![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
34" 21:9 UltraWide Displays (3440x1440) - LG UM95/UM65 & Dell U3415W
- Thread starter anonuser
- Start date
dukenuke88
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,924
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnrxNfxRK_4
Linus just posted a video regarding the LG UM95. I might just roll with this new 3440x1440 IPS screen...and wait till 4k matures with a real 30-32 inch IPS type 4k monitor.
Linus just posted a video regarding the LG UM95. I might just roll with this new 3440x1440 IPS screen...and wait till 4k matures with a real 30-32 inch IPS type 4k monitor.
You don't anything to lose by doing the best offer thing. Let us know if anyone bites. I doubt anyone would bite, though, because they already have to eat the risks and costs associated with shipping the monitor across countries. Unless the monitor is quite a bit less than $1K for them, they don't have much incentive to ship it across the world to you for $1K total.
The eBay listings I've seen say "Ships from South Korea." I wouldn't be surprised if you ended up with a Korean market monitor. Either that, or the seller is going to hold on to your money and just order up a $999 monitor from a US outlet when they're actually available.
B&H will, obviously, carry the official US market version of the monitor.
dukenuke88
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,924
I wonder if a Korean Yamakasi counterpart will appear soon? I know Yamakasi currently has U2913WM 2560x1080 clone on the market right now. If they can aggressively price it, similar to how when 1440p korean monitors first came 2 years ago....then I would be buying one for sure.
Damn. Linus' praise for 21x9 has just made me REALLY want to pull the trigger on this thing. He trashed the aspect ratio previously.
harsaphes
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2005
- Messages
- 5,330
Great video review. I just wish it wasn't matte. Anyone want to take it off for me?
dukenuke88
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,924
Yeah I see where he is coming from. 2560x1080 was kinda meh....but then 3440x1440 really brought the wideness out. And 1440 vertical is not shabby at all. 1080 vertical is so yesterday IMO...lol
34UM65 is the lesser version with only 2560x1080 resolution mate, i hope you know this
Was considering the U28D590 but this has definitely taken my interest. I have the feeling that 4K monitors don't really match the offering in GPU's right now and as I don't really feel like going SLI, this one looks absolutely amazing.
The price is not pretty, but it gives me some time to await more impressions to make a decision. It seems like this monitor allows me to do exactly what I was even considering a 4k for, so that is good.
The price is not pretty, but it gives me some time to await more impressions to make a decision. It seems like this monitor allows me to do exactly what I was even considering a 4k for, so that is good.
34UM65 is the lesser version with only 2560x1080 resolution mate, i hope you know this
Thanks for the heads up. I knew it already, but I don't think that it is a problem for me. Currently I use a 22" Monitor with a resolution of 1680x1050. Which, dpi-wise is between the 34um65 and 34um95.
Furthermore the 34um95 is too expensive for me and I doubt that my GTX470 will handle the resolution.
i'm running a dell U2913WM on a Gigabyte GTX 680 OC with 4GB of VRAM and it can run a 1440p screen without any problems too with full details on most games, so i think i will be able to run the 34" too, maybe not all highest details, but i will be able to run stuff on it.
will upgrade my GPU once the 800 series hits the market i guess
will upgrade my GPU once the 800 series hits the market i guess
elvn
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,312
I like the real estate. Currently I'm using a 27" 2560x1440 ips with a few 19" 1440x900's in portrait mode on monitor arms (set back slightly to "match"). I have a 27" 1920x1080 120hz samsung a750 TN in the array too, for gaming almost exclusively with desktop/apps/browsers/readouts/progress-meters/playlists/email etc on other other monitors. 2560+900+[1080p]+900
I'm interested in the 27" asus PG278Q 2560x1440 120hz-144hz g-sync/ulmb mode 120hz-144hz gaming monitor (thread here).
It's too bad there isn't something in between the two. A 21:9 3440x1440 120hz-144hz gsync/ulmb mode monitor would be great. Getting below 5ms on an ips panel would still be a hurdle though.
For me as far as non-desktop/app use - I can't go back to gaming sub-120hz in 1st/3rd person perspective games with continual FoV movement.. movement keying and mouse-look pathing. Not just for twitch gaming advantages as people often repeat either, it is a big difference aesthetically in regard to motion blur reduction/elimination, judder/tearing and vsync input lag avoided with gysnc mode, and the ability to deliver much higher number of frames per second (to feed the higher number of screen updates) giving higher definition motion, animation, and smoothness/motion-flow. (i.e. "You don't play a still screen shot").
web-cyb.org 120hz-fps-compared.htm
.
I'm interested in the 27" asus PG278Q 2560x1440 120hz-144hz g-sync/ulmb mode 120hz-144hz gaming monitor (thread here).
It's too bad there isn't something in between the two. A 21:9 3440x1440 120hz-144hz gsync/ulmb mode monitor would be great. Getting below 5ms on an ips panel would still be a hurdle though.
For me as far as non-desktop/app use - I can't go back to gaming sub-120hz in 1st/3rd person perspective games with continual FoV movement.. movement keying and mouse-look pathing. Not just for twitch gaming advantages as people often repeat either, it is a big difference aesthetically in regard to motion blur reduction/elimination, judder/tearing and vsync input lag avoided with gysnc mode, and the ability to deliver much higher number of frames per second (to feed the higher number of screen updates) giving higher definition motion, animation, and smoothness/motion-flow. (i.e. "You don't play a still screen shot").
web-cyb.org 120hz-fps-compared.htm
.
Last edited:
Martha Stewart
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2011
- Messages
- 668
The current eBay and Amazon 3rd party sellers are confirmed Korean versions that come with power adapters and Korean packaging/manuals.
Even if you ordered the Korean versions now they probably wouldn't get here for a couple weeks, at that point there is no reason not to wait an extra 7-10 days for the real US versions.
brokenblade30
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2014
- Messages
- 19
Where do you see that the US version will be coming out in 7-10 days? I am seeing late May at the very earliest.
I believe the intended meaning was 7-10 days after the time it takes to receive one from Korea. So, yes, late May.
Martha Stewart
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2011
- Messages
- 668
eBay listing-
http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/190814406823?lpid=82
The Korean versions will take so long to get here via shipping, it will be a week with in ordering a US version from B&H/Amazon. Basically zero reason to order an import at this point.
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
burningrave101
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Messages
- 11,825
I want the Dell version since it will be height adjustable and the LG sits so low it requires a stand. Dell also has a superior warranty for monitors with advanced replacement and their premium panel guarantee. Hopefully Dell releases it soon.
These people wanting a 120hz monitor that runs at 3440x1440, what kind of computer are you planning to purchase to get 120 fps out of it? Or will you play with downscaled resolutions?
I am interested in this monitor and i will be more than happy if i get a steady 60fps at that resolution.
I am interested in this monitor and i will be more than happy if i get a steady 60fps at that resolution.
BIGGRIMTIM
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Messages
- 943
I agree with this but I am unable to find any info as when or if it is coming out.
We're all running HP PCs.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
Did some miracle happen that we have monitor with scaler running overclocked without losing frames ?
I guess you're joking but i am genuinely interested.
Just for funs sake, with this setup
Intel Core i7-4960X @ 4,4 GHz
Asus Rampage IV Extreme
16 GB Corsair Vengeance, 1 866 MHz, 9-10-9-27
Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 Ti SLI
Which i would consider a pretty decent system..
Sweclockers.com recorded an average FPS of 65 with the lowest recorded FPS being 45 in Battlefield 4 at 3840x2160 (4k) with every setting on High, only AA comes from postprocessing.
At 2560x1440 with everything on Ultra with 4xMSAA they recorded an Average FPS of 98 with the lowest recorded FPS being 83.
My conclusion is that anyone wanting a 120hz 3440x1440 / 4k monitor has a far superior computer than this since it doesn't come close to putting out 120fps, even at a lower resolution.
http://www.sweclockers.com/image/diagram/6237?k=3670a0740432d2f2030f837154f5e1f7
http://www.sweclockers.com/image/diagram/6282?k=34e2fd0a6483e21bca7f916cd45452e3
Last edited:
While I agree with you, the review was not using the same BF4 settings at both resolutions. If they did this, it would give a better idea of performance. I would imagine that turning off the 4aa and using the high setting would give a decent bump in FPS.
It would give a very noticeable bump - at 2560x1440 - which is some 30% easier to render than 3440x1440 so it would still not show an accurate picture at all.
I think the more logical conclusion here is that some people are just never happy. Every new hardware thread comes with a handful of people who wish that it had this feature or that feature, or that it only cost 1/2 as much.
True. It just seems to me the 120Hz-crowd are asking for something they would not be able to fully utilize, just having the specs say 120Hz means nothing if your PC isn't up to the task.
Ever heard of lowering graphical settings?
And you don't need 120fps to enjoy the benefits of 120Hz. I thought that was pretty obvious. Apparently not.
120Hz has benefits beyond gaming at over 60fps, though. Desktop usage feels slightly smoother, for example. The differences aren't significant, though.
Also, it's trivial to run most older games at 120fps these days. It's also a much cheaper hobby to be a couple years behind the curve when it comes to computer games. I highly recommend it.
By the same token, another generation of video cards may be all it takes to run today's games at greater than 60fps.But if you're primarily interested in the monitor for productivity, like I am, then 120Hz is totally unnecessary.
I was thinking people preferred quality over quantity, Apparently not.
Still can't see why anyone would pay for a monitor with a resolution higher than 1080p if you still need to turn graphical settings to low to maintain a higher FPS.
AgentQ : I hope no one buys 120Hz monitors soley "for a smoother desktop experience" or playing older games, that seems to defeat the purpose a little bit.
120Hz has benefits beyond gaming at over 60fps, though. Desktop usage feels slightly smoother, for example. The differences aren't significant, though.
Also, it's trivial to run most older games at 120fps these days. It's also a much cheaper hobby to be a couple years behind the curve when it comes to computer games. I highly recommend it.
But if you're primarily interested in the monitor for productivity, like I am, then 120Hz is totally unnecessary.
I have been holding onto this 7 year old 37in Westinghouse monitor for a while because of such a lack in options above the 27in size. Sure I wouldn't mind a 4K monitor, but its going to be years before they are down to 1K with IPS and it doesn't take $1500 in GFX cards to run one at reasonable FPS with good image quality.
I think it really comes down to immersion vs smoothness. Some people like myself are fine with 60Hz but really like the immersion you get with a monitor this size. Others may want the 120Hz for smoothness in game-play and especially for twitch based FPS's.
I think OLED is really the only technology that can solve all the issues here. Hopefully it will not be too long before there are screens with the technology at reasonable prices.
elvn
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 5,312
I agree that even 2560x1440 is quite demanding to average 100fps or more. I would use dual 780's to get that but I am waiting until 20nm to do sli.
GTX 780Ti Benchmarks 1x-4x SLI (Work in Progress)
Gsync and high hz are greatly advantageous for gaming experience even at somewhat lower fps.
High hz does two things. It cuts movement blur (by 1/2 comparing 120hz vs 60hz, 60% at 144hz). It also increases motion definition, animation definition, and overall motion flow/control flow and motion tracking. (More "slices" of unique newer action, animation, and control path states shown per second).
http://www.web-cyb.org/hardware-info/120hz-fps-compared.htm
You still get 1/2 the FoV (movement keying + mouse-look pathing, FoV movement affecting abilities and triggered events) movement blur with 120hz vs 60hz due to the refresh rate and response time, even if some of the frames are duplicated. 100fps is a good target average though.
The amount of FoV movement blur at 60hz is not even definably a solid grid resolution to your eyes during continual FoV movement (movement keying, mouse-look pathing, etc). You don't play a still screen shot.
You still get a 5:3 increase in movement definition, animation definition, and overall smoothness/flow at 100fps at anything over 100hz vs 60fps-hz max.
This is not just something for those who seek a gameplay advantage and motion tracking advantage, it aesthetically looks much better and feels better in controls.
I'm sure most people have seen the mouse pointer tracking examples of 60hz vs 120hz. That applies to the entire view-port and control pathing in a game.
This is just a graphic trying to simulate it
(5frames of world state action vs 3 ~> 100fps at 100hz+ shown vs 60hz-fps max ceiling.. 120fps-hz would be 6:3)
If you get a g-sync monitor, you can get dynamic hz to match whatever your fps is all the time. This eliminates the use of v-sync (which causes input lag) while avoiding judder and tearing from unmatched fps roller coaster vs hz due to different gpu demands in different scenes(complexity, number of characters)/action/viewpoints(distances,etc).
G-sync monitors (and monitors like the eizo fg2421 VA's own tech) have an ulmb mode you can use instead of the g-sync mode on games that are less demanding (of if you have an extreme gpu budget) too. Games where you get 120fps average. This is a backlight strobing mode which results in zero FoV movement blur much like a crt's pristine movement.
IPS monitors have their advantages but lack all of that advanced gaming tech. 60hz monitors have double the FoV movement blur of 120hz (tn vs tn) + worse due to ips response time, they lack upcoming g-sync tech and backlight strobing options, and they have a 60fps max viewable motion slices ceiling due to their refresh rate. Even the overclockable korean 120hz one's response times are slow so that they blur a lot more than a gaming by design 120hz-144hz monitor, and obviously lack g-sync and strobing tech options.
Considering I use multiple monitors (2560x..900..[1080p]..900] this 21:9 3440x1440 would still be a nice desktop/app monitor. It would be quite expensive to run it next to the asus 2560x1440 gaming monitor but what a cool setup that would be
3440x1440.+.2560x1440 120hz-144hz g-sync and ditch the portrait mode monitors.
Pre 120hz this monitor would be something for games, and for a desktop monitor still is.. That's why I have always used two monitors, one dedicated to gaming. Personally I can't see gaming in a 1st/3rd person game with a 60hz monitor, and without g-sync and backlight strobing options going forward.
I honestly like the ratio and lack of bezels and can only hope they make a full featured (120hz - 144hz + g-sync/dynamic hz function - ulmb/backlight strobing mode function) ultra low response time gaming monitor similar to it someday (even if they curve it for viewing angles).
For much greater immersion I'm hoping for the oculus rift and competiting VR rigs in the next few years, and at higher resolutions than 1080p in later models. The oculus rift is also shooting for 90hz - 100hz, 1080p, and some kind of low persisitence or strobing tech to eliminate FoV blur (which they consider essential for immersive persepectives/VR).
GTX 780Ti Benchmarks 1x-4x SLI (Work in Progress)
Gsync and high hz are greatly advantageous for gaming experience even at somewhat lower fps.
High hz does two things. It cuts movement blur (by 1/2 comparing 120hz vs 60hz, 60% at 144hz). It also increases motion definition, animation definition, and overall motion flow/control flow and motion tracking. (More "slices" of unique newer action, animation, and control path states shown per second).
http://www.web-cyb.org/hardware-info/120hz-fps-compared.htm
You still get 1/2 the FoV (movement keying + mouse-look pathing, FoV movement affecting abilities and triggered events) movement blur with 120hz vs 60hz due to the refresh rate and response time, even if some of the frames are duplicated. 100fps is a good target average though.
The amount of FoV movement blur at 60hz is not even definably a solid grid resolution to your eyes during continual FoV movement (movement keying, mouse-look pathing, etc). You don't play a still screen shot.
You still get a 5:3 increase in movement definition, animation definition, and overall smoothness/flow at 100fps at anything over 100hz vs 60fps-hz max.
This is not just something for those who seek a gameplay advantage and motion tracking advantage, it aesthetically looks much better and feels better in controls.
I'm sure most people have seen the mouse pointer tracking examples of 60hz vs 120hz. That applies to the entire view-port and control pathing in a game.
This is just a graphic trying to simulate it
(5frames of world state action vs 3 ~> 100fps at 100hz+ shown vs 60hz-fps max ceiling.. 120fps-hz would be 6:3)
If you get a g-sync monitor, you can get dynamic hz to match whatever your fps is all the time. This eliminates the use of v-sync (which causes input lag) while avoiding judder and tearing from unmatched fps roller coaster vs hz due to different gpu demands in different scenes(complexity, number of characters)/action/viewpoints(distances,etc).
G-sync monitors (and monitors like the eizo fg2421 VA's own tech) have an ulmb mode you can use instead of the g-sync mode on games that are less demanding (of if you have an extreme gpu budget) too. Games where you get 120fps average. This is a backlight strobing mode which results in zero FoV movement blur much like a crt's pristine movement.
IPS monitors have their advantages but lack all of that advanced gaming tech. 60hz monitors have double the FoV movement blur of 120hz (tn vs tn) + worse due to ips response time, they lack upcoming g-sync tech and backlight strobing options, and they have a 60fps max viewable motion slices ceiling due to their refresh rate. Even the overclockable korean 120hz one's response times are slow so that they blur a lot more than a gaming by design 120hz-144hz monitor, and obviously lack g-sync and strobing tech options.
Considering I use multiple monitors (2560x..900..[1080p]..900] this 21:9 3440x1440 would still be a nice desktop/app monitor. It would be quite expensive to run it next to the asus 2560x1440 gaming monitor but what a cool setup that would be
3440x1440.+.2560x1440 120hz-144hz g-sync and ditch the portrait mode monitors.
Pre 120hz this monitor would be something for games, and for a desktop monitor still is.. That's why I have always used two monitors, one dedicated to gaming. Personally I can't see gaming in a 1st/3rd person game with a 60hz monitor, and without g-sync and backlight strobing options going forward.
I honestly like the ratio and lack of bezels and can only hope they make a full featured (120hz - 144hz + g-sync/dynamic hz function - ulmb/backlight strobing mode function) ultra low response time gaming monitor similar to it someday (even if they curve it for viewing angles).
For much greater immersion I'm hoping for the oculus rift and competiting VR rigs in the next few years, and at higher resolutions than 1080p in later models. The oculus rift is also shooting for 90hz - 100hz, 1080p, and some kind of low persisitence or strobing tech to eliminate FoV blur (which they consider essential for immersive persepectives/VR).
Last edited:
I agree that even 2560x1440 is quite demanding to average 100fps or more. I would use dual 780's to get that but I am waiting until 20nm to do sli.
GTX 780Ti Benchmarks 1x-4x SLI (Work in Progress)
Gsync and high hz are greatly advantageous for gaming experience even at somewhat lower fps.
High hz does two things. It cuts movement blur (by 1/2 comparing 120hz vs 60hz, 60% at 144hz). It also increases motion definition, animation definition, and overall motion flow/control flow and motion tracking. (More "slices" of unique newer action, animation, and control path states shown per second).
http://www.web-cyb.org/hardware-info/120hz-fps-compared.htm
You still get 1/2 the FoV (movement keying + mouse-look pathing, FoV movement affecting abilities and triggered events) movement blur with 120hz vs 60hz due to the refresh rate and response time, even if some of the frames are duplicated. 100fps is a good target average though.
The amount of FoV movement blur at 60hz is not even definably a solid grid resolution to your eyes during continual FoV movement (movement keying, mouse-look pathing, etc). You don't play a still screen shot.
You still get a 5:3 increase in movement definition, animation definition, and overall smoothness/flow at 100fps at anything over 100hz vs 60fps-hz max.
This is not just something for those who seek a gameplay advantage and motion tracking advantage, it aesthetically looks much better and feels better in controls.
I'm sure most people have seen the mouse pointer tracking examples of 60hz vs 120hz. That applies to the entire view-port and control pathing in a game.
This is just a graphic trying to simulate it
(5frames of world state action vs 3 ~> 100fps at 100hz+ shown vs 60hz-fps max ceiling.. 120fps-hz would be 6:3)
If you get a g-sync monitor, you can get dynamic hz to match whatever your fps is all the time. This eliminates the use of v-sync (which causes input lag) while avoiding judder and tearing from unmatched fps roller coaster vs hz due to different gpu demands in different scenes(complexity, number of characters)/action/viewpoints(distances,etc).
G-sync monitors (and monitors like the eizo fg2421 VA's own tech) have an ulmb mode you can use instead of the g-sync mode on games that are less demanding (of if you have an extreme gpu budget) too. Games where you get 120fps average. This is a backlight strobing mode which results in zero FoV movement blur much like a crt's pristine movement.
IPS monitors have their advantages but lack all of that advanced gaming tech. 60hz monitors have double the FoV movement blur of 120hz (tn vs tn) + worse due to ips response time, they lack upcoming g-sync tech and backlight strobing options, and they have a 60fps max viewable motion slices ceiling due to their refresh rate. Even the overclockable korean 120hz one's response times are slow so that they blur a lot more than a gaming by design 120hz-144hz monitor, and obviously lack g-sync and strobing tech options.
Considering I use multiple monitors (2560x..900..[1080p]..900] this 21:9 3440x1440 would still be a nice desktop/app monitor. It would be quite expensive to run it next to the asus 2560x1440 gaming monitor but what a cool setup that would be
3440x1440.+.2560x1440 120hz-144hz g-sync and ditch the portrait mode monitors.
Pre 120hz this monitor would be something for games, and for a desktop monitor still is.. That's why I have always used two monitors, one dedicated to gaming. Personally I can't see gaming in a 1st/3rd person game with a 60hz monitor, and without g-sync and backlight strobing options going forward.
I honestly like the ratio and lack of bezels and can only hope they make a full featured (120hz - 144hz + g-sync/dynamic hz function - ulmb/backlight strobing mode function) ultra low response time gaming monitor similar to it someday (even if they curve it for viewing angles).
For much greater immersion I'm hoping for the oculus rift and competiting VR rigs in the next few years, and at higher resolutions than 1080p in later models. The oculus rift is also shooting for 90hz - 100hz, 1080p, and some kind of low persisitence or strobing tech to eliminate FoV blur (which they consider essential for immersive persepectives/VR).
Great write up. I just wish there was more monitors above 27in. I would have no problem with a TN panel if I could get a monitor that does at least 2560x1440 and 120Hz that's above 27in, but it just doesn't exist. Even a 30in monitor wouldn't be too bad. So it looks like the only options above 27in, will end up being 4K monitors in the future.