![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
21:9 Monitor over 29"?
- Thread starter Trackr
- Start date
Supersnake
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,152
Google "21:9 monitor", and you'll find several.
Then go to http://www.displaywars.com/ and plug in
21:9 / 29 inch left menu and 16:10 / 29 inch on right menu and hit the 'compare' tab..
You will gain 2 inches in viewing screen width but you will lose 4 inches in viewing screen height with a 21:9.
21:9 is understandably beneficial for those working with spread sheets and side-by-side documents.
However, If you use your computer for surfing the web (and in my opinion games too) you will regret it.
A 29 inch 21:9 will equal a screen area of 304.50 sq inches versus the 377.98 sq inch area of a 29 inch 16:10 display.
Then go to http://www.displaywars.com/ and plug in
21:9 / 29 inch left menu and 16:10 / 29 inch on right menu and hit the 'compare' tab..
You will gain 2 inches in viewing screen width but you will lose 4 inches in viewing screen height with a 21:9.
21:9 is understandably beneficial for those working with spread sheets and side-by-side documents.
However, If you use your computer for surfing the web (and in my opinion games too) you will regret it.
A 29 inch 21:9 will equal a screen area of 304.50 sq inches versus the 377.98 sq inch area of a 29 inch 16:10 display.
Last edited:
I think what Trackr meant was - Is there any 21:9 aspect screens larger than 29" available on the market, or upcoming...
AFAIK I haven't seen anything larger as far as a PC monitor goes.
I wouldn't doubt that we'll see larger panels down the road as this becomes a more typical format. (I'd think there will be a point however where the screens will need to be curved to be viewed properly).
Philips has produced a couple of 21:9 TV's - So that might be worth looking at if you can handle the much larger screen size. How well they handle for PC use, I couldn't tell you?
They are also quite expensive....
AFAIK I haven't seen anything larger as far as a PC monitor goes.
I wouldn't doubt that we'll see larger panels down the road as this becomes a more typical format. (I'd think there will be a point however where the screens will need to be curved to be viewed properly).
Philips has produced a couple of 21:9 TV's - So that might be worth looking at if you can handle the much larger screen size. How well they handle for PC use, I couldn't tell you?
They are also quite expensive....
Supersnake
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,152
Thanks for pointing out the direction of his question to me.
Very good point! And if you are playing games on a wide curved screen you are going to have FOV (field of view) concerns, e.g. fish bowl effect and misjudging distances.
Last edited:
I think you're right. Monitors seem to stop at 30" for some reason, even though I used a 37" HDTV as a monitor for almost a year.
As for the TV's.. they're all 1080p, no? I want a resolution of 3500x1500 or so.
Are there any 21:9 4k TV's/Monitors?
The closest thing I've found is the XVT3D580CM.
It's a 58" 2560x1080 LED 3D TV.
It's way too big for a monitor, and it has huge borders, but at least the price is half what it used to be.
I think the 21:9 format failed for TV's.. but it's perfect for gaming.
It's a 58" 2560x1080 LED 3D TV.
It's way too big for a monitor, and it has huge borders, but at least the price is half what it used to be.
I think the 21:9 format failed for TV's.. but it's perfect for gaming.
I think they're going to play the resolution game first with 16:9 aspect TV's.
21:9 is a little tough for the market to swallow right now, but I don't doubt in the future that the standard TV format will be 21:9. It's great for movies and gaming, but not ideal for the current state of our cable broadcast format.
As it is here in Canada, we are still steadily working towards full 720p/1080i (16:9) adoption on all of our channels. There's a number of channels that are still broadcast in the old 4:3 format.
People who use large TV's for their every day desktop computer monitor are certainly in the minority. The majority are happy enough to sit at their desk 2ft. away from their 19"-24" display. 27", 29", 30" are all above what the average consumer buy's and is getting into a size class that is too large for many.
I would personally be OK with maybe a 32"-35" 21:9 screen at my viewing distance, but any wider and I think the display would require a subtle curvature to it. - Or I'd have to sit further back.
21:9 is a little tough for the market to swallow right now, but I don't doubt in the future that the standard TV format will be 21:9. It's great for movies and gaming, but not ideal for the current state of our cable broadcast format.
As it is here in Canada, we are still steadily working towards full 720p/1080i (16:9) adoption on all of our channels. There's a number of channels that are still broadcast in the old 4:3 format.
People who use large TV's for their every day desktop computer monitor are certainly in the minority. The majority are happy enough to sit at their desk 2ft. away from their 19"-24" display. 27", 29", 30" are all above what the average consumer buy's and is getting into a size class that is too large for many.
I would personally be OK with maybe a 32"-35" 21:9 screen at my viewing distance, but any wider and I think the display would require a subtle curvature to it. - Or I'd have to sit further back.
matixryder
n00b
- Joined
- May 27, 2013
- Messages
- 8
Idk about this, but I have heard nothing but problems with 21:9 monitors at the moment for both Dell and LG. if I were you I would wait until new models roll out and new manufactures enter the market.
Not so. I have worked with spreadsheets for more than twenty years and now tend to start a new spreadsheet a couple of columns in from the LH edge because even on a 24-inch 16:10 display it requires bit too much of peripheral vision. 16:9 would be way too much, 21:9 torture.
Supersnake
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,152
I found your dislike of the 21:9 wide screens for spreadsheets to be surprisingly refreshing!
Would be interesting to see if other like wise opinionated users will be emerging.
Proponents of the 21:9 aspect ratio on the web are so far the manufacturers of the ultra wide display, plus a PC Advisor reviewer who I am not sure was actually using the 21:9 for spreadsheets, and a contributor in an LG blog:
21:9 Aspect Ratio for wide spreadsheet documents to enhance productivity and powerful multitasking. - LG Ultrawide EA93 Product Page
21:9 format makes it perfectly suitable for more spreadsheets columns to be viewed.- Phillips 29" Ultrawide Product Page
Photo showing how their 21:9 will attain 35 spreadsheet columns instead of only 26
http://www.lg.com/us/monitors/discoverlgmonitors/ultrawide.jsp
YouTube Video illustrating the "advantage" of viewing 35 column wide spreadsheets
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eby7oigOjjM
So why would you want a display in this format? Obviously, there’s the benefit of extra screen space – documents fit nicely side-by-side and spreadsheets can show many more columns.- PC Advisor
The Phillips 21:9 format makes the monitor perfectly suitable for viewing large spreadsheets or two full Internet pages side by side on one screen.- PCper.com
The UltraWide monitor offers a definitive solution. Bearing in mind differences in every computer set up, the 21:9 monitor can display 35 columns in one screen, letting users grasp information all the more easily and efficiently. This monitor offers nine more columns compared to a conventional 16:9 monitor. - LG Blog
http://whylgtv.lge.com/archives/5167
Last edited:
Supersnake
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,152
Anand Tech gave a heavily negative review of the 21:9 LG29EA93.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6741/lg-29ea93-monitor-review-rev-125/8
The original review of the 1.09 firmware 29EA93 was quite negative indeed.
However, the link you posted is for the updated review of the 29EA93-P with firmware 1.25
This Anandtech review was significantly more positive, stating that this updated version of the display was/is vastly improved from the original in every respect.
FWIW, my LG 29EA93-P is a rev 01 panel with 1.43 firmware (manufactured in April 2013).
Supersnake
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,152
Oops! Yes it was the 1.09 firmware that Anand was critical of. I forgot that in another thread I pointed out the distinction between the firmware versions.
Thanks for the correction.
Last edited:
I think you hit both nails on the head.
1.) They're probably going to come out with 16:9 monitor with higher resolutions thatn 2560x1600, so we'll just have to wait.
2.) A screen larger than 32" at 21:9 would need to have some sort of curvature. Is this even possible with LCD's? Won't we need to wait for OLED displays that can do that? That might take 5 years..
My biggest issue with 21:9 is that it's not selling.
In my opinion, 21:9 sucks for everything besides 2.35:1 movies and gaming.
I want it ONLY for gaming.
I suppose I'm one of those people who want surround, but don't want border at all. I guess I'll just have to wait..
But even if 21:9 curved 4k screens will be available, they'll be few and far between because I honestly don't believe that anyone besides the PC gaming community would want them.
my setup is a U2913WM for gaming/movies (main screen) and U2412 for browsing/other stuff (secondary screen) i love it.
lately i've been thinking about downgrading the secondary screen to a 22-23" and pivot it, i think that would be even better for surfing.
lately i've been thinking about downgrading the secondary screen to a 22-23" and pivot it, i think that would be even better for surfing.
It would actually be a perfect monitor for some professionals as well. For me I want one for music editing. As an audio engineer most of my detail work comes from editing audio and midi notes that are spanned laterally. I currently use a triple monitor set up, but having bezels in the way while editing gets frustrating. 21:9 would be perfect for me as I would love to ditch a spanned desktop in favor of a single ultra wide.
I could also see some benefit for image editing as well, but only if we get more vertical pixels. 1080 vertical is not enough. I would imagine 1200 vertical pixels would be enough. More real estate is always better.
I am still holding my breath for a 2800x1200 monitor. I assume it is still possible with the current interfaces and technology. I really hope one like this is released within the next year, I have been using the same screens for a few years now. I really want to upgrade.
The key to 21:9 really is resolution (higher = better for sure ... well until we can't see anything on the screen lol!), and of course screen size.
For "most" desks 29"-33" will be enough.
Of course some [H]ard core folk will want larger, but then we're really getting into the realm of TV's at that point.
I used to run two Dell U2711's (more recently just one as I prefer a single display) @ 2560x1440 res. They were great, but for my needs I think the 21:9 format suits me better.
It was a very "weird" change at first (going from one format to the other), but I've really taken to the 29EA93-P. So much so that now every time I sit down and watch my 55" Panasonic TV... well it just feels weird. It's like I'm looking at a square box.
The 21:9 format will grow in time. It's new and like anything new, will take a little while to gain a foothold in the market place. Once you start seeing these hit the big box stores - then you'll see the sales numbers climb. Right now they are a little bit exclusive and few actually know this screen format exists.
Those that have seen my 29EA93-P have been very intrigued by it to say the least.
Two of them are now proud owners of a Dell U2711
I only hope they enjoy them as much as I enjoy my LG.
For "most" desks 29"-33" will be enough.
Of course some [H]ard core folk will want larger, but then we're really getting into the realm of TV's at that point.
I used to run two Dell U2711's (more recently just one as I prefer a single display) @ 2560x1440 res. They were great, but for my needs I think the 21:9 format suits me better.
It was a very "weird" change at first (going from one format to the other), but I've really taken to the 29EA93-P. So much so that now every time I sit down and watch my 55" Panasonic TV... well it just feels weird. It's like I'm looking at a square box.
The 21:9 format will grow in time. It's new and like anything new, will take a little while to gain a foothold in the market place. Once you start seeing these hit the big box stores - then you'll see the sales numbers climb. Right now they are a little bit exclusive and few actually know this screen format exists.
Those that have seen my 29EA93-P have been very intrigued by it to say the least.
Two of them are now proud owners of a Dell U2711
I only hope they enjoy them as much as I enjoy my LG.
The key to 21:9 really is resolution (higher = better for sure ... well until we can't see anything on the screen lol!), and of course screen size.
For "most" desks 29"-33" will be enough.
Of course some [H]ard core folk will want larger, but then we're really getting into the realm of TV's at that point.
I used to run two Dell U2711's (more recently just one as I prefer a single display) @ 2560x1440 res. They were great, but for my needs I think the 21:9 format suits me better.
It was a very "weird" change at first (going from one format to the other), but I've really taken to the 29EA93-P. So much so that now every time I sit down and watch my 55" Panasonic TV... well it just feels weird. It's like I'm looking at a square box.
The 21:9 format will grow in time. It's new and like anything new, will take a little while to gain a foothold in the market place. Once you start seeing these hit the big box stores - then you'll see the sales numbers climb. Right now they are a little bit exclusive and few actually know this screen format exists.
Those that have seen my 29EA93-P have been very intrigued by it to say the least.
Two of them are now proud owners of a Dell U2711
I only hope they enjoy them as much as I enjoy my LG.
I agree. We need higher resolution 21:9 screens.
But yes, I do prefer if they were a bit bigger. Maybe 33".
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic...l-219-monitor-with-a-resolution-of-3440x1440/
34" screen in 3440x1440 resolution.... drooling
34" screen in 3440x1440 resolution.... drooling
Mhm. Well, it's better than the 29" 1080p, but not by a lot.
There are more pixels, but they are tiny. It's still only as tall as a 24" monitor.
I'm looking for something that is exactly 2 inches shorter than my 3007WFP-HC.
I also don't really care about the width THAT much. It doesn't have to be 21:9.. It could be 20:9, 19:9, maybe even 18:9. I just want it somewhat wider and almost equally tall.
So, 2 inches shorter and let's say 4-8 inches wider.
Aren't these 34" ones the same height as a 27" 16:9? http://www.displaywars.com/34-inch-21x9-vs-27-inch-16x9
Zepher
[H]ipster Replacement
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2001
- Messages
- 20,927
the 34" 21:9 is really really close to the size you want,
Code:
Stats 34" 30"
Width 31.25 inches 25.44 inches
Height 13.39 inches 15.90 inches
Area 418.55 inches² 404.49 inches²
As a 4:3 Display 22.32 inches 26.50 inches
As a 16:9 Display 27.32 inches 29.19 inches
As a 16:10 Display 25.27 inches 30.00 inches
As a 2.35:1 Display 33.96 inches 27.65 inchesSupersnake
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,152
Why isn't anyone discussing the GPU a gamer will require - if such a GPU is available - to drive that large a screen with that large a resolution?
So far, everyone is talking about pixels and size, what about frame rates for a gamer?
If you are a gamer you could be setting themselves up for disappointing, inadequate frame rates. Yes? No?
And what about the issue of being able to comfortably read text at native resolution, won't that too be a concern?
So far, everyone is talking about pixels and size, what about frame rates for a gamer?
If you are a gamer you could be setting themselves up for disappointing, inadequate frame rates. Yes? No?
And what about the issue of being able to comfortably read text at native resolution, won't that too be a concern?
Last edited:
suiken_2mieu
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2010
- Messages
- 2,911
For that resolution if you can run 5760x1080, you'll be more than fine for 3440x1440 . That res is also only a little bigger than a 30". So in a lot of cases even a single 7970 will be good enough.
See below
Agreed. I ran 6000x1200 for a long time on a 7970, now running a 780 and it runs fine. Newer games run at mostly high settings. Should be able to bump a few settings up by going with a single 3440x1440 monitor.
Yep, 34" is as tall as as 27" 16:9 not a 24"... this is the perfect size probably.
http://www.displaywars.com/34-inch-235x1-vs-27-inch-16x9
But... I haven't seen a SINGLE word about this screen in any of the CES coverage...
Last edited:
Thank you both of you! Looks amazing!
http://translate.google.com/transla...dbox=0&usg=ALkJrhiakf28UEcOMR4Iqd1kSqSk9FizgA
Page 4 of that article has a few videos and a lot of images of the screen in action:
http://translate.googleusercontent....996765&usg=ALkJrhhkXaUHAmgeLY4IaCd098J_QdxTOA
I really hope it is less than $1500... if so I'll be purchasing it. Anyone read any tentative release date information? I'll need a monitor soon.
EDIT: Bad translation from article:
"FYI .. From the 13th of this month in G-market seems to be selling the product reservation. You can do a good discount you are interested in
The 13th try searching for that once in the open market."
http://translate.google.com/transla...dbox=0&usg=ALkJrhiakf28UEcOMR4Iqd1kSqSk9FizgA
Page 4 of that article has a few videos and a lot of images of the screen in action:
http://translate.googleusercontent....996765&usg=ALkJrhhkXaUHAmgeLY4IaCd098J_QdxTOA
I really hope it is less than $1500... if so I'll be purchasing it. Anyone read any tentative release date information? I'll need a monitor soon.
EDIT: Bad translation from article:
"FYI .. From the 13th of this month in G-market seems to be selling the product reservation. You can do a good discount you are interested in
The 13th try searching for that once in the open market."
This monitor is 857600 pixels greater than a 30" 2560x1600 display. You can run most games on a 30" w/a single 780 at almost high settings. I would assume that you could manage most games on this monitor with one 780 but you may have to drop settings down a little bit.
I plan on playing league of legends on it, and that won't require too much power at all.
mike_j_johnson
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 961
The panel looks like it might be glossy from one of those YouTube videos!!! I have a 29" ultra wide currently and I cannot stand the matte AG coating.
Wish this had G-SYNC or at least we knew if it would be compatible with variable refresh rate (aka FreeSync) in the future.
Wish this had G-SYNC or at least we knew if it would be compatible with variable refresh rate (aka FreeSync) in the future.
KashunatoR
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2011
- Messages
- 127
Is there any chance that a monitor at these dimensions and resolution could come in 144 hz? I don't care if it would be TN.
Last edited:
MajorMullet
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2004
- Messages
- 765
There is a press release on LG's site about these. It seems there will be multiple models, but it doesn't give a lot of details yet. I'm very excited about these.