Research articlesNewDemo data
OLED vs Mini-LED: What Our Demo Dataset Shows
Averaging test scores by panel type across every monitor on the bench shows the trade-off clearly: speed and contrast against brightness.
HannahRev Test Bench · Published
Demo data. This article describes HannahRev's draft methodology using fictional demo products. Any figures are illustrative — they are not laboratory results.
This analysis runs on the fictional demo catalogue. The method is real; the figures only illustrate how the analysis will look once real test results are published.
Because every monitor goes through the same tests, we can group results by panel technology and compare the averages. The table below is calculated live from the test data behind every review on this site.
| Test | Edge-lit LCD (3) | Mini-LED LCD (2) | OLED (3) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Response Time @ Max Refresh Rate | 5.7 | 5.1 | 10.0 |
| Contrast | 1.4 | 4.4 | 10.0 |
| SDR Brightness | 7.3 | 9.7 | 4.5 |
| HDR Brightness | 1.9 | 8.6 | 3.4 |
| Text Clarity | 8.0 | 7.9 | 6.9 |
| Reflections | 6.4 | 7.2 | 6.0 |
Reading the results
Self-emissive panels lead on response time and contrast, while Mini-LED LCDs lead on brightness. Text clarity depends more on subpixel layout than on panel family. With only a handful of products per group, treat these averages as directional rather than conclusive.
Related
Tests in an example review
Products mentioned
More research
Test methodologyUpdated
How We Test Monitors
The complete monitor test bench: which tests we run, what equipment each uses and how every result flows into a score.
Updated
Data interpretationUpdated
How HannahRev Scores Work
From raw measurements to a single overall score: the anchors, weights and rules behind every number on a review.
Updated
Measurement methodologyNew
Understanding Response Time and Overshoot
Why the time pixels take to change colour decides how sharp motion looks, and how to read our total response time and overshoot results.
Published