (Quantum Dot OLED) and WOLED (White OLED), and they differ in several ways, including how they generate light (WOLED: bottom emission; QD: top emission), their subpixel structure, and filtering. To summarize, WOLEDs generate white light from the bottom, which goes through four (RGBW) color filters, the backplane, and out. Whereas QD displays generate blue light and then turn it into green and red through a quantum dot layer.

What does all that mean? Without getting technical, it means QD-OLEDs excel in color volume and saturated highlights, with excellent color uniformity and tinting. WOLEDs offer the same benefits as traditional OLEDs (per-pixel control) but with an added advantage. Using a single white emitter with color filters means you don’t run into the problem of individual red, Green, and blue emitters aging at different rates, which can cause color shifting and burn-in. Now, WOLEDs don’t eliminate burn-in or image retention, but they can lessen the severity. In the end, finding a bad OLED monitor is difficult, especially when you compare it to VA and IPS panels, since the contrast ratio , color volume, and response times put them in a league far above their IPS and VA counterparts. The biggest downside to any OLED panel is price (OLEDs cost more). So what about the elephant in the OLED room, Burn-in? If you don’t know, burn-in is a phenomenon where the image on a monitor is retained and visible when other content is displayed. A good example is something static, like the ticker bar at the bottom of the screen or the Windows taskbar; these items tend to ‘burn in’ versus other areas of the panel that constantly change.

Over the years, this has improved. Most brands have mitigation features; for example, Philips (among others, like Samsung and MSI) uses pixel shifting technology to move displayed content one pixel up/down/left/right to reduce burn-in. MSI also uses pixel shifting, pixel refreshing, and OLED Care 3.0 to dim or turn off the screen when you step away. Each vendor has something to reduce it. Burn-in is real, but with today’s prevention features and a little bit of common sense from the user, it could take years to see anything visible on your screen, and something that I, so far, cannot see. Tom’s Hardware’s own monitor expert, Brandon Hill, wrote a great article ( WOLED vs QD-OLED monitors: which panel technology is better ) covering the differences between OLEDs and which panel technology is better; it's absolutely worth a look if you want more detail on the panel types.

Jumping up from my 2560×1440 165Hz monitor to a 4K OLED at 240 Hz was, without a doubt, the best upgrade I made to my system in quite a while. For me, the awesome contrast and colors, plus the extra screen space, changed how I worked during the day and played games at night. Frankly, there’s no way I can go back. Prices, while still out of range for some, have come down considerably, and you can now get a 32-inch 4K 240Hz OLED panel for under $700. With upscaling tech like DLSS and FSR making it easier to run, you may not need a graphics card upgrade to reach your goals. If you want a sharper picture, more screen real estate, and a big jump in image quality, a 4K OLED is hard to beat. That said, it isn’t for everyone. If your graphics card can’t keep up and your day is packed with static spreadsheets and toolbars, or the price is just too much ($700 is still a lot of money), you can wait or look at a 1440p OLED instead. You can find those, like the Acer Predator X27U, for under $300 . If you’re a competitive esports gamer, a smaller, faster 1080p panel is likely the best choice. In the end, the price of entry was worth it for me. But affordability is in the eye of the beholder, so be honest with yourself about how you'll use it before you buy.

Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.

Key considerations

Investor positioning can change fast
Volatility remains possible near catalysts
Macro rates and liquidity can dominate flows

Reference reading

More on this site

Informational only. No financial advice. Do your own research.

Key considerations

Reference reading

More on this site

Related posts:

Leave a Comment Cancel reply