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]

Other than slightly lower contrast AHVA is just as good as IPS, so this is very good news.

[yberkurko]

Not really sure how far you have to sit to comfortably look that 34" ultrawide... with my usual gaming distance to my 27" (1440p) dell ultrasharp i sometimes feel if it was any wider i would need to move my head to look whats happening on the sides.

[NeXuS23]

Cool, i will order a such one for testing, because it seems to better cover the natural FOV of Humans, not perfectly but better than anyone i seen and it has no black Lines between like if i stich together multiple Screens.

But somehow i have the Feeling that it isn't high enough, well i will see how it is if i have it in front of me. Anyway what i probably want is one that is twice the size of this one and curved, that would be even better to meet the natural Human FOV, who knows perhaps such ones will come.

Also what would be really cool, is if they would build such Screens as Plasmas or OLED, because they have both no delay at all and perfect Black Level's. I still not like the greyisch Blacks, even LED's can not compete with the Blacks of Plasma's, so i really hope the big OLED's are comming soon else i still prefer playing on Plasmas.

[Aliquis Freedom & Ethnopluralism]

Цитата допису yberkurko:

Not really sure how far you have to sit to comfortably look that 34" ultrawide... with my usual gaming distance to my 27" (1440p) dell ultrasharp i sometimes feel if it was any wider i would need to move my head to look whats happening on the sides.

I've seen someone suggest we see square/how the Apple tablets 4:3 was good.

But if that's the case I don't see why so many films are 2.35:1 and previously 16:9.

Also if I hold my hands in front of me and try to decide where I can't see them any longer that rectangle in front of me is waaaay wider than a square.

So I think 21:9 is just fine as a ratio.

As for size IMHO a 28" 21:9 is way too small. so I think it's just fine. It's half the height extra on each of the sides on a 27" 21:9 one.

I don't need to be able to take it all in, when I type this I only sharply see the text around this text I'm typing and not the whole screen. That's thow our sight work. The marginal data will provides clues and you can decide to look at them to see what it's all about but normally it will just provide some blurry visual clues (well, considering you're watching in the middle as in an FPS) which prove extra immersion.

I can imagine people who have had 14" CRTs thought going 20" was too far. And people who got 20" 16:9 TFTs thought that that was ok and maybe 23" was too big.

I would just let the 34" one give some visual clues on the sides which your 27" can't :)

Or in the case of some other usage just more space for whatever information you want to put there.

Цитата допису NeXuS23:

Cool, i will order a such one for testing, because it seems to better cover the natural FOV of Humans, not perfectly but better than anyone i seen and it has no black Lines between like if i stich together multiple Screens.

But somehow i have the Feeling that it isn't high enough, well i will see how it is if i have it in front of me. Anyway what i probably want is one that is twice the size of this one and curved, that would be even better to meet the natural Human FOV, who knows perhaps such ones will come.

Also what would be really cool, is if they would build such Screens as Plasmas or OLED, because they have both no delay at all and perfect Black Level's. I still not like the greyisch Blacks, even LED's can not compete with the Blacks of Plasma's, so i really hope the big OLED's are comming soon else i still prefer playing on Plasmas.

I guess you can already get a 65" curved panel if that's what you want.

But likely not tuned for competitive gaming.

I don't know what happens in the OLED screen space.
Plasma seem to have been abandoned.

[videogames]

A decent-sized AMOLED display would be VERY expensive, though. I imagine that's why there aren't any available right now. I'd bet Samsung will jump right on it once manufacturing becomes more cost-effective.

As for curved monitors, the 34UC97 seems to be the best ultrawide out right now.

[NeXuS23]

Ohh, indeed the 34UC97 looks even better as the 34UM95 well so better pick that one instead for testing, its the same Size anyway... And yeah there are no big enough OLED's available, but they are coming... Also i have already use Plasmas as TV, what i mean is as Monitor because they are too big normaly, but once big enough OLED's are available, its what i will use then anyway for TV and Monitor usage... It all about Black Levels for me and then on second Place no Delays... ;)

[yberkurko]

Цитата допису Aliquis:

I've seen someone suggest we see square/how the Apple tablets 4:3 was good.

But if that's the case I don't see why so many films are 2.35:1 and previously 16:9.

Also if I hold my hands in front of me and try to decide where I can't see them any longer that rectangle in front of me is waaaay wider than a square.

So I think 21:9 is just fine as a ratio.

As for size IMHO a 28" 21:9 is way too small. so I think it's just fine. It's half the height extra on each of the sides on a 27" 21:9 one.

I don't need to be able to take it all in, when I type this I only sharply see the text around this text I'm typing and not the whole screen. That's thow our sight work. The marginal data will provides clues and you can decide to look at them to see what it's all about but normally it will just provide some blurry visual clues (well, considering you're watching in the middle as in an FPS) which prove extra immersion.

I can imagine people who have had 14" CRTs thought going 20" was too far. And people who got 20" 16:9 TFTs thought that that was ok and maybe 23" was too big.

I would just let the 34" one give some visual clues on the sides which your 27" can't :)

Or in the case of some other usage just more space for whatever information you want to put there.

I guess we all have our own preferences. For me 16:10 ratio is the best but i got this good 1440p screen for reasonable price so ended up there (not that big difference after all). I can understand why in fps games 21:9 may be good as you rarely have to see high but extra with helps spotting threats. Traditional rpg's and such work best on as square as possible giving equal visual distance to all directions. Many games need bit height to view to be at best. For office, web surfing and such 1080 pixels height is bit low, but i guess 1440pixel height ultra wide would work ok for it. So it also depends on use.

[Elite Autiste]

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/acer-predator-xr341ck-34-curved-gaming-screen-with-g-sync.html


How about G-sync, 144hz and 21:9 (3440x1440)?

Instead of just picking ONE :)

I allready have an ultrawide monitor, LG 34UM95-P

[Fury]

Цитата допису TickleMeRifle:

Цитата допису Mozendo:

Too bad 3440 x 1440 is useless unless you have multi high end GPUs.

thats why the monitor comes in two resolutions: 3440 x 1440 and 2560 x 1080. i decided to buy the latter and @ only 10% frame rate hit compared to 1080p its a winner! i avoided the 3440 x 1440 res because of its big hit on fps....

Easy to power that, just get a R9 290x or GTX 980...

[Aliquis Freedom & Ethnopluralism]

Цитата допису Fury559:

Easy to power that, just get a R9 290x or GTX 980...

While personally I prefer the idea of scaling perfect ratios (so render in 1720x720 in this case) if it can't be done at least team Xbox seem to be just fine with interpolating and upscaling the graphics ..

Seem like they prefer that and full effects over limited effects and higher resolution too and maybe that's correct when things actually move what do I know.

I mostly want the aspect ratio. The resolution may not be perfect for the latest and greatest games and a not awesome machine but on the other hand for older games I guess it can still be done and it would be nice for pictures and such (though not necessary) and things like small text.

Guess a care least for the resolution, 2560x1080 isn't awful but then again 1080 is just so little more than what 1280x1024 had like .. 10-15 years ago ..

Needed a decent screen and graphics card if it wasn't large to show it accurately and at decent refresh rate though.

[Hatman]

When we made the switch from CRT to TFT's we gave up on free resolution choice and high refresh rates deliberately ... just for the sake of comfort.

Now that gaming monitors have caught up at least in one department and i can play on a high Hz screen without input lag and/or tearing again (only took them 10 years, geesh) you wan't me to give that up to jump on yet another experimental bandwagon?

No thanks...

How about fixing the 2nd issue first? Dependancy on native reolutions...

[Charlie]

I have been thinking about getting an ultrawide monitor.

[Aliquis Freedom & Ethnopluralism]

Цитата допису Hatman:

gave up on free resolution choice and high refresh rates deliberately ... just for the sake of comfort.

you wan't me to give that up to jump on yet another experimental

How about fixing the 2nd issue first? Dependancy on native reolutions...

As for refresh rates the advantage for most users is that it doesn't flicker. So 60 Hz on both the LCD will be stable. And I'm sure some people wasn't happy with the flicker at 75 Hz either. I guess that's what you mean with comfort though. Though I'm not sure.

As for free resolution choice did we really had that anyway?
Don't CRTs have a grill in front of them? I don't know what the purpose is but I guess that maybe it increases sharpness at the native resolution? But make things worse at other resolutions? Do all have grills? None and there's just one resolution which look much sharper than the others anyway?

If CRTs used a grill and "wrong" resolution led to weird consequences there then I don't really see all that much difference vs interpolating/extrapolating to a native LCD resolution.

What is the experiment you talk about? 144 Hz? G-sync? You're not giving up anything on those? It become even better than combined.

How do you suggest native resolutions would be fixed? Only way of going in that direction as things work now is to increase the resolution a lot so the resolution you want will use about the same amount of physical pixels for the each data pixel you send the screen.

[Hatman]

Цитата допису Aliquise:

Цитата допису Hatman:

gave up on free resolution choice and high refresh rates deliberately ... just for the sake of comfort.

you wan't me to give that up to jump on yet another experimental

How about fixing the 2nd issue first? Dependancy on native reolutions...

As for refresh rates the advantage for most users is that it doesn't flicker. So 60 Hz on both the LCD will be stable. And I'm sure some people wasn't happy with the flicker at 75 Hz either. I guess that's what you mean with comfort though. Though I'm not sure.

As for free resolution choice did we really had that anyway?
Don't CRTs have a grill in front of them? I don't know what the purpose is but I guess that maybe it increases sharpness at the native resolution? But make things worse at other resolutions? Do all have grills? None and there's just one resolution which look much sharper than the others anyway?

If CRTs used a grill and "wrong" resolution led to weird consequences there then I don't really see all that much difference vs interpolating/extrapolating to a native LCD resolution.

What is the experiment you talk about? 144 Hz? G-sync? You're not giving up anything on those? It become even better than combined.

How do you suggest native resolutions would be fixed? Only way of going in that direction as things work now is to increase the resolution a lot so the resolution you want will use about the same amount of physical pixels for the each data pixel you send the screen.

The comfort i meant was the reduced size and weight. There was nothing else going for LCDs at the time..

Flickering is one thing but what i meant are input lag and screen tearing. Most 60Hz displays suffer from noticable input lag in gaming when you have a fast computer and VSync is enabled. So you either have to live the lag, or disable vsync and the screen starts tearing. Proper high Hz monitors, some with aditional input lag reduction features, solved this issue. (Wich wasn't an issue in CRT times at all because we could easily play at 200 Hz if desired).

My main problem with increasing the resolution (to no end) is backwards-compatibility. Thousands of games, especially older ones or indie titles, don't come with scaling interfaces.
What good is a high resolution NPC when you can't make out what he's trying to tell you because the text is too small to read. -.-

And that is also why i'd be much more interested in a technology that does lower resolutions just as sharp as it's "native" one before i start turning the resolution screw again.

Yes, the "grill" (aperture masks) of CRTs would be undesirable these days but we denied CRTs a decade of evolution so it's not a fair comparison really.

[Keltik79]

Цитата допису QUO:

I find Ticklemerifle's observations pretty accurate, and thank god I have not pulled the trigger on the 3440X1440 lg 34UM95-P yet, because I fear dual titans may not be enough for smooth gameplay.

Curious I have two First Gen Titan's (EVGA SC) as well, but why do you think they might not be enough to handle a 3440x1440?

The Titan Specs state Maximum digital resolution at 4096x2160 for a single card.

{3840x2160 at 30Hz or 4096x2160 at 24Hz supported over HDMI}
{4096x2160 (including 3840x2160) at 60Hz supported over Displayport}

Sorry I only know the basics when it comes to GPU.