• SirMaster@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep in mind that this test is inherently unrealistic

    I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily unrealistic.

    They found burn-in with 700 hours of 16:9.

    But how long should the monitor go before burning in?

    3 years? In 1.5 years, 700 hours of 16:9 is only about 1.2 hours a day of 16:9 content which is not unrealistic in the slightest. Even double that is not unrealistic and burn-in in less than 1 year…

    That’s certainly problematic.

    This is exactly what happened to my monitor. Visible burn-in in 10 months, and 1.5 years on now it’s even worse.

    • StickiStickman@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Did you miss the part where they explicitly tested in on the same content the entire time, which makes burn in much worse?