34" 21:9 UltraWide Displays (3440x1440) - LG UM95/UM65 & Dell U3415W

All the online pre-order prices I'm seeing here in Canada are between $985 - $1,050.

Funny enough, it's actually worth adding the UM95 to cart to see what the final price will be after taxes, eco fees, and shipping... because in many cases the more expensive initial sales price tends to be the lower final price. Largely because of free shipping offers and/or a reduced (or no) eco-fee.

I'm chomping at the bit to put in my pre-order... But I'm trying my best to wait and see where prices end up at or shortly after release.
 
Yea, should wait. Prices will go down, but mainly want to wait and make sure reviews are good.

I'm sure they will be great but it's smart to wait
 
Let me help clear up any confusions as to why this monitor is the ultimate awesome sauce that many of us have been waiting for:

For those that don't like longer posts....Summary = This monitor has everything anyone could want, unless you're into lower resolution 120hz. It's the best of multiple worlds

--- Triple screens ---
I've been there. The immersion of triple screen is great, but it has it's drawbacks. It's hard to push on the vid cards and continuously makes you sink more money into better and better vid cards over the years as newer games are more complex to push to 5760 x 1080 rez. Add in bezel correction and you're actually pushing 5960 x 1080. This usually makes you have to put games on med to low graphic settings unless you have $1500 in vid cards.
Minor issue, but the bezels can be annoying. In addition, not all games adapt to triple screen natively and usually you're having to mess around with HUD options, .ini files, etc. Not every game is nice to triple screen yet.
Triple screen, in my opinion, is TOO wide. It's alot to visually process at times, especially in fast moving first person shooters, and you can have excessive fish eye effect on alot of games. I tried it, and I would still have it if not for the never ending expensive video card costs that it would create.

--- 60hz vs 120hz ---
I've tried this too, so I don't dog 120hz as someone who hasn't tasted it. Dry land is not a myth, I've seen it. BF3, the 120hz was cool with how smooth it was, sure. BUT....60hz with vsync (or better adaptive vsync) is plenty smooth and playable just fine. The 120hz just made it smoother in shooters (BF3). Oooo and dragging windows around on the desktop. I play many other games and I didn't see a huge impact in anything else, if at all.
But, a BIG negative drawback to 120hz is the low resolution you have to deal with. You 120hz guys say, "once you go 120hz, you can't go back". Wrong, I've went back and am happier, because of resolution. I say to you, "Once you go 2560x1440, you can't go back". At the time I tried 120hz, I went from a 30" 2560x1600 monitor to 120hz 27" 1920x1080. The smoothness did not make up for the serious drop in resolution. Things looked horrible...GASP...but it was a little smoother dude!!!! No, not into it. I want my pixel clarity and "dealing with" 60hz is just fine to have that.
This 34UM95 has the same awesome .232 dot pitch but sports 3440x1440. That's as clear and big as it gets. Total awesome.

--- 21:9 screens entered the scene ---
Great, awesome step in the right direction, but the one major thing that people didn't like was the vertical limit of 1080 pixels....so now the 1440 21:9 screens are coming to the scene.....PERFECT NESS!!!!!


So these LG and Dell 34" 21:9 screens coming out..........It's the best mix of resolution, immersion, IPS, no bezels, best clarity, and medium vidcard power requirement. It's the best. There is no other monitor that will give you more. Big deal it's not 120hz. That's not needed. This is the best until we get bigger, thinner 21:9 OLED or Graphene screens that aren't locked to a refresh ceiling.
 
I will be sold if someone can overclock theirs above 60Hz. Just waiting for the reviews. :)
 
For those that don't like longer posts....Summary = This monitor has everything anyone could want, unless you're into lower resolution 120hz

How? I still dont get why so many of you are ignoring the fact that not every game even works properly in that aspect ratio. There where a myriad of issues when I tried to use 21:9. Some games flat out wont use that aspect ratio at all and many others are just doing something screwy. Some of you are just oblivious and will never even notice issues in some games I guess. Personally I got tired of having to use flawlesswidescreen to try and fix some issues and it was just not worth the hassle in the end.
 
misterbobby said:
For those that don't like longer posts....Summary = This monitor has everything anyone could want, unless you're into lower resolution 120hz

How? I still dont get why so many of you are ignoring the fact that not every game even works properly in that aspect ratio. There where a myriad of issues when I tried to use 21:9. Some games flat out wont use that aspect ratio at all and many others are just doing something screwy. Some of you are just oblivious and will never even notice issues in some games I guess. Personally I got tired of having to use flawlesswidescreen to try and fix some issues and it was just not worth the hassle in the end.
Click to expand...

That's helpful to know. Do you by any chance have a list of games with non-fixable problems?
 
kabobi said:
That's helpful to know. Do you by any chance have a list of games with non-fixable problems?
Click to expand...
Well some games including all of the Assassins Creed games will not do 21:9 at all. Some games I tried such as Aliens Colonial Marines simply zoom in and cut off a little from the top and bottom. Many people don't notice that as they don't compare it to 16:9 to see what is happening. Some games got stretched out or the hud would not display properly but most could be fixed if you take the time but I get fed up after a while. Far Cry 3 gave me some issues that I could never fully fix. Also a couple games got really wonky looking running in 21:9. It was sort of that exaggerated look you get in some UE 3 games where objects looked more oval or stretched out the further they were from the center of the screen. I dont remember every case with every game since its been probably a year now since my 21:9 adventure.
 
What you wrote is a realistic and pertinent issue, Misterbobby. Am appreciating what you are revealing.

Personally, I am not willing to settle for less than maximum graphic settings and 60 fps in any of my games just to get a widescreen view.. If it takes SLI 780Ti (or whatever) to get 60 fps at max settings, than I will splurge on the expense. Am still waiting for gamers or reviewers to actually be playing their demanding high end games on this 34inch 21:9 and letting us know if it is happening.
 
Last edited:
Supersnake said:
What you wrote is a realistic and pertinent issue, Misterbobby. Am appreciating what you are revealing.

Personally, I am not willing to settle for less than maximum graphic settings and 60 fps in any of my games just to get a widescreen view.. If it takes SLI 780Ti (or whatever) to get 60 fps at max settings, than I will splurge on the expense. Am still waiting for gamers or reviewers to actually be playing their demanding high end games on this 34inch 21:9 and letting us know if it is happening.
Click to expand...

Many popular games support 21:9 without a problem... for the ones that don't (mostly Ubisoft's crappy console ports), try:

https://www.flawlesswidescreen.org/
 
SixFootDuo said:
So this 34" 4K monitor is no longer $999?

I'm seeing new pricing that what LG had originally announced .....

$1,499 ....... that's basically a new X99 motherboard, DDR4 and a new Intel Haswell-e 8 core CPU and I am pretty sure most people would pick the new motherboard, ram and cpu before spending $1500 dollars
Click to expand...

Sounds like you just have different priorities. Personally, I'm willing to spend several times more on a monitor than I would general computer parts. The reason being, I don't change my displays that often.

At any rate, in terms of pixel count alone this isn't a bad deal at all in the current market. 3440x1440 is more pixels than a 2560x1600 monitor, which still are around $1k unless you pick up a refurb or something.
 
anonuser said:
Many popular games support 21:9 without a problem... for the ones that don't (mostly Ubisoft's crappy console ports), try:

https://www.flawlesswidescreen.org/
Click to expand...
Well Ubisoft makes all the Assassins Creed games but they are not even on that site because they cant be fixed at all. And for the games that supposedly can be fixed, if you actually look at the summaries you will see that using flawlesswidescreen will not fix all issues even in those games.
 
anonuser said:
Many popular games support 21:9 without a problem... for the ones that don't (mostly Ubisoft's crappy console ports), try:

https://www.flawlesswidescreen.org/
Click to expand...

I wonder why you quoted my post that I desire my games to be running 60 fps in max setting then lead me to that link?
That flawless-wide-screen site addresses fixes to HUD, FOV, menu rendering, and other resolution issues, I saw nothing in there confirming the games are running at 60 fps at max graphical settings.

While I appreciate your interest, we have yet to read where a 34" 21:9 screen is rendering high end games at 60 fps in max setting.
 
Last edited:
There's one big problem with these monitors: they're not available (in the UK) even for pre-order. A second big problem is that 4K is here. That said, I wouldn't mind one for vertical use.
 
Quartz-1 said:
There's one big problem with these monitors: they're not available (in the UK) even for pre-order. A second big problem is that 4K is here. That said, I wouldn't mind one for vertical use.
Click to expand...

4K also takes much more GFX processing to get playable frame rates. We are at least 2 generations away from 60FPS+ at 4K on a single high end part with high-ultra settings.
 
misterbobby said:
For those that don't like longer posts....Summary = This monitor has everything anyone could want, unless you're into lower resolution 120hz

How? I still dont get why so many of you are ignoring the fact that not every game even works properly in that aspect ratio. There where a myriad of issues when I tried to use 21:9. Some games flat out wont use that aspect ratio at all and many others are just doing something screwy. Some of you are just oblivious and will never even notice issues in some games I guess. Personally I got tired of having to use flawlesswidescreen to try and fix some issues and it was just not worth the hassle in the end.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'm ignoring the gaming angle because I don't do much PC gaming. I do want a bigger monitor for coding and CAD though.

When (if) I want to play a game that doesn't support 21:9 widescreen, I have no problems playing with bars on the side.

21:9 isn't for everyone, obviously. If it is for you, this monitor should be great. If not, there are plenty of great 16:9 or 16:10 monitors out there.
 
This is my next monitor upgrade, no doubt about it. I too would rather spend the money on a monitor over computer hardware any day. I spent $900 on a Dell 2405fpw back when they first came out and I still use it today. I have gone through 3-4 video cards since then.

I don't game much any more so I'm not too worried about lack of game support at this resolution. I'm sure over time more games will support 21:9.
 
i'll also upgrade to this kind monitor, soon or later, and i have more interest in such monitor than in computer hardware. One problem is that upgrading to this monitor will require to replace my computer, this implies that further money is required. Moreover, currently it is difficult to find a medium-cost branded pc (for instance an hp) supporting this resolution, if you want to be sure you'll need to spend more than 1000 euro, as far as i can see.
 
They need to make a 120hz version of this that supports lightboost. That would be my ideal monitor.
 
Just signed up for the AMEX Sync spend $599 at Dell and get $100 back offer. Plan to use it to order one of these monitors :).
 
Supersnake said:
I wonder why you quoted my post that I desire my games to be running 60 fps in max setting then lead me to that link?
That flawless-wide-screen site addresses fixes to HUD, FOV, menu rendering, and other resolution issues, I saw nothing in there confirming the games are running at 60 fps at max graphical settings.

While I appreciate your interest, we have yet to read where a 34" 21:9 screen is rendering high end games at 60 fps in max setting.
Click to expand...

This is because your question / concern doesn't make sense. The monitor will do 3440 x 1440 up to 60hz, which means if you have enough vidcard power to push each game to 60fps at that rez, then the monitor will do it easily. Whether you're able to push 60fps has nothing to do with the monitor, that's purely a question of game graphic settings and vidcard power....

.....with 3 year old SLI NGTX580 3GB's, I'm able to push 60fps+ at 2560x1440 on anything, at max settings. BF4 on ultra, np. Capped at 60fps because the monitor is 60hz monitor so will only display a max of 60fps. If you're able to push 100fps, then you're only ever seeing 60fps worth of that on a 60hz monitor, but that's plenty smooth. It's usually best to go into the nvidia vsync properties and turn on "adaptive vsync".

This makes it so your vidcards will only work as hard as they need to in order to give you no less and no more than 60fps, cuz that's all you need and can even see on a 60hz monitor. This keeps your cards cooler and making less noise.

So in summary, FPS is like your vidcards screaming at a certain volume........that's how much power they have, that's how loud they're able to get....but when you (the monitor) relay that message to someone else, (display it on screen), you're only able to scream that message as loud as YOU can go. (60hz). Doesn't matter how loud your vidcards screamed, you can only scream so loud (60hz).
 
"with 3 year old SLI NGTX580 3GB's, I'm able to push 60fps+ at 2560x1440 on anything, at max settings"

There are games you most certainly cant stay above 60 fps in on "max" settings at 2560x1440.
 
The Dark Session said:
K then show me crysis 3 , metro last light , dayz , the witcher 2 , watch dogs and tomb raider.
Click to expand...
And Company of Heroes 2, Borderlands 2(with high physx since claiming "max"), STALKER Clear Sky, Hitman Absolution, and Metro 2033. And for some games like GTA 4 and the original Crysis, no system can stay above 60 fps since the games are too poorly optimized in spots and no cpu in the world can keep the framerate up the whole time.
 
Circumnavigate said:
They need to make a 120hz version of this that supports lightboost. That would be my ideal monitor.
Click to expand...

Well this is an unrealistic request, hence why it's not been done. We do not have a video interface (DisplayPort, HDMI, D-DVI, etc.) that is capable of pushing 3440 x 1440 @ 120hz, it's just too much bandwidth required. You 120hz guys love to throw that requirement around........New monitor comes out and you won't touch it unless it's 120hz....

4k monitors? "Nope, it's not 120hz version, you won't touch it". 120hz is not a big deal.
 
Ultranifty said:
This is because your question / concern doesn't make sense. The monitor will do 3440 x 1440 up to 60hz, which means if you have enough vidcard power to push each game to 60fps at that rez, then the monitor will do it easily. Whether you're able to push 60fps has nothing to do with the monitor, that's purely a question of game graphic settings and vidcard power....
Click to expand...

You made a fair point. I should have asked if current video cards are capable of fueling that amount of pixels to high end games and have the game run in ultra/max at 60 fps. But even if I did, your link still does not address that concern.

However what you wrote next does address my concern to attain 60 fps at Ultra/Max playing high end games on that monitor.

Ultranifty said:
.....with 3 year old SLI NGTX580 3GB's, I'm able to push 60fps+ at 2560x1440 on anything, at max settings. BF4 on ultra, np. Capped at 60fps because the monitor is 60hz monitor so will only display a max of 60fps.
Click to expand...

Coincidentally I am running 2 GTX 580's in SLI. Am holding out for NVIDIA's next generation flagship cards, i.e. their 880's or whatever they decide to name them.


Ultranifty said:
If you're able to push 100fps, then you're only ever seeing 60fps worth of that on a 60hz monitor, but that's plenty smooth. It's usually best to go into the nvidia vsync properties and turn on "adaptive vsync".
Click to expand...

Agreed, which is why I set my V-synch to cap at 60 fps.
Thanks for your latest posting.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, I'll be following this. I do a lot of media work and if these can remain somewhat color accurate then it may be my next purchase. I have a 3x 1920x1200 setup and never use EyeFinity. I tried it once but I didn't like the desktop like that and at the time, EF drivers were buggy as hell with hotkeys. Seems to be a good mix when paired with a smaller 2nd monitor.
 
The Dark Session said:
K then show me crysis 3 , metro last light , dayz , the witcher 2 , watch dogs and tomb raider.
Click to expand...

Guys.....I said there's nothing I run that doesn't run at max settings still at that rez. I'm not talking about Crysis 3, or Metro, or other hard hitters like that cuz I don't have those. I said, of the stuff I run (BF4, Xcom, Sins of Solar Empire, Company of Heros, Wow, Diablo 3, Borderlands 2, and assorted others)......all of these, I'm able to run on max still. What helps a lot is these cards are factory overclocked and they are 3GB, not the 1.5GB standard at that time. I didn't claim I can run ALL games at max rez still

My point to all this was talking about adaptive vsync and how great it is. I've ran 5960x1080 (triple screen with bezel correct) on these SLI 580's and they ran BF3 fine, but was on low settings, yes.
My point was that I run everything that "I" currently have at max settings still, and I ran 5960x1080 at low settings. I've already done the calculations, and running 3440x1440 will be 23% harder on my SLI 580's, so I'll probably have to run games on med, which is fine. I bet I'll still get 60fps at medium, but we'll see
 
Ultranifty said:
Well this is an unrealistic request, hence why it's not been done. We do not have a video interface (DisplayPort, HDMI, D-DVI, etc.) that is capable of pushing 3440 x 1440 @ 120hz, it's just too much bandwidth required. You 120hz guys love to throw that requirement around........New monitor comes out and you won't touch it unless it's 120hz....

4k monitors? "Nope, it's not 120hz version, you won't touch it". 120hz is not a big deal.
Click to expand...


You got it all wrong. I was going to buy this monitor as well as a BenQ XL2720z :)
 
Marm0t said:
Wow. So i guess Bizbuy on amazon actually has the things on hand and isn't just pulling a fast one to cash in when the pre-orders drop...

That makes me wonder if i should jump the gun.
Click to expand...


You would honestly pay about $400 so you wouldn't have to wait a month?

Do you wipe your ass with hundred dollar bills as well?
 
Circumnavigate said:
You would honestly pay about $400 so you wouldn't have to wait a month?

Do you wipe your ass with hundred dollar bills as well?
Click to expand...

I've already been waiting a few months, and it keeps getting delayed.. If i would have known they had them then, i would have gladly paid an extra 400 to get it a few months earlier than i've waited, Just to check the thing out.
 
Marm0t said:
I've already been waiting a few months, and it keeps getting delayed.. If i would have known they had them then, i would have gladly paid an extra 400 to get it a few months earlier than i've waited, Just to check the thing out.
Click to expand...

Well let us know how it turns out if you pull the trigger on it.
 
Marm0t said:
I've already been waiting a few months, and it keeps getting delayed.. If i would have known they had them then, i would have gladly paid an extra 400 to get it a few months earlier than i've waited, Just to check the thing out.
Click to expand...
You should wait untill the end of this month and see if it gets release. If not then you can always buy it. There is only about 1 week left :)
 
Some shops start getting the 34um65 in stock in Germany. But 580€ is still to expensive. (800$)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top