You are absolutely right about the sound quality...these guys are sold on Corporate talking points though, so "Atmos" sounds cool and they think it's the absolute best experience. Not that it's a bad thing (more directionality in a home theater is better to a point). But they won't understand the technical aspects of audio you are mentioning. My Schiit Stack with even some Beyerdynamic 990's "sounds" better than whatever is in their living room, but it doesn't have that keyword to cling to. It's just scientifically better sound, which isn't what they are looking for at this point in their life. They want justification for their purchase...which most people do, to be fair.

I say this as an aspiring audiophile (If only I were more rich!) with a 5.1.2 atmos setup connected to my computer, ps4pro, xbones. PC audio sounds much better to my ear, and for the games that don't have atmos, it matrixes just fine. I'd rather have the higher quality audio than a talking point.

Dell had an OLED screen on the market for a couple of months but pulled it due to quality control issues.

Not much into sound engineering so I don't know much about it but how is Windows Sonic similar to Dolby Atmos? Don't the games need to support it?

The difference in motion blur between a 1ms response time monitor and a 0.1ms response time OLED screen is insignificant in the extreme.

The OLED TV would perform phenomenally better if it's refresh rate was also much higher, but consoles simply can't do it in the majority of cases and certainly can't reach as high as a PC in any case that I know of.

What you should be considering is the metric used to measure the quality of motion on the display. That includes refresh rate.

33.3ms refresh rate for consoles by default at @ 30fps.

6.94ms refresh rate for pc monitor @ 144fps.

http://www.30vs60fps.com/ - That's the difference between 30fps and 60fps.

For a console with an OLED screen that has super duper response time let's just pick 0ms it doesn't really matter. You are getting a slide show:

New image every 33.3ms + 0ms = 33.3ms.

Let's pick a 6ms response time monitor for arguments sake.

New image every 6.94ms + 6ms = 12.94ms.

33.3ms vs 12.94ms.

PC can still reproduce the image nearly 3 times as fast with a standard monitor. If you start reducing the response time on PC to some of the greater performance monitors then it starts to approach 5 times.

Plus it even says it in your article you just linked, "Noticeable difference in response time 10ms". The difference in OLED screens and decent monitors is not 10ms and not noticeable.

@m3Boarder32 said:

@GarGx1 said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

@GarGx1 said:

Link please, state a 'fact' present the evidence to go with it. Not saying you're wrong but until you have something backing up your statements then, as far as I'm concerned, you are talking shite.

You want to see the "input lag" response time for monitors?

Feel free to compare and you can see why monitors are better for gaming than TV's. You can but... but... about HDR all day long but it doesn't change that monitors are better gaming displays, add in Gsync or Freesync and incomparibly higher frame rates and they'll always win, regardless of bright white is or how dark black is.

Thank you, that wasn't hard was it? Do you have a link so as I can see the entire table/article and not just the cropped image?

Now what's your take on the higher input lag and low frame rates (the actual thread topic)? We'll not go into being forced to use DoF and motion blur, just yet.

To me it’s not as important/satisfying as contrast ratio, color saturation, response times, HDR, and 3D Audio.

which is why I game on an OLED and ditched my PC for a X1X

Can you post a link to that article please, I've been through Rtings.com and it's not an easy find. I would like to see what they mean by 80% and 100% response time and why they are listed like that, I'd also like to see the rest of the table.

I presume you have a LG C7 or Sony A1E, other wise the response times are slower.

Why would input lag be less of a concern when it has a direct impact on gaming where as colour saturation (available on PC), HDR (available on PC) and 3d Audio (available on PC) have a much lesser impact? It's looking very much that you prefer graphics over game play.

Mildly improved colour being the biggest priority in gaming.

Damn.... this is how TV companies make a fortune.

@m3Boarder32: You keep repeating yourself and trying to act like you've got some holy Grail gaming setup...and like it's been pointed out time and time again you just don't lol.

@m3Boarder32 said:

@MBirdy88 said:

@Juub1990 said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

You’re right, a little strong with the adjective :)

So you have a 10,000$ set up but only about 7 games are phenomenal on it? Kinda ironic you are one of the guys constantly comparing the quality/price of a PC vs an Xbox One X.

Yea I think it's time to stop.

As you said about Pedro...

Feeding this guy is just as bad.

Fact's don't work when you are only experience the one side of the fence (console gaming) ... just emotional defensive responses from them.

"In your opinion, my opinion with no experience is all that matters" .. f*ck it, lets have a world focus on opinions!

I’ve had a 5870, GTX 670, and GTX 970.

Yall just sound mad that I didn’t go from a 970 to a 1070, I chose an X1X instead.

It’s laughable that you peasants think it’s irreprehensible that someone prefer The system with the best HDR and Atmos Support. And the system which undoubtedly will continue to get more support. All while you harp on about 4K/60 while at the same time admiting a 1080 Ti doesn’t cut it for 4K/60.

But I will keep laughing, laughing while sitting up top my HDR/Audio throne

Mad? .... no just think you are quite looney at this point.

All this "supposed" money spent on OLED and ATMOS (lets be honest, its alot smaller deal than you claim. as someone who has that kind of money to splash is not concerned with a 970 or 1070 if they want fidelity). You could hook up a PC to that same setup with the same controller and have a million more options with 1080 TI you would actually see the VAST majority of games at that fidelity... and yes, when HDR actually gets more love in the gaming world, more HDR.

All cheap talk about nothing.

Bookshelf speakers + 18" sub.

Talk about frequency gaps. :D

Yea I think it's time to stop.

As you said about Pedro...

Feeding this guy is just as bad.

Fact's don't work when you are only experience the one side of the fence (console gaming) ... just emotional defensive responses from them.

"In your opinion, my opinion with no experience is all that matters" .. f*ck it, lets have a world focus on opinions!

So you have a 10,000$ set up but only about 7 games are phenomenal on it? Kinda ironic you are one of the guys constantly comparing the quality/price of a PC vs an Xbox One X.