Quantcast

POLL: Has your OLED TV suffered burn in? (NOTE YOUR VOTE WILL BE PUBLIC)

Has your OLED TV suffered burn in?

  • I have a 2019 Panel with burn in.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    759

gizlaroc

Distinguished Member
We are seeing sets where there is dark patches in the middle where people's faces have been.

When the content is static the set darkens that static logo etc. So I disagree, static images are not actually an issue, it is aeras that use 100% red that are the issue. Red and bright Yellow graphics, and graphics that are moving more so.

Black bars would be an issue, if it were a full red/yellow field everywhere else, but this doesn't happen, therefore it is not.
 

blackmesa8

Well-known Member
We are seeing sets where there is dark patches in the middle where people's faces have been.

When the content is static the set darkens that static logo etc. So I disagree, static images are not actually an issue, it is aeras that use 100% red that are the issue. Red and bright Yellow graphics, and graphics that are moving more so.

Black bars would be an issue, if it were a full red/yellow field everywhere else, but this doesn't happen, therefore it is not.
That is what I have been seeing people say on here for years. It is screenware not burn and the yellow and red pixel colours wear out fastest. GMB logo anyone?

OLED is a no go for me due to my use but I have been looking into getting one in another room away from my PC and gaming use, even then I am still not sure.
 

5to1

Well-known Member
We are seeing sets where there is dark patches in the middle where people's faces have been.

When the content is static the set darkens that static logo etc. So I disagree, static images are not actually an issue, it is aeras that use 100% red that are the issue. Red and bright Yellow graphics, and graphics that are moving more so.

Black bars would be an issue, if it were a full red/yellow field everywhere else, but this doesn't happen, therefore it is not.
If it's just typical cumulative wear then why does it have to be "full red/yellow field everywhere else" to cause black bars to be an issue?

None of the content we watch is truly random, unless you watch static. Over time there will be significant variation in sub pixel utilisation. If you watch a lot of content with black bars, those areas will clearly have been utilised less then the rest of the screen. The adjacent pixels will have been lit up at 100% at various points. So you would see a marked difference between the pixels in the black bar area and the pixels adjacent to it.

Moreover, if it's just cumulative wear, after a few thousand hours any full field solid frame should look an absolute mess. Because there's no chance every pixel will have been utilised evenly.
 

5to1

Well-known Member
I think it would be interesting if rtings (or someone else) did the following test all on the same panel:

1) 100x100 pixel box, full red for 60 consecutive minutes/day.
2) 100x100 pixel box, full red for 1 min every 24 mins.
3) 10k pixels spread across the screen, full red for 60 consecutive minutes/day.
4) 10k pixels spread across the screen, full red for 1 min every 24 mins.

It would also be useful if they used temp probes to see if there were temp differences between the various zones 1-4.

And it would also be useful if they repeated the test on another panel. With one panel having those zones where the electronics are housed and the other having them at the top half of the screen.

I suspect (1) would burn in much quicker then the other 3.

NB: For test (1) they may need to vary the pixels to prevent ABL dimming kicking in, as I believe the consensus is that's what happens with tickers.
 
Last edited:

BAMozzy

Distinguished Member


This is the slide from RTINGs Real life burn in test from the NBC channel. According to RTINGs, this test is informative for people who watch a lot of general TV, since NBC shows a variety of movies, TV shows, sports, and news. The source is a live cable feed and should be representative for a range of general TV content.

I've picked the Magenta slide in particular as this shows more clearly the wear of the Red sub-pixels as the blue stands out more. This is a 'mix' of content and not a static logo/box etc but still shows that some areas have worn more than others - particularly in the middle of the screen - although there is some shape in the bottom right and the top right corner shows wear too.

What is clear though is that this slide is quite uneven and as such, the colour accuracy will be affected. Whether you notice it when watching TV, I don't know - especially as it doesn't have particularly sharp defined shapes that would be much more obvious. A face for example maybe a bit more 'blue' in the middle of the screen but you may attribute that to the lighting in the scene or as the red has faded slowly over time, you have become accustomed to it.

Admittedly, the RTINGs tests are accumulating 1000's of hours of use in a relatively short time but this does indicate that uneven wear will show at some point. If you only watch 2500hrs a year, that may well not become noticeable for many years but for someone who watches 5000hrs a year, that would occur much sooner.

As for Black bars, if all you watch is movies, then it you will eventually see fading occurring where the Pixels are used - much sooner if the films you watch are in HDR. Again though, it really depends on how many hours you have spent watching movies and the brightness setting. Under general use (NBC) in SDR, it took 1000's of hours before there was any noticeable uniformity issues and there are areas that look like they may not have faded much (if at all). The difference between the area of the black bar and active area may not have faded sufficiently for it to be noticeable - at least not for many many hours of use but its inevitable that an OLED will eventually due to use.

The question isn't whether or not an OLED will end up with uneven wear - its inevitable - the question is whether or not it will be an issue for the user during their ownership. If you generally replace your TV after 5yrs and not a 'heavy' user, don't watch certain content or a lot of HDR, then chances are, you may not have any 'noticeable' issues during your ownership. However, some people are at a much greater risk of having noticeable uneven wear.

The key is to establish whther your viewing habits are a low risk or high risk - especially in the time frame you expect to own your TV. Even a relatively heavy user may be a low risk if they upgrade every couple of years because the hours of use in that time frame won't be enough to show noticeable wear. Peoples viewing habits are individual - the amount of hours they consume a year, the content they watch etc so their 'risk' is unique to them.
 

gizlaroc

Distinguished Member
I said with a full red/yellow field as that represents the same as the red/yellow ticker tapes that are such an issue.
I have never seen an issue with black bars posted on here with OLED, therefore it is not an issue. Why? Because the content with black bars is not going to cause an issue.
If you were to say watch a movie with black bars and nothing else at all, then after 3 - 4 years you may start to see that area as brighter on screen with normal content, the reality is even avid movie watches probably use it for 2-4 hours a day with black bars, and how many of them don't watch other content at all.
That is very different to ticker tape.

Of course a logo like GMB that is bright yellow will cause issues. But not as quickly as ticker tape.

ABL does not cut in with ticker tapes. It does with static logos, depending on model.
 

mad steve

Well-known Member
My dad as just replaced my old burned Oled with a GZ950.. Have to admit the piture is stunning.

He only watches old movies and such so he should be good for a few years. Looks a cracking piture.
 

GadgetObsessed

Well-known Member
Reported Burn In Rates as of 24 Jan 2020 - now
2019 OLEDs – 0% (out of 20 votes)
2018 OLEDs - 4.9% (out of 163 votes)
2017 OLEDs - 14% (out of 271 votes)
2016 OLEDs - 35.8% (out of 285 votes)
2015 OLEDs – 13.9% (out of 36 votes)
 

aoaaron

Well-known Member
I just can’t understand why 2018 and 2019 sets are taken into account seriously when they haven’t even had time to burn in yet 😂😂😂
 

sagaris99

Well-known Member
I just can’t understand why 2018 and 2019 sets are taken into account seriously when they haven’t even had time to burn in yet 😂😂😂
Because it’s not about age, it’s about usage time. A number of users have used a 2018 set for the equivalent of 4/5 years, by average time of 3.7 hours a day. My C8, bought 14 months ago, has amassed 2.75 years of use by this measure - 3950 hours / 3.7 = 1069 days. I would reasonably expect to start seeing image retention now if it were to begin appearing, going by reports.
 

aoaaron

Well-known Member
Because it’s not about age, it’s about usage time. A number of users have used a 2018 set for the equivalent of 4/5 years, by average time of 3.7 hours a day. My C8, bought 14 months ago, has amassed 2.75 years of use by this measure - 3950 hours / 3.7 = 1069 days. I would reasonably expect to start seeing image retention now if it were to begin appearing, going by reports.
What if their usage time/year is similar to the 2015/2016/2017 users?
Do 2018/2019 OLED users use their TVs exponentially more than 2015/16/17 or whatever year users?

I don't see a category or mention of users to specify their usage time for it to be included/excluded in the poll... please forgive me if this is included.

Therefore on face value, sadly, its just common sense to disregard the 2018/2019 sets until time has lapsed which is reasonable enough.
 

sagaris99

Well-known Member
What if their usage time/year is similar to the 2015/2016/2017 users?
Do 2018/2019 OLED users use their TVs exponentially more than 2015/16/17 or whatever year users?

I don't see a category or mention of users to specify their usage time for it to be included/excluded in the poll... please forgive me if this is included.

Therefore on face value, sadly, its just common sense to disregard the 2018/2019 sets until time has lapsed which is reasonable enough.
Because the poll, as useful as it is, is fundamentally flawed in this respect.
Regardless of your view on the topic, you must see the logic that it is not age, but usage? Given the fact that the issue is not caused by age, but instead by cumulative wear, this is the best possible way to run a poll about this issue. One would want to include a breakdown of picture settings (brightness, backlight, contrast) as they directly impact the ageing process, as well as the types of content viewed, and for how long. in the real world though, that information is not availabl. It’s not reasonable to ask an owner of a set to buy the service remote off amazon in the interest of a poll, is it? Or record specifically what they watch, how they watch it, and how long for?

You can disregard the 2018/19 sets all you want. There’s the risk that it comes across to someone else that because the results don’t fit your narrative, you’re excluding them. I’ve explained clearly why 2018 sets may be included, with good reason.
 

aoaaron

Well-known Member
Because the poll, as useful as it is, is fundamentally flawed in this respect.
Regardless of your view on the topic, you must see the logic that it is not age, but usage? Given the fact that the issue is not caused by age, but instead by cumulative wear, this is the best possible way to run a poll about this issue. One would want to include a breakdown of picture settings (brightness, backlight, contrast) as they directly impact the ageing process, as well as the types of content viewed, and for how long. in the real world though, that information is not availabl. It’s not reasonable to ask an owner of a set to buy the service remote off amazon in the interest of a poll, is it? Or record specifically what they watch, how they watch it, and how long for?

You can disregard the 2018/19 sets all you want. There’s the risk that it comes across to someone else that because the results don’t fit your narrative, you’re excluding them. I’ve explained clearly why 2018 sets may be included, with good reason.

I do except the poll doesn't specify age/usage unless I've mis-read (in which I case I apologise).

Its not results fitting my narrative or not. Its just simple common sense.

Its easier to disregard the years where the time lapse for burn in to set in is pretty much not there for the standard user.

I'd be ecstatic of 2019 sets are resistant to burn in. I just think its very obvious that we can't know that until time has lapsed where a large proprotion of enough people's panels have been subjected to a similar usage as the older sets.

If you disagree, although I find it a bit funny, fine. lol.

I don't care about any narrative. I love OLED screens. I just hate retailers not covering for burn in. Trying to paper over the cracks by releasing a poll for TV sets which aren't even a year old, making out they're burn-in resistant I personally think does more damage than it does good. If you disagree.. lol fine.
 

BAMozzy

Distinguished Member
Of course hours of usage, the content you watch, the brightness setting etc all affect the wear and likelihood of seeing any uneven wear on your TV and its unlikely that many 2019 and certainly 2019 TV owners would see any wear yet - even with 'higher' than average usage. Even RTINGs tests didn't show problems for most scenarios for 5000hrs and only after 9000hrs were issues noticeable on the Fifa and Sports test and starting to appear on the NBC test too. This is at 200nits brightness so if you watch a 150nits for example, then you may not see issues after 9000hrs like we see here. Watch a lot of HDR in that time and you may see issues sooner.

You cannot expect everyone to document their settings, their brightness level, the amount of hours watched in general as well as an accurate breakdown of exactly what they watched and duration.

However, just because you voted 'no' issues on a 2018/19 TV, that doesn't mean your vote is cast in stone. You can change your vote IF you do get issues later - assuming that this Poll still exists. I would be surprised if many 2018/19 TV's have problems but maybe those with newer TV's are also more aware of the potential risks too and minimise/reduce that risk.

Age of the TV too cannot be determined from this Poll. A 2017 TV could have been bought on the first day of release or even 16months later because it was much cheaper than the newer 2018 TV's. The ones that bought in 2018 may well be reporting no issues and haven't accumulated the same number of hours as some of those 2018 TV owners. There are a lot of variables. Someone could watch GMB for 2hrs every morning before work and report that their TV has 'Burn-in' and yet someone who watches at most 30mins before work then turns around and says they watched GMB every morning too but their TV is fine after the same number of accumulated hours and display brightness settings but doesn't mean that their TV is somehow better or that the other TV was 'faulty'. It just means that they haven't yet accumulated the same wear on the same sub-pixels yet. It also depends on whether someone is regularly analysing slides to see if the can spot any issues or waiting until the issue becomes 'obvious' or at least noticeable in their regular viewing.

What you cannot say for definite is that LG have improved their OLED sub-pixels and increased the longevity just because 'newer' TV's haven't yet had anyone reporting Burn-in. There is still so many different factors that affect the rate of wear and whether or not that 'excessive' wear is focussed on a specific area of the screen to cause an issue.
 

Nielzor

Member
Just adding my own experience of burn in. LG OLED65B7V, first started showing signs after just under 2 years of use. Have been very careful with it, avoiding things like Sky News and making sure to vary content. The Netflix logo was visibly burned in on red screens (from the LG app). Green haze particularly visible on yellow screens:

burnin.jpg


My theory is a lot of it was caused by the 'Fireplace' videos from Netflix as they use bright yellow and red flames. Having said that, I can't imagine I left them running long enough to cause such deterioration.

LG are replacing the panel for £250. Originally quoted me £2000. Courier collected it 2.5 weeks ago and it's still at the repair centre. Have been phoning every few days for updates. Not sure why it's taking so long.
 

BillRawles

Active Member
How old is that screen, much over the 2 year mark now? Where was it bought?

Unless it's over 4 or so years I'm sorry but I'd be having that fixed/swapped as per my consumer rights. Not a chance a penny would be spent on a repair. You've not damaged it, it's been used as intended. Madness.
 

Nielzor

Member
Bought in December 2017. Starting showing burn in just under 2 years later. Rapidly deteriorated from there.
 

dcmcquade

Standard Member
Don’t suppose you have any idea of hours usage? My burn in looks very similar but I will be pursuing curry’s for a replacement and don’t expect to pay anything unless I get an upgrade. I paid £1500 for a c7 and I expect it to still be top notch after 2 yrs, albeit heavy use age. Don’t see why you should pay lg anything rather than use your consumer rights to pursue the retailer? Hope you get it sorted anyway.
 

staffy 2

Well-known Member
Hi dcmcquade it don’t matter how long you watch your tv for as that’s what they were made for to watch.2 years is a joke and these tvs should last 5 years minimum with no issues so you demand a new tv or every penny you paid for it back.
 

BAMozzy

Distinguished Member
I agree that a TV should last 5yrs without issues regardless of hours watched or the content you display. However, OLED's wear with use and as such, will vary on the length of time a TV lasts before issues become noticeable. If it takes 10000hrs for example before issues start occurring with 'general' SDR content, that could be 5yrs+ if you watch 2000hrs or less a year - that's around 5.5hrs a day but watch 5000hrs, that could be just 2 years. That's not accounting for brightness settings or content with bright coloured static elements.

Each of the sub-pixels is like a little candle and every time its on, its burning away its life, the brighter it burns the faster it burns through that life. OLED sub-pixels also fade as they get used - they don't appear to be the same brightness/colour right up until they burn out/stop working. Therefore, you get a gradual deterioration of the colour accuracy rather than a sudden failure of the sub-pixel when it reaches its end of life. That 'fading' though also means that uneven wear can become noticeable as the difference between the amount of wear in different areas of the screen will become detectable. If they didn't fade, the screen would be even, right up until the sub-pixels reach their final minute of life.

Because the content people watch, their brightness settings etc are different, its difficult to determine how many 'hours' you could get from an OLED before noticeable wear occurs. That then makes it difficult to determine whether you will get 5yrs or more from an OLED but a very high user will be much more likely to get issues much sooner than a low user - although brightness settings and content displayed will affect the results. If the low user watches a lot of content with a bright static element and at Max brightness for example, they may not get anywhere near the same hours of usage as a high user.

As I stated at the start, I think a TV should still last at least 5yrs - even for a very high user. If that's as high as 25000hrs, so be it. That's over 13hrs a day, 5000hrs a year and should cope with HDR content and static elements in that time too - no fading either. LED technology may not be the 'best' PQ, but it is durable and more likely to last - especially for high users regardless of content/brightness so maybe have to sacrifice a bit on PQ to get longevity. Its picking the right technology for you, your viewing habits and expectations on life expectancy.
 

staffy 2

Well-known Member
Hi BAMozzy I understand everything you say and I was aware of burn in before I went OLED but as time goes by we are seeing quite a few tvs aren’t fit for purpose how quickly the pixels are degrading.Also I do believe some panels leave factory with small faults in the manufacturing process that makes them degrade quicker.LG know this and should hands down 100% replace panels that degrade around the 2 year mark.Id settle for just a one time replacement and then anything after that say £200 but even that’s letting them off too easy as they should cover this for 5 years.
 

Nielzor

Member
I'd estimate about 4000 hours, but it could be up to 5000.

I'm pretty sure the central smudge us from the fireplace videos, but I'm not sure what the horizontal lines came from. It can't be the usual culprit of news banners, as I don't watch news on the telly. My only idea is from subtitles, specifically the ones which appear in black horizontal boxes. Couldn't believe the Netflix logo got burned in.

As for the retailer, I bought it from John Lewis and they were incredibly unhelpful, which seems to be a common problem on these forums in comparison to somewhere like Currys. Was happy to pay LG just to be done with it rather than go down the small claims court route.

LG have been very helpful overall and a £250 repair for a £2500 telly seemed tolerable.
 

BAMozzy

Distinguished Member
Hi BAMozzy I understand everything you say and I was aware of burn in before I went OLED but as time goes by we are seeing quite a few tvs aren’t fit for purpose how quickly the pixels are degrading.Also I do believe some panels leave factory with small faults in the manufacturing process that makes them degrade quicker.LG know this and should hands down 100% replace panels that degrade around the 2 year mark.Id settle for just a one time replacement and then anything after that say £200 but even that’s letting them off too easy as they should cover this for 5 years.
I don't doubt that some sub-pixels may well degrade at a higher rate than they should and as I started off saying, I think every TV should last at least 5yrs regardless of the consumption. 24hrs a day for 5yrs would be less than 44k hrs of use and that would be 'excessive' use but 22k (12hrs a day everyday) should be achievable regardless of whether that's all news and at max brightness or not.

It would help if LG provided some better information about their panels and expected life. What do they consider 'normal' use for example and in that, how many hours a day they consider 'normal' use. If they think that 4hrs a day is 'normal', 5yrs would be around 7.3k hrs and, if RTINGs tests are indicative, those watching 'general' SDR content at 200nits would get more than 5yrs at 4hrs a day. 10000hrs without any real noticeable issues could well be more than 5yrs for someone.

The problem though is if someone has their TV on for 14hrs a day. 2yrs later, you have racked up more than 10000hrs. Is that 'excessive' use to LG? Should they honour some warranty because that person used up their 10k hrs in 2yrs instead of more than 5yrs? Proving that you have a 'defective' panel isn't going to be easy unless you have some idea on the hours of use. If its only affecting the odd sub-pixel, then you can show the 'dead' pixel but when its shaped like a logo or more broad (like the area where a newsreader sits) but still even wear compared to the rest around it, its not indicative of a defect because there is a cause and effect happening to all in that area equally. Unless the 'whole' panel has every sub-pixel (even if its just a single colour) equally defective, the wear wouldn't be as 'even' as we see. Those defective sub-pixels would look more like 'dead' pixels in their colour slide - not as evenly faded as the non-defective sub-pixels.

Without the information, you don't know whether the 'wear' is excessive either or just a lot more than you anticipated/expected. If you know that a panel is expected to last 10k hrs with general content at 200nits for example before any noticeable uneven wear could start to appear, and HDR use and certain static elements will reduce that time significantly, would those after 2 yrs and 6k hrs (with some HDR use too) feel as entitled to a replacement? Not saying they should or shouldn't.

If you buy car tyres, they may come with a 3yr or 36000mile warranty for example and if you drive 24k a year, you don't expect that tyre to last 3yrs because you've done your 36k in 18months. The road surface can affect the rate of wear too but you can't go to the garage and complain your tyres haven't lasted 3yrs and compare to another who only drives 6k a year. Point is, we don't really know what is 'normal' wear for an OLED to know what is defective. We don't know what LG considers normal use either and it would be difficult to prove 'defective' unless you get single dead sub-pixels. I still think its wrong that watching an hour a day of news (o some content with a static element) can cause enough wear, enough fading to affect a colour slide in 2yrs - that's less than 750hrs but for LG, that maybe considered excessive - not the viewers fault but that's still quite a sizeable difference in usage so should you expect to see those have faded more.

However I look at it, it still comes down to hours of usage. I stated before that I think a TV should last 5yrs regardless but whether a TV does still comes down to hours of usage. LG really ought to be more open about their panels, the decay rates at various brightness settings and what they consider 'normal' usage - is that 2000hrs a year? Can they not provide some warranty like a car tyre - 3yrs or 5000hrs for example. How many 'hours' does it take for single colour element (like a Red logo) to wear and fade enough to become noticeable - even with all the built in protection. All these things would help. They won't because they are more concerned with making that sale, having the best PQ at least when you buy but 2/3 years later, the owner has accumulated thousands of hours and when the colour accuracy is no longer accurate due to the uneven wear, even if you have avoided static elements, they will happily sell you a new OLED...

Regardless of what I think about TV life expectancies, if an OLED only lasts 10k hours (general SDR content), you can't expect it to last 5yrs if you watch 12hrs a day and if you do get issues after 2yrs, that's no different from someone who watches just 4hrs a day experiencing uneven wear after 5-6yrs. If anything, this shows that people expected OLEDs to last like an LCD. You can't compare to older tech like Plasma or the first wave of OLEDs either as modern OLEDs have smaller pixels (due to increased resolution) and go much brighter (which will be burning up their life span quicker when used for HDR). I also wonder if people in general are watching SDR content brighter than they did because the TV's are much brighter. I know that a LOT of LCD TV owners were because having the brightness slider down low made them think it was 'dark' even if it was still brighter than their old TV could manage on Max.

If LG issued some form of warranty, like a 3yr, 5000hr SDR warranty with say 1hr of HDR = 2hrs of SDR as some indication of the wear, usage and expectation, that would help greatly. Its not going to stop high users experiencing issues but may help them decide whether or not its worth taking the risk. It would give people an idea of what to expect and whether or not the issues are a result of defective sub-pixels or just the normal wear for that type of TV. Not saying they should accept that wear but if its too much for them, buy a different technology - speak with your wallets. All the talk about being 'fit for use' is difficult to argue if its offering the best PQ for say 10k hours but you burn through that in 2yrs. Its like buying a car tyre rated for 20k miles, complaining its worn out in less than 3yrs and driving 15k a year - calling it a defective tyre or not fit for purpose - why not buy a 50k rated tyre if you want 3yrs of use. The wear could be perfectly normal for OLED and was fit for use for the first 10k hours - like it was for someone who only watches 4hrs a day and gets 5yrs+ from their OLED.

I am not defending OLEDs at all and made it clear that I think TV's should last 5yrs regardless of usage. However, they are not calendars and wear when on so hours of usage is important. One person's 2yrs of usage could be another's 5yrs and unless an OLED can run 24/7/365 at max brightness for 5yrs (~44000hrs) without any uneven wear, there is the potential that someone could experience issues in less than 5yrs. The big issue to me is that many people didn't realise that OLED sub-pixels wear individually and the rate of wear is determined by the brightness they are on. I know some people don't realise that White is made up of all 3 colours on and that a Red logo is going to wear those red sub-pixels faster than the other red sub-pixels around the screen. I don't think people knew that fading is a result of wear and because an image is not static, not the same colour or brightness, that those sub-pixels will be constantly wearing at different rates and therefore lead to uneven wear. Most importantly, I don't think people really knew what to expect in terms of durability and wear which I believe wasn't very well communicated or helped by LG either. None of that really makes a difference with IR or Burn-in because that's just wear but Burn-in was the 'fear' so focus on that and what they are doing to reduce/eliminate risk without talking about the rate of decay. Why worry about the long term when you have the best PQ because of self emitting tech - blind them with the best image quality today to offset the worries about what tomorrow may bring.
 

staffy 2

Well-known Member
I’m 3,600 hours a year as my tv averages 10 hours a day in my house.At weekends it can be on 12 hours easy with football but I average 3,600 hours a year.
It was its second 2000 hour pixel refresh that messed my panel up with severe bands but the new panel is perfect and done 400 hours now.D&G were faultless with my warranty as were Peter Tyson.
 

butchbr73

Standard Member
I'm taking the burn in issue with a grain of salt, no disrespect to anyone that has experienced the issue and not trying to downplay the risk. Can anyone verify the below (found on a quick Google search):
******
LG Electronics sold 3,600 units in 2013 when it launched its first OLED TV model but its sales increased more than 20-fold to 76,400 units in 2014, followed by 313,900 units in 2015 and 666,400 units in 2016. Its annual sales topped one million units for the first time in 2017
******
As with my experience in anything when you search for problems... you'll always find someone with issues. For example, I drive a Ford F150 and when you scan forums... you'll find plenty of problems, enough to scare you... but its also the best selling vehicle in America and most folks drive them without anything significant happening. The people with "burn in" are obviously more vocal than the folks without burn in and actively searching and commenting across forums,etc. to find fixes or looking for help. I think in general, anyone without any problems tend not to say anything... but you'll hear a lot from the folks that do.

If LG did produce 666,400 Oled units in 2016, I have a hard time believing 36% of those, or roughly 233k units have had burn in issues (otherwise this thread would be tens of 1,000's of posts long looking for help)... I think the actual is a much smaller percentage in real life but only LG knows the real answer. As with most stuff, you'll never hear a peep from most people with a good experience - (other than aficionados of home theater equip and tv's or people that research quite a bit), they've got no reason to search for Oled burn in, interested in reading about the risks and answer polls... but you will hear from the minority with the problem.

I have a 2015 EG9100 that I bought in late 2015 with almost 9,000 hrs on it in our Kitchen sitting area (granted its not 4k/HDR), varied usage between sports (probably the most watched - football, baseball and basketball across many networks), news and regular network shows and cable, - little bit of Netflix/amazon streaming and used everyday for 4 years. No video game usage at all. Still looks great, not much uneven wear and very little noticeable color variation across any of the colors - just checked it this past week. If I didn't enjoy reading and learning about home theater equip and tv's, etc... I wouldn't be here commenting. Just my 2 cents...
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest News

Micro LED TV alternative to modular design on the way?
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Musical Fidelity announces M8xi integrated amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky announces price rises for UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
LG Display OLED panel production below forecasts
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Panasonic launches SC-HTB600 and SC-HTB400 soundbars
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom