New Monitor

demo said:
I find it bizarre you discount the 34" UW due to height, only to get a 27" panel of identical height. They're both 1440p panels with the same pixel pitch, one just has an extra 33% real estate on the sides
Click to expand...

It's a visual thing, and it bugs me. :lol: As I mentioned, I saw it was the same height as the 27" next to it on the shelf.

Just too narrow and not tall enough. It's so skewed, I thought the 27" monitor next to it was a 24"
Click to expand...

The keyboard I bought there today has a couple of keys not working (just my luck...), so I'm going back tomorrow. I'll check them out again.
 
Fair enough, each to their own. I guess I feel that way about the 49" 32:9 Super wide monitors.


Anyway, in game shots:
cs-go-different-aspect-ratios.jpg
 
How does 21:9 work with older games and movies/shows? I'd imagine I'd have borders on the sides on a lot of stuff.
 
I can't speak for every game, but everything I have installed works fine (about 40 games). The oldest game I have installed is HL2 and it's perfect.


Check out this link for video and movie comparisons (scroll to bottom).

If video is a priority I'd probably be looking at a 4k display though, forget about 1440p.
 
Interesting article, definitely answered a lot of questions. I'll take another look at them tomorrow. Videos definitely aren't a priority, as I have TV's for that. I just have videos with either Netflix or Youtube constantly going while on the web. So, on the other hand, ultra-wide would be nice to have that extra room (like I did with the 4k tv when I used that) to have multiple sites open, or videos plus sites. And I could hook the display up to my work laptop and get rid of these monitors while not sacrificing real estate.

Here's my current setup that I tossed together with monitors I took from my desk at work.

wuVkcUX.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yea so a 49" 32:9 Superwide would just be like that, if they are 27", but without a bezel in the middle.
 
For me the unbearable part was the stretching (fishbowl effect) on the sides which happened with UW. I just couldn’t live with it. The positive would have been cheating potential in online FPS games.
 
demo said:
That just means your FOV was too high.
Click to expand...
I play at 90 for everything. Rarely 100. Either way it is water under the bridge for me. Now there is no chance of me diving back into UW anytime soon. Right now I am trying to find a desk where I can hook up the OLED without going blind in the process. :).
 
Whatever floats your boat man. I'll be staying with UW. Have a 4k TV right next to it and find the 144hz UW monitor to be far superior for KB/M gaming and productivity.
 
Of course different strokes. The good news is unlike in the past these days there are actually choices. In the past you had to compromise a lot or pay through the nose for cutting edge (think BFD or UW 100 Hz displays, panel uniformity issues, Gsync, OC, refresh rates etc). Now for same price you can have a 55 inch OLED with HDMI 2.1 and best colors in the display business.
 
Looked at the 34" 3440x1440 displays again at Best Buy. They still look very small on the display shelf, but I think it's just the way they are on the shelf. I watched it a bit to try and get use to it, then went back to the 1440P 27". They both seemed small, but I think they'll be fine when I get it here on my desk. Hell, these are 22" monitors I'm using now. :lol:

The longer I looked at the ultrawide and then went back to the 27"...you guys were right. I think I preferred the wider display.

Going to switch gears and research those a bit. Open to suggestions on specific displays.
 
Glad you got a second look, with the higher resolutions the height issues really melt away compared to the first gen of these super wides. I haven't seen any ultrawides (32:9) in person, were there any at Best Buy? Might have to make a visit if they allow window shopping now.
 
dodger said:
Glad you got a second look, with the higher resolutions the height issues really melt away compared to the first gen of these super wides. I haven't seen any ultrawides (32:9) in person, were there any at Best Buy? Might have to make a visit if they allow window shopping now.
Click to expand...

The two Best Buy's near me (40mi away in different directions) both had only a single 34" display. Not a very good one either, being something like 2560x1080 or some goofy resolution. I was just trying to get an idea of size, since it's the only option I have to see something in person.

There were definitely no 32:9 displays at either location.
 
OverclockN' said:
The two Best Buy's near me (40mi away in different directions) both had only a single 34" display. Not a very good one either, being something like 2560x1080 or some goofy resolution. I was just trying to get an idea of size, since it's the only option I have to see something in person.

There were definitely no 32:9 displays at either location.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah those sound like first gen super wides, definitely avoid. For 27" I wouldn't go below 1440p so to drop resolution and have a wider screen is a big step backwards.

Do you have any Fry's? I haven't stepped into one for a while but I remember they would have tons of PC's on display with all sorts of monitors attached. The nearest one is a bit of a drive so I rarely go.
 
dodger said:
Oh yeah those sound like first gen super wides, definitely avoid. For 27" I wouldn't go below 1440p so to drop resolution and have a wider screen is a big step backwards.

Do you have any Fry's? I haven't stepped into one for a while but I remember they would have tons of PC's on display with all sorts of monitors attached. The nearest one is a bit of a drive so I rarely go.
Click to expand...

Right, I had no intention of getting those low resolution displays. Just trying to get an idea of the size. I won't do anything but 3440x1440 or 3840x1600.

My only option anywhere reasonably close is Best Buy. Other closest stores are about 3hrs away.
 
Depending on the refresh rate you want, you can pick up some UW for pretty cheap. 100hz are fairly cheap, but 120 and 144hz drive the costs up significantly, as well as Gsync module or cheaper Gsync/Freesync compatible VRR.

KAC said:
Of course different strokes. The good news is unlike in the past these days there are actually choices. In the past you had to compromise a lot or pay through the nose for cutting edge
Click to expand...

You're totally right buddy, so many choices these days without as much compromise.
 
demo said:
Depending on the refresh rate you want, you can pick up some UW for pretty cheap. 100hz are fairly cheap, but 120 and 144hz drive the costs up significantly, as well as Gsync module or cheaper Gsync/Freesync compatible VRR
Click to expand...

I'm thinking 120Hz minimum, and it doesn't have to have the GSYNC module...but at least GSYNC compatible.
 
demo said:
Depending on the refresh rate you want, you can pick up some UW for pretty cheap. 100hz are fairly cheap, but 120 and 144hz drive the costs up significantly, as well as Gsync module or cheaper Gsync/Freesync compatible VRR.



You're totally right buddy, so many choices these days without as much compromise.
Click to expand...

my display should be relatively affordable these days, the freesync version plays quite with nv cards
 
I just picked up the Odyssey G7 32" myself. After being wowed in store. This could be _the_ perfect monitor.... If they can get this flickering issue sorted out. 240hz, VA, 1ms, HDR600, local dimming, 1440P (I get it, not 4k, but you want to use 240hz). 32" So you get almost the same "size" as the 34" while keeping the standard 16:9 aspect ratio. 1000R curve, which at first is incredibly aggressive, but being the same curve as the eye, it's actually quite soothing once you understand how to use the monitor the same way you do your eyes (stare middle, use peripherals).

As a competetive gamer with league, I welcome the 240hz, dear lord butter smooth. But please Samsung, fix the flickering.

Anyways, might be one you want to look at OCN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top