1,025 mini-LED's sounds amazing but in context that means it still adjusts 8,092 pixels each LED.
You don't need one LED per pixel to potentially get the same effect as OLED but I don't know where the point becomes (for 1:1 viewing distance) where it's hard to tell the difference... probably going below 100 pixels per LED is pointless.
I'm guessing that mini-LED monitor is Q-LED (Quantum LED) but not sure... for those who don't know OLED (Organic LED) has each sub-pixel produce its own light (each pixel is three lights of red, green blue). So pixel off means no light aside from light externally reflected off the screen.
Q-LED uses existing LCD technology. An LCD screen just FILTERS out what you do NOT want for each sub-pixel as it passes through from the rear LED. So GREEN filters out the non-green wavelengths of right (above and below a range).
But... it's hard to BLOCK the light from leaking through so you don't get pure black. The best solution they came up with was to use existing LED's and sprinkle them with fairy dust, err... particles that ABSORB the broad spectrum then re-emit the light in a more NARROW range.
Then they use an LCD panel designed to expect light in that range which allows for more control and thus less light leakage (deeper blacks) at a much higher brightness.
OLED will win eventually, but Q-LED + mini-LED is a great alternative mostly because existing manufacturing plants don't need to re-tool... the main issues with OLED really are:
a) cost to manufacture, and
b) burn-in and/or image retention
OLED is surprisingly COMPLICATED to make currently but the end goal is to create an organic material they can simply PRINT on, so basically lay down the copper traces for current then squirt on the OLED material etc.