34 inch ultrawide 21:9 is the future...not 4k, not gsync, not 144hz...

[TickleMeRifle]

Ive owned over a dozen monitors in the last 10 yrs ...everything from high refresh rate, TN, IPS, 4k, gsync, etc etc you name it!. Recently i purchased a 34 inch LG ultrawide IPS.

I can tell you right now it is HANDS DOWN the best general purpose and gaming monitor ive used EVER!

Let's see:

Colours = exceptional! it is after all an IPS
Viewing angles = not as good as some of my Dell IPS screens but a world above all TNs
Response Time = 5ms (not as good as some TNs but i can tell you right now I did not notice any difference visually between 1ms vs 5ms)
Refresh Rate=60hz...sure some of you might be rolling your eyes saying 'boo its not 144hz' but seriously in games like farcry 3 and crysis 3 you're never gonna reach 144fps on ultra so why bother? Also i own 3 cards in SLI and running anything at 144fps+ will boil over and throttle my cards anyhow! Its pointless for a person like myself.

The extra width also made gaming incredibly immersive...i could actually see much much more and my performance in FPS online actualy increased due to seeing blind spots more effectively. Out of the 200+ games i own i found only about 12 werent compatible with 21:9.....and guess what? The third party program 'Flawelss Widescreen' fixed about 6 of those 12 incompatible games! So incompatibility wasnt really a major issue at all!

The monitor comes in two resolutions: 3440X1440 or 2560 x 1080.

Ive used 3440 x 1440 and even other 4k monitors and both run with MAJOR STUTTERS in game regardless of your GPU setup (I own x3 780 Ti so i know what im talking about). 2560 x 1080 runs at only a loss of 10fps compared with its 1080p counterpart! This isnt a big hit at all! Not only that 2560 x 1080 desktop scaling is much easier compared to higher resolutions!

In my personal opinion It even beat the latest 27 inch Asus ROG Swift G-sync monitor! (which i also own). The Asus' viewing angles were woeful! G-sync did not live up to its hype it actually slowed and stuttered A LOT of my games which was contrary to what nvidia had demo'd in online vids. dont get a gsync! its really a bunch of false advertising!

So there you go, from a guy who owns just about every great monitor money can buy i have no idea why people havent jumped on this LG beast of a monitor...it's effective with just about everything from everyday use to gaming. has great colours and doesnt hit your framerate hard like other resolutions. I understand at $1k its quite costly but i would gladly sell my other 11 monitors just to keep this one.

EDIT: Linus did a review of this monitor and he loved it too!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnrxNfxRK_4

[videogames]

Sadly it looks like it, at least until manufacturers start investing in single-input IPS "gaming" monitors or a new panel technology comes up. As far as I know Overlord are the only ones selling 120Hz 1440p IPS displays, aside from the overclockable korean stuff on ebay.

[mika]

Ive had my eye on a LG 2560x1080 29 inch Monitor-recently went on sale from $500 to $300 so not sure if I schould take it or not? Iam current;y running a single Asus Veh247 1920x1080 monitor and a single Geforce Gtx 660ti.Maybe once I upgrade my gpu I will have enough muscle to push the xtra resolution? Was thinking something like a Gtx 780ti thats about equal to (2) of my 660 ti,s in Sli performance wise.

[videogames]

Honestly, you might as well go with a 27" 2560x1440. The 29" ultrawides don't make a ton of sense to me. You don't need a 780ti, a single 970 is enough for 1440p if you're aiming for 60 fps.

[Schrödinger's Hitbox]

videogames님이 먼저 게시:

You might not want to hold your breath for 21:9 adaptive-sync displays. Every single 21:9 display that I know of is IPS, and there are no multi-input IPS displays that go over 60hz. adaptive-sync / g-sync for 60fps just seems like a big waste of money unless you're trying to push 4k+

Could you explain why adaptive-sync for 60 FPS is a waste of money in terms of why it would cost more and why it would be a waste?

The reason why I'm asking is because I've got a lot of tearing in some games even on lower fps (50-60) especially in Metro LL on Linux. I actually stopped playing it because of it. Unfortunately there's no vsync option, not sure about the Redux version I have not tried that yet, anyway like I said it's not the only game. Lets not get started on display-server tearing... The other thing is it's part of DP 1.2a/1.3 spec so not sure if they would increase the price just because the screen has the new version of DP albeit perhaps with g-sync that is the case due to marketing and implementation costs.

My gaming needs are very different to the average gamer. Most of my 300+ games on steam works fine in Windows 7/8.x, but I tend to spend most of my time playing old games or flash games that also tear (out my eyes ). I completely forgot about my kongregate addiction

PS: I prefer getting a IPS monitor since I never had the desire to go over 75Hz. The OP said that 144Hz is not the way to go. The review video linked in the first post also said that TN is not their preference.

[videogames]

You're right, yeah. I know adaptive-sync is part of the DP 1.2a standard, but I didn't realize it doesn't require an aditional module like G-Sync does. With G-Sync at lower resolutions I feel like it just makes more sense to put that extra money into a better GPU instead. A DIY G-Sync kit alone costs $200! Not really an issue if adaptive-sync monitors still cost the same. I guess the real question is when will it start being adopted as a standard for all displays.

[Schrödinger's Hitbox]

I took a quick look yesterday, only found one guy on some overclockers forum that apparently phoned LG. They told him you should see screens early 2015. I've got some time to wait, planning to replace my 4 year old CPU before I get a new screen. Thanks for the help, before reading these comments I did not know about IPS / TN.

[MrMcSwifty]

папаwагвию님이 먼저 게시:

The reason why I'm asking is because I've got a lot of tearing in some games even on lower fps (50-60) especially in Metro LL on Linux. I actually stopped playing it because of it. Unfortunately there's no vsync option, not sure about the Redux version I have not tried that yet, anyway like I said it's not the only game. Lets not get started on display-server tearing...

...My gaming needs are very different to the average gamer. Most of my 300+ games on steam works fine in Windows 7/8.x, but I tend to spend most of my time playing old games or flash games that also tear (out my eyes :tcry: ). I completely forgot about my kongregate addiction :tcry: :tcry: :tcry:

Hope I'm not taking this too far off topic, but are you not able to force VSync at the driver level?

[Schrödinger's Hitbox]

McSwifty님이 먼저 게시:

Hope I'm not taking this too far off topic, but are you not able to force VSync at the driver level?

I appreciate any advice! :-)

I don't think it's possible on a driver level, if you know how please let me know. If you are referring to forcing v-sync via catalyst control center then I don't think that viable for me.

Here's why: According to http://forums.amd.com/game/messageview.cfm?catid=454&threadid=177574 v-sync force is done via DDL dependency injection and because of this only works on D3D windows games. There's a whole list of cons from getting false hacking alerts to causing your games to crash, not to mention the performance loss. I'm probably exaggerating/talking about worst case scenarios. The point is though I'd love to have a proper solution that works on all platforms across games, multimedia, flash and does not have a performance penalty. I hope adaptive-sync is the solution I'm looking for.

PS: I know of a way to force v-sync on Linux, but it usually causes more problems. I have not tried using open source drivers only with catalyst.

[Aliquis Freedom & Ethnopluralism]

Kate님이 먼저 게시:

So, am I the only one who actually thinks 16:10 was the perfect ratio and 16:9 is pointlessly wide already? Guess so.
With that said, I don't understand why Ultrawide being the future means 144Hz or G-Sync isn't.

Guess he wanted to say. "I like this screen and currently I'd take it over a 144Hz/G-sync one which doesn't have this aspect ratio (and IPS?)"

[Honkler The Clown]

Hey guys. Im a high end gamer (5960x + 2 x GTX 980 SLI) and I currently game on the LG 34" (3440 x 1440) flat screen (the curved model was not out when I bought my flat one). I have also owned the 27" Asus "Swift" PG278Q 144hz. I can share some thoughts.

The LG is overall better, and in fact, the best monitor I have ever owned. I went from a Dell u2711 27" IPS to the LG 34" and was blown away by the amazing screen size. Its great for gaming too (but...continue reading). I played the following titles on the LG at 3440 x 1440 with a single GTX 980 (I did not have the second card when I first bought the monitor).

Fallout New Vegas, WarThunder, Dragon Age Inquisitions, Titanfall, Elite Dangerous, WarGame Red Dragon, Shadows of Mordor and Far Cry 4 .

They looked amazing and played at a full 60 fps (note: you MUST use DP connection to get 60 hz with the LG, do NOT use hdmi) with high settings with just 1 GTX 980 (again, I have only owned the second 980 for 2 days now)

A fantastic windows monitor and great gaming at 3440 x 1440. You can see so much more to the left and right and it DOES play just fine with only 1 high end card. (gtx 970 or 980 needed).

Now on to the Asus 144hz "Swift". I bought the swift after I had been using the big LG for about a month, to personally experience the hype of 144hz and g-sync. Let me tell you two things:

1. When the monitor arrived, I was shocked at how SMALL the box was. When I opened the box and put the Asus PG278Q next to my 34" LG, I thought ****, someone at shipping made a mistake and they shipped me a 24" Asus! After some careful reading of the model number on the box and monitor, I still did not believe this thing was 27" It was SO tiny next to the LG. So I took out a tape measure and physically measured the diagonal distance. Yup 27". Point being, 27" seems minuscule after using 34" 3440 x 1440 for a month, it was very disappointing.

2. G-sync at 144hz is REAL. Once I hooked it up to my single GTX 980 (again, use DP connection), enabled 144hz and g-sync, WOW. Even moving the MOUSE cursor from one side of the desktop to the other is notably different than with the 60 hz LG or my previous 60hz Dell. Its like moving a laser beam.

So, on to gaming. Again, an amazing difference. First title I played was WarThunder. Panning around the scenery and observing aircraft movement at 144hz w/ g-sync is night and day compared to the LG at 60hz. Everything seems likes its drawn by a laser and NOTHING blurs, anywhere. Things just "happen", feels like nothing is drawn, everything is literally already "there" if you know what I mean. Next I tried BF 4. WOW. Movement was so exacting compared to any of my previous 2 monitors. Head-shots, instant movement recognition, placing the pip of the gun sight anywhere, exactly. Heroes and Generals was also way better at 144hz then it was at 60hz.

Conclusion:

I only wanted to keep 1 monitor. I did not want to keep switching from my LG for games like Fallout NV, WarGame Red Dragon, and Far Cry 4 to the Asus for games like War Thunder and BF4 and Heroes and Generals. So in the end, I sold the Asus Swift on ebay. The LG is the superior monitor for windows use + average gaming. 3440 x 1440 with a good video card has to be seen in persona to be believed. BUT, 144hz and g-sync is real and has to be experienced in person in a game like War Thunder or BF4. It is NOT hype. The movement in rapid games was SO fluid it was amazing compared to the 60hz monitors Ive used for decades.

In the end, the future is not here "yet". I believe the future will offer choices like the big LG 3440 x 1440 w/ greater than 60hz (maybe 75 or 120) + g-sync/free sync as well as 4K monitors greater than 60 hz w/ g-sync. I think we will see both of these options in 2015. But until then, the LG 34" is the best thing I have ever added to my computer system.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

What's a good fit for those that need multiple displays though.
Llike for: Gaming + Streaming + Extra live apps on the side

Is it possible to get say a single GSync Monitor as my main display for running a game full screen; while still allowing a 2nd or 3rd monitor of lesser cost to do what I need on the side; all at the same time/same system?

[Schrödinger's Hitbox]

@Heir Thomas, Thanks for taking the time to write an informative review from someone who has first hand experience! I don't think we will get any freesync reviews since only one GPU supports it.

I got a new PC today (just the case). Saving up some cash for a new screen in 2015, oculus rift (if it is released in 2015) and a good HOTAS! Although I wont do 4k gaming, prob not until 2016+ I still would love to watch movies and do some designing in 4k.

[Aliquis Freedom & Ethnopluralism]

Bad-Motha님이 먼저 게시:

What's a good fit for those that need multiple displays though.
Llike for: Gaming + Streaming + Extra live apps on the side

Is it possible to get say a single GSync Monitor as my main display for running a game full screen; while still allowing a 2nd or 3rd monitor of lesser cost to do what I need on the side; all at the same time/same system?

I don't see why not.

Depending on what you like the image quality IPS may have looked nicer on the side screens though.

[LoTekRabbit]

TickleMeRifle님이 먼저 게시:

Also on another note, i have tried gsync before and i can tell you it is VASTLY OVERRATED. Dont get me wrong i was just as excited about gsync as much as anyone when i first heard about it and watched demos of it. But the fact is, in reality, a lot of games i tried gsync with were not even compatible with it! What's the point in new tech if 30% of your games dont run with it or run worse with it on?

eg Borderlands 2 runs great with gsync on....but in Battlefield 4 it stuttered all over the place...worse than if it was turned off.

I haven't had a single issue with G-Sync. Battlefield 4 is one of the highlights and works exceptionally well with it so I don't know what's wrong on your end considering that every review agrees BF4 works well with G-Sync. The tech isn't overrated at all and my gaming experience is far more enjoyable with it on.

I'll pass on 60hz monitors thanks :) Going back to one after playing with a high refresh rate monitor and/or G-Sync is impossible.

Besides they are now making IPS 144hz G-Sync and Free Sync monitors. Acer is releasing a 27 inch IPS G-Sync in March.

[Aliquis Freedom & Ethnopluralism]

V10Club님이 먼저 게시:

Besides they are now making IPS 144hz G-Sync and Free Sync monitors. Acer is releasing a 27 inch IPS G-Sync in March.

Yeah. That's what I wanted to say.

27" IPS-copycat (AHVA) 144Hz QHD G-sync one.
34" 21:9 FreeSync one (panel type and refresh rate unknown.)

The 27" is likely close to good enough.
But I'd rather have it all! Together!

Next upgrade would be polarization filter against IPS glow.