Tüv Rehinland and Eyesafe certifications are useless!

Aquila

In my experience, I've tested many laptops, monitors, smartphones, and tablets.
Many of these are certified Flicker Free or Blue Light, but this is almost always useless and I believe it's just marketing.
Remember, the problem today isn't just PWM or blue light, but also temporal dithering, matrix type, pixel alignment, and the operating system and GPU.

So don't trust it, and always test devices with your own eyes, especially modern ones, which are problematic and unreliable.

JTL

Aquila Well they aren't exactly forthcoming with the criteria for certification. Consider also the fact they were involved with the disputed Intel "eye strain investigation"

K-Moss

Aquila "Remember, the problem today isn't just PWM or blue light, but also temporal dithering, matrix type, pixel alignment, and the operating system and GPU."

However, PWM is something major that probably irritates more over time. Isn't it possible the eyes and brain can adapt to less acute deficiencies in the display, such as dithering and matrix type?

Nick at Android Central says he is sensitive to PWM, not dithering.

Vividblu99

Aquila

You’re right, Aquila.

Display hardware and software have changed so fast in the last decade that independent research on user comfort and eye health hasn’t kept up. Modern phones and monitors are using so much advanced tech from the variable and dynamic refresh rates, to backlight/OLED drive schemes, low fr pwm, and all the other color related processing tricks that introduce fast temporal changes, are evidently bothering many of us.

The push for higher resolution, wider gamuts, higher refresh rates, and aggressive image processing (sharpening, tone mapping, vivid presets) is increasing visual workload and perceived strain. Also every brand programs its displays differently, backlight control, dithering, power and motion smoothing vary a lot, so two screens with the same specs often feel very different.

Personally, I find older fixed 60 Hz LCDs with minimal processing and no low‑freq PWM the least taxing, with none of the variable refresh rates & advanced color BS. All these eye comfort certifications are essentially marketing hype, to give the perception and impressions that brands care about eye health, when the truth is, hardly any vigorous deep scientific related research has been or is being conducted into the matter. New tech, all looks great on paper, but it's causing real eye issues for us sensitive users, and more independent study & scientific research desperately needs to be conducted into the effects on ocular and brain health.

Jack

A while ago some were complaining about the Dell U3219Q which was TUV certified flicker free when in fact it was not and had a "dual PWM" which made it more difficult for users to capture. I dont trust their certifications at all.

Donux

Well true regarding this one, unless Rtings website testers made mistake.

Jack

Donux I used to have one and it certainly wasnt flicker free in the sense of using DC dimming.

Donux

Personally I would always gravitate towards brands that manufacture its own panels. Otherwise they have very little control what they are given by panel manufacturers, or during supply shortages and supply chain complexities, nobody is checking anyone all the specs they provided to end customer and simply replace alternative suppliers considering they match basic specs. So far LG, is the only brand that is very transparent and most of its products use its own LG panels. And I like that they clearly write 8 bit plus FRC or whatever bits are on their monitors. Also, they are stating if its flicker free or flicker reduced, not relying on the external validators, who validate just one unit. So brand can send them one unit, and what gets produced later, is none of anyones business. So here we are.

JTL

Donux Personally I would always gravitate towards brands that manufacture its own panels. Otherwise they have very little control what they are given by panel manufacturers, or during supply shortages and supply chain complexities, nobody is checking anyone all the specs they provided to end customer and simply replace alternative suppliers considering they match basic specs. So far LG, is the only brand that is very transparent and most of its products use its own LG panels.

I understand why you'd think that, but in today's world brands are brands, e.g just because LG "makes their own panels" doesn't necessarily mean that LG brand monitors use their own panels.

This also isn't the first time I've heard this allegation but I also didn't bookmark it beforehand.

Aquila

K-Moss
Old panels are better, modern ones are more aggressive. KSF phosphor panels are bad.
Yag panels are way better.
I have an Asus TUF VG27AQ, pwm free, low Blue light, no TD, true 8 bit, but my eyes are in trouble.
Lg 27q paper like

K-Moss

Aquila You suppose newer devices are intentionally bad or accidentally?

Aquila

K-Moss Hard to say.
Probably to show more colours there's a new tech approach that strains our eyes and brain.

K-Moss

Aquila Why the fixation on showing more colors?

Aquila

K-Moss it's a trend to sell new hardware. They call it progress, I prefer to say involution.

Aquila

Vividblu99 absolutely! I agree 💯 with you