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

I'd be really tempted to wait for the Dell U3415W if I thought that it would be out any time soon. But all I can find on that monitor are posts from the last part of 2013 when the monitor was announced. At least with Dell I know there are pretty hassle-free exchanges and it might not have some of the issues that the early 34UM95s had. Of course, the 34UM94 might not either, but that (like many other things) is a gamble.
 
lee0539 said:
The way they avoided some of the questions on massdrop, the way they designed the frame to cause bleeding, the flickering displayport issues, the crappy stand etc. I think i'm going to wait for AOC. I just hope I don't have to wait too much longer
Click to expand...

AOC is a budget brand, even if some people don't want to admit it. It's just like buying a Korean IPS with warranty, your chance of getting an inferior product increase greatly. I'd be very surprised if the PQ is the same, even with the same panel. Firmware plays a huge factor in getting the most out of a panel and I've never been impressed with an AOC monitor, infact the last one I saw was absolutely terrible. You get what you pay for and the grass is always greener on the other side. If you can afford it, I would 100% without a doubt go with the LG over the AOC. Just buy a $50 stand if you want it higher.

(P.S. The DP issues are not the monitor's fault.. It's video drivers. Blame AMD for refusing to acknowledge it, works great on latest NVIDIA drivers.)
 
Tyrindor said:
(P.S. The DP issues are not the monitor's fault.. It's video drivers. Blame AMD for refusing to acknowledge it, works great on latest NVIDIA drivers.)
Click to expand...

Are you referring to DP 1.2 issues? Because I haven't had any issues at all with DP 1.2 disabled (Trifire 290X)...

Also, I agree for the most part about AOC having lower quality products in general, but we'll just have to wait and see how their 34" 21:9 handles professional reviews. I want that stand for my LG though...
 
Xinmosni said:
Are you referring to DP 1.2 issues? Because I haven't had any issues at all with DP 1.2 disabled (Trifire 290X)...

Also, I agree for the most part about AOC having lower quality products in general, but we'll just have to wait and see how their 34" 21:9 handles professional reviews. I want that stand for my LG though...
Click to expand...

Yes, DP1.2 only. Many NVIDIA users reported the issues going away after updating their drivers (including myself), but there's still many AMD users having the problem. I imagine as this monitor gets on the market more, AMD will fix it.
 
imyourzero said:
I'd be really tempted to wait for the Dell U3415W if I thought that it would be out any time soon. But all I can find on that monitor are posts from the last part of 2013 when the monitor was announced. At least with Dell I know there are pretty hassle-free exchanges and it might not have some of the issues that the early 34UM95s had. Of course, the 34UM94 might not either, but that (like many other things) is a gamble.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Dell is pretty good with returns. Although, I suppose amazon will eventually be carrying this and they also pay for return shipping if you want to return the monitor due to issues like backlight bleeding.
 
I had DP 1.2 flickering on my GTX 780 on the latest WHQL and BETA drivers.

I now have an AMD 290X and still get flickering with 1.2 enabled in the OSD.

I think truth is that 1.2 is supported properly only on OpenGL rendering cards like the FireGL/Quadro. For everyone else it doesn't matter hence why it's off by default.
 
Guys my desk isnt very stable....i will buy new in a few months but i am afraid for the monitor,so i was thinking buy that Ergotron MX that is looks very good and steadier than that lg provide me...should i buy it for safety? And if someone has it ,does the stand need also a stable desk because i see that it is heavy....thank you for answers :)
 
For what it's worth, most (all?) stores will just use a random sample for the floor model.
Click to expand...

It might have been a random sample and I got lucky sure, but it was like mounted at the end of an isle looping some promotional material. Even though it was a little light in there some scenes would be mostly dark and I scrutinized the best I could


What makes you think we're not chiming in? This isn't the late 90s. It's now possible to use a Mac without being a total fanboy and bringing it up in every conversation. :p
Click to expand...

funny :) I'm putting together my first mac now (well had mini 4 years ago or so to play with) I just hear more about gaming than anything else about the monitor so far. Its nice to use daily even though I'm not in any industry.
 
Last edited:
eladrion said:
Guys my desk isnt very stable....i will buy new in a few months but i am afraid for the monitor,so i was thinking buy that Ergotron MX that is looks very good and steadier than that lg provide me...should i buy it for safety? And if someone has it ,does the stand need also a stable desk because i see that it is heavy....thank you for answers :)
Click to expand...

While the Ergotron MX is a more stable arm, it's also insanely more heavy than the default base. It will likely cause more stability issues with your stand itself. I use the monitor on a simple pole mount arm that screws into the desk itself, to make it light as possible. It's a very tiny desk, infact the monitor is wider than it, and it's on wheels. I tried the Ergotron MX and it was worse than the stock stand for me due to the sheer weight of it. The default stand is quite stable, especially if your desk is stationary.

This monitor is incredibly light. It weighs less than most 24"-27" monitors.
 
Quick, maybe stupid, question. I've got a MacBook Pro with TB2. Do I use a thunderbolt cable to connect to the monitor, or a TB2/Mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable? With the aim of connecting USB peripherals with just the one connection... Cheers!
 
Tyrindor said:
While the Ergotron MX is a more stable arm, it's also insanely more heavy than the default base. It will likely cause more stability issues with your stand itself. I use the monitor on a simple pole mount arm that screws into the desk itself, to make it light as possible. It's a very tiny desk, infact the monitor is wider than it, and it's on wheels. I tried the Ergotron MX and it was worse than the stock stand for me due to the sheer weight of it. The default stand is quite stable, especially if your desk is stationary.

This monitor is incredibly light. It weighs less than most 24"-27" monitors.
Click to expand...

So if i dont keep the one that comes with monitor i should use wall mount to be sure??
 
eladrion said:
So if i dont keep the one that comes with monitor i should use wall mount to be sure??
Click to expand...

There are good desk mounted arms as well but you should have a solid desk for that. If your desk is wobbly and you don't want to replace it then a wall mount is your only other logical choice.
 
prolific71 said:
Anyone using Windows 8 with this monitor using displayport? When you turn the monitor off/on, does it re-arrange the windows to a default location? It would've been good if they included a DVI port as displayport can have some issues like that.
Click to expand...
I have this problem, and it's maddening. It also doesn't seem to be just DisplayPort or Win8* at fault. I have my 34UM95 connected to a Win8.1 PC via DisplayPort, and also to a Win7 laptop (docking station) with a DisplayPort-to-HDMI conversion cable. The window jumping issue happens on each system, almost every time I power the monitor on, wake it up, or switch from one input to the other.

I saw someone else in this thread also mention that they had the problem. I have not seen any potential solutions, although I have only devoted about 3 hours so far to resolving this problem which I should not have to deal with at all.

Edit: I've now updated to the latest NVIDIA WHQL drivers (340.52). I also installed the monitor driver from the CD that came with the 34UM95, as I had been using the generic Windows monitor driver before. I was hopeful that this would correct the issue, but IT HAS NOT!. This problem really pisses me off--so much so that I'm ready to ditch this damned monitor, despite all the other things I like about it.

Edit 2: I finally found the registry fix that has been suggested for these issues, and it seems to have corrected my issue. The only time I have had my windows jump around since was after exiting a game (Crysis Warhead). Which is odd, because I run that game in 3440 x 1440 resolution. In any case, it also helps that I use Actual Window Manager to arrange my windows.
 
Last edited:
mike0x said:
Quick, maybe stupid, question. I've got a MacBook Pro with TB2. Do I use a thunderbolt cable to connect to the monitor, or a TB2/Mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable? With the aim of connecting USB peripherals with just the one connection... Cheers!
Click to expand...

Use a TB connector, it will enable the usb ports and sound at the same time, much less cabling.
 
trout4u said:
OK so I hooked up both my MacBook Pro and my PC. The back I/O is infact a full KVM / Thunderbolt dock or switch or whatever you want to call it. The uplink USB go's to my PC, the keyboard and mouse plug into my monitor, and my Mac plugs into Thunderbolt port closet to the USB hub. My God it just works FLAWLESSLY. All I have to do is switch between inputs on the displays menu and its done!!

Just in case someone want to hook up two different machines, your good to go!!:D
Click to expand...
You have the USB uplink cable going only to your PC... Which means the USB (i.e. video/mouse) is not "switching" at all. The monitor would need to have two USB uplink outputs and cables to switch as you seem to think it does (and it doesn't). You're only switching the video input. So clearly, this is not a "KVM switch".

trout4u said:
[W]hat I'm getting at is this back I/O is actually a full fledged KVM switch and Thunderbolt dock. The Thunderbolt cable carries all the USB data over the cable as well as the display video and sound. I thought we neede a seperate controller for that but it's built in.
Click to expand...
Ah, so as long as you don't want to switch between two Windows systems from the monitor, you may be OK.
 
Last edited:
cc2096 said:
Be careful with the LX stand. The MX needed to be tightened pretty heavily to hold the 34UM95 even with it being rated for 30 lbs.
Click to expand...
The Ergotron LX supports monitors up to 25 lbs, which is well beyond what is needed for the 34UM95. I'm using an LX with a 34UM95 right now; no problem whatsoever. I had tightened the arm very slightly before when I used the LX with the Acer T272HL.
 
Gomez said:
You have the USB uplink cable going only to your PC... Which means the USB (i.e. video/mouse) is not "switching" at all. The monitor would need to have two USB uplink outputs and cables to switch as you seem to think it does (and it doesn't). You're only switching the video input. So clearly, this is not a "KVM switch".


Ah, so as long as you don't want to switch between two Windows systems from the monitor, you may be OK.
Click to expand...

I think you got it wrong. He needs the USB uplink to his computer because that's the only way the PC will see the keyboard and mouse directly connected to monitor.

Thunderbolt is kinda the magic here. With it, the Mac sends video signals AND mouse and keyboard.

Considering this setup, yeah, it does behave like a true KVM switch but it's not a traditional one ;)
 
^ Yeah, I get it. At first, it seemed to me he was saying it was a true, direct replacement for a KVM switch, which of course it is not.
 
I just bought a 34UM95-P at Fry's Electronics in Irving TX today, to use with my late 2013 rMBP. It was a "return" so I got 5% off the regular price.

I do notice the "light bleed" in both the bottom corners. But to be honest, I'm not caring right now - this monitor is just too damn beautiful.

I sold two Dell U2412Ms which I had setup to help pay for this one. Not regretting the move at all.

Something interesting, however. the LG box states this:

"New Mac Pro is the only Apple product currently compatible with this monitor."

Whomever at LG decided to put that on the box needs to be fired. They should have know this was either untrue or going to become untrue before all these monitors sold. It caused me to leave the store, drive home to research that statement, then have to drive back to Fry's a second time to buy it.

But the monitor is awesome. I thought I would have buyer's remorse ( something I am familiar with ) but I have none. This thing is worth every darn penny.

I did use the basic Apple calibration which comes with OSX. It really improved the image out of the box. Before this, I thought the image was inferior to the Dells I just traded up from - but after, I see I was wrong. This screen is just as clear, bright, and colorful as those were.
 
Last edited:
Has anyone tried overclocking succesfully and if so what hz and does it skip frames while gaming?

I'm considering 34UM65 simply because it's cheaper.
 
trout4u said:
OK so I hooked up both my MacBook Pro and my PC. The back I/O is infact a full KVM / Thunderbolt dock or switch or whatever you want to call it. The uplink USB go's to my PC, the keyboard and mouse plug into my monitor, and my Mac plugs into Thunderbolt port closet to the USB hub. My God it just works FLAWLESSLY. All I have to do is switch between inputs on the displays menu and its done!!

Just in case someone want to hook up two different machines, your good to go!!:D
Click to expand...

What's the switching time like? Is there a noticeable delay before you can start typing after you switch? Thanks.
 
Can someone try dota 2 plz at 3440x1440 and tell me if support this resolution even with the map hud bug?
 
eladrion said:
Can someone try dota 2 plz at 3440x1440 and tell me if support this resolution even with the map hud bug?
Click to expand...

You can cheat it with a patch that hides the hud overlay but it sorta looks stupid and causes problems when you need to update the client, which happens like twice a week. Valve is on record that the won't support 21:9 officially as of yet because it is an unfair advantage over 16:9 as you have more FOV. I run mine at 2560X1440, and has insane awesome latency, way better than my 2 30" dells.
 
eladrion said:
If i dont use the patch the only problem is the map and something in the shop?
Click to expand...

Yeah...I think it stretches it too....that might be just me seeing things thou. Either way I found it much easier to play it at 25X14.

Dota 2 doesn't render the bottom inch+ of the screen anyways. So when you disable the HUD you get a stupid looking black line which the HUD would of covered.

To each there own.
 
Derkspector said:
Valve is on record that the won't support 21:9 officially as of yet because it is an unfair advantage over 16:9 as you have more FOV.
Click to expand...

So, running 21:9 isn't to improve your own enjoyment of the game, it's cheating?? Do they cap your GPU performance and internet throughput to level the playing field, as well?
 
grandpatzer said:
Has anyone tried overclocking succesfully and if so what hz and does it skip frames while gaming?

I'm considering 34UM65 simply because it's cheaper.
Click to expand...
If you have the chance, you should try to see it in person. Nothing wrong with the 1080p 21:9 aspect monitors, but I felt the 29inch was a lot better nicer than the 34inches.
 
adudeinblue said:
If you have the chance, you should try to see it in person. Nothing wrong with the 1080p 21:9 aspect monitors, but I felt the 29inch was a lot better nicer than the 34inches.
Click to expand...

I think you are saying this because the 29" version can be overclocked to 85hz without frame skip?
 
adudeinblue said:
If you have the chance, you should try to see it in person. Nothing wrong with the 1080p 21:9 aspect monitors, but I felt the 29inch was a lot better nicer than the 34inches.
Click to expand...

I think you are saying this because the 29" version can be overclocked to 85hz without frame skip?

The 29" 21:9 is stretched out 23.3" 16:9, while the 34" is 27.3" stretched out 16:9.

looking as I currently use 3x 16:9 monitor setup: 23" 24" 23", I would like to replace 2 displays with one 34" preferably so this setup: 24" 34"
 
grandpatzer said:
I think you are saying this because the 29" version can be overclocked to 85hz without frame skip?

The 29" 21:9 is stretched out 23.3" 16:9, while the 34" is 27.3" stretched out 16:9.

looking as I currently use 3x 16:9 monitor setup: 23" 24" 23", I would like to replace 2 displays with one 34" preferably so this setup: 24" 34"
Click to expand...

I personally do not know that haha but Frys had the monitors on display and there was a 29 and 34 inch wide screen 1080p monitor and the smaller and more pixel dense monitor was really nice.
 
34" 21:9 1080p is only 81 PPI versus the 109 PPI on the 1440p model. It's an absolute deal breaker, 81 PPI is quite a bit worse than a standard 24" 1080p monitor. Personally I don't understand the point of the UM65, if it was 29" (95 PPI) it would be more appealing for people on a tighter budget.

Either go with the UM95, or get the 29" Dell 21:9 1080p in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
AFD said:
So, running 21:9 isn't to improve your own enjoyment of the game, it's cheating?? Do they cap your GPU performance and internet throughput to level the playing field, as well?
Click to expand...

If you were around during the 16:9 transition, game developers were saying the same thing to not support it (4:3 at the time). RTS games were big [bigger?] at the time and the extra screen real estate was crucial on low res games like wc3 and sc1
 
So I've decided to go for the 34UM95-P and Sod's law.. It's not available from amazon at the nice prices from last week (£709). Anyone been following the price and know what the deal is? Cheers. Not gonna bother with any international orders since there are so many backlight issues. Despite the attractive £660 price from Germany....
 
Tyrindor said:
34" 21:9 1080p is only 81 PPI versus the 109 PPI on the 1440p model. It's an absolute deal breaker, 81 PPI is quite a bit worse than a standard 24" 1080p monitor. Personally I don't understand the point of the UM65, if it was 29" (95 PPI) it would be more appealing for people on a tighter budget.

Either go with the UM95, or get the 29" Dell 21:9 1080p in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Why the 29" Dell 21:9 instead of the 29" LG 21:9? If on a budget, I've seen the LG version go on sale more often than the Dell. But I haven't been keeping up with those much after seeing the LG version in person (it's just too short vertically, after moving on from 22" heights a long time ago).
 
Xinmosni said:
Why the 29" Dell 21:9 instead of the 29" LG 21:9? If on a budget, I've seen the LG version go on sale more often than the Dell. But I haven't been keeping up with those much after seeing the LG version in person (it's just too short vertically, after moving on from 22" heights a long time ago).
Click to expand...

Dell has better warranty/support and zero bright/stuck/dead pixel policy. LG warranty/support is hit or miss, though they seem to be handling these monitors better lately.
 
Xinmosni said:
Why the 29" Dell 21:9 instead of the 29" LG 21:9? If on a budget, I've seen the LG version go on sale more often than the Dell. But I haven't been keeping up with those much after seeing the LG version in person (it's just too short vertically, after moving on from 22" heights a long time ago).
Click to expand...

There are also single input korean 29" 21:9 displays on ebay for cheap. I assume that input lag is next to nil like the rest of the single input korean displays. I've been wondering if they overclock as well. There is next to no info on here or ocn. I wouldn't expect it but it may be nice.

I hear that the dell overclocks and has lower input lag than the lg.
 
[H]appymeal;1041015719 said:
If you were around during the 16:9 transition, game developers were saying the same thing to not support it (4:3 at the time). RTS games were big [bigger?] at the time and the extra screen real estate was crucial on low res games like wc3 and sc1
Click to expand...

16:10 actually.

I remember at the time various devs were adamant about not supporting widescreen because it would cause an "unfair advantage" over non widescreen users. I especially remember this being the case with Battlefield 2 for a while.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top