OLED vs. LCD : Long-term test with surprising results

Table of Contents

 

OLED vs. LCD

The Rtings portal presents the final results of its long-term test of 102 TVs, comparing OLEDs and LCDs: Most devices lasted over 10,000 hours of operation. The "burn-in" specter, however, now seems to be largely irrelevant.

When asked about a new screen, a specter of OLED TVs regularly haunts discussions: How long does the panel type actually last? In particular, the burn-in effect, known as "burn-in", causes worries among those interested in buying.

To this end, the Rtings portal has subjected 102 models of different classes of devices to extreme conditions. After interim results have been published from time to time, the testers are now releasing their complete conclusion. As a result, most televisions actually work for 10,000 operating hours, usually even beyond that. However, the test ended with a total failure for 20 devices, while 24 other models suffered partial damage.

OLED beats LCD clearly

• When it comes to the question of display technology, the balance is clear: OLED TVs turned out to be much more durable. Contrary to popular belief, the dreaded burn-in only played a role under extreme test conditions.
• Although every OLED device in the test showed stoving effects, Rtings expressly emphasizes that this would not occur under normal use.
• The real problem of LCD technology lies elsewhere: the backlight. LCDs with edge LED illumination showed the highest failure rates here. The light path guidance proves to be a vulnerable error point in this context.
• Since the LEDs are also often connected in series, the failure of one element often leads to the failure of the entire series or group - with consequences up to a complete blackout.

LG and TCL lead the reliability scale - Backlight technology decisively

When looking at individual manufacturers, there are also differences. LG and TCL impressed with low failure rates: only one device failed each for LG (out of 24 OLED models tested) and TCL (out of 10 models). LG recorded several partial failures, but these mainly occurred with LCD variants.

However, Rtings itself points out the limitations of the methodology: the test only included one unit per manufacturer model, which makes the meaningfulness a little more vague. This also explains why brands such as Insignia and Toshiba are represented with a 100 percent failure rate, since they only ever had one model in the test. However, the analysis by backlight type revealed another pattern:

• OLEDs without backlighting proved to be the most reliable solution; this applies to both W-OLED and QD-OLED variants.
• LCD models with local dimming performed better than "Edge Lit" variants. About 60 percent of TVs without local dimming experienced either total or partial failures. Mini-LED models with full-area local dimming (FALD) tested much better, with about 25 percent still showing signs of failure.
• There is also a difference in the comparison between IPS and VA. IPS panels had higher failure rates - 15 out of 24 models experienced damage.

Price is not a quality feature

A surprising finding of the test: the price range does not have a significant impact on reliability. Some of the best test results were provided by budget models, while more expensive devices performed worse in some cases.

The situation is similar with repairability. Cheaper models often perform worse here, as manufacturers make compromises during installation - for example, by using double-sided adhesive tape for panel mounting, which makes repair practically impossible. In the case of premium TVs, access to the components from the back is theoretically possible, but in most cases it is not worth repairing.