LG 38GL950G - 37.5" 3840x1600/G-Sync/175Hz

bigbluefe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
749
Would like to hear feedback from the people that have got there screens. local stores here sold there stock in the first day.( i was tempted to go to store and get one) i am still waiting for amazon to start shipping mine.
How did you even order one on Amazon? I've never seen it available to order there.
 

KiwiCanuck

n00b
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Messages
25
Amazon.ca (Canada ) has had preorder for couple of weeks now, not sure why they waiting for dec 10 to release when stores here already have it. very tempted to get to local store to pickup
 
Last edited:

shadow2761

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Messages
163
Im really wondering if I should go from my Asus XG438Q, only 2 months old to this new LG 38GL950G?

Just for the extra 24 hz, nano-ips display.

Is it much better? The XG438Q has really good contrast that I really like.
HDR 400 v 600 I don't really care about anymore because HDR on PC really is mostly terrible.

But this 38GL950G is exactly 2x the price of the XG438Q in Australia. I just don't know if it is really going to be 2x better.
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,696
Im really wondering if I should go from my Asus XG438Q, only 2 months old to this new LG 38GL950G?

Just for the extra 24 hz, nano-ips display.

Is it much better? The XG438Q has really good contrast that I really like.
HDR 400 v 600 I don't really care about anymore because HDR on PC really is mostly terrible.

But this 38GL950G is exactly 2x the price of the XG438Q in Australia. I just don't know if it is really going to be 2x better.
Contrast will be poor on the 38GL950G compared to your XG438Q. Nano IPS just mainly increases color gamut - not contrast, it's still typical IPS, around 1000:1.

So I don't know if you'd be happy with the switch. However motion should be better on 38GL950G, and it has better viewing angels being an IPS panel. Based on what you're looking for it doesn't seem it'd be worth it, as it would be a step back in contrast levels and an extra 24Hz is not a big deal.
 

Iratus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
1,283
Proper HDR is objectively an improvement, it’s just most screens don’t it justice because they’ve not got the dynamic range, their black floor is too high and they are nowhere near bright enough. Plus obviously most content using it is hokey.

If you see a reference screen version of something well mastered it’s mind blowing, but we’re probably 5-7 years from screen tech being mass market enough to be able to do it justice. Even then it’ll be high end. I was lucky enough to see Westworld played on a reference monitor and it’s hard to convey just how good it looked. Seeing HDR sports similarly was crazy.

It’s tough to convince people on, hence why the electronics stores just max the settings and people fall for it.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
Im really wondering if I should go from my Asus XG438Q, only 2 months old to this new LG 38GL950G?

Just for the extra 24 hz, nano-ips display.

Is it much better? The XG438Q has really good contrast that I really like.
HDR 400 v 600 I don't really care about anymore because HDR on PC really is mostly terrible.

But this 38GL950G is exactly 2x the price of the XG438Q in Australia. I just don't know if it is really going to be 2x better.
The problem is both these displays are twice as expensive as they should be, neither offer good value... both are terrible in that respect actually.

IPS is inherently flawed given its poor contrast and likelihood of IPS glow and most likely bleed in the bargain.

VA is inherently flawed due to the gamma shift, smearing and overshoot. Some panels do better than others, but the XG438Q is probably about as bad an example of VA as there is.

When you can pick up an OLED for LESS than either of these, and have NONE of these issues, and all the benefits that OLED brings to the table... well, it's just absurd really. Obviously there are two major issues here, the minimum 55" that OLED comes in, and the risk of burn-in if used as a dedicated PC monitor. Hardly the most practical choice, but the actual EXPERIENCE otherwise just destroys LCD, and that's the most frustrating thing.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,188
I don't think anyone is going to come into this thread and state that IPS is superior to OLED when it comes to black levels etc. but this is a thread about the LG 38GL950G. I own this monitor and IMO it is the best IPS monitor I've ever owned. Not sure why it's constantly being compared to an OLED television. The two products are in entirely different categories. I use this monitor to game and work remotely from home. I can do both extremely well so I'm very happy with my purchase. Is it expensive, absolutely but I was using an Acer X34 for many years and this is a substantial upgrade from that so I have no regrets.
 

Panel

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
456
Not sure why it's constantly being compared to an OLED television. The two products are in entirely different categories.
As I’ve learned in the last few months, this fact is apparently irrelevant to 70% of this sub-forum. I don’t think folks here care too much what they use for work, even if it’s absolute garbage. The conversation seems to revolve mostly around gaming, for which setting up a new station seems worth it.

Personally, I want OLED’s amazing contrast for text-work more than anything else.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
As I’ve learned in the last few months, this fact is apparently irrelevant to 70% of this sub-forum. I don’t think folks here care too much what they use for work, even if it’s absolute garbage. The conversation seems to revolve mostly around gaming, for which setting up a new station seems worth it.

Personally, I want OLED’s amazing contrast for text-work more than anything else.
OLED is better for everything. There's nothing LCD does better, save maybe for refresh rate, but OLED motion is superior so it's pretty much cancelled out. This would be fine if LCD was more affordable, but it's actually more expensive! This is the issue more than anything else. I object to paying such an obscene amount of money for a panel which is really nothing special. Some people don't seem to realise the 38" inch 3840x1600 panels have existed for years, albeit at max 75Hz up until now! The justification at the price only comes from people who've bought it, which is to be expected.

The biggest problem with OLED is the lack of smaller sizes available and the burn-in risk, although this is overblown significantly and can be mitigated. Still, I understand why the 38GL950G will be the perfect monitor for some people, and they have no choice but to pay its stupid price... but that doesn't actually make it the perfect monitor, because it's a long, long way from being that.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,188
I get that you guys are speaking about things from the side lines. Once this product gets out there do me a favor and go see it for yourself before making judgement calls on what is or isn't the perfect monitor. The only thing that can be critiqued by anyone before actually using this is the price. I agree with the majority of the forum that the price is too high right now. If LG lowers the price by $200 I personally would consider it as one of the best choices for wide screen gaming in 2020.
 

DoubleTap

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
2,413
I don't think anyone is going to come into this thread and state that IPS is superior to OLED when it comes to black levels etc. but this is a thread about the LG 38GL950G. I own this monitor and IMO it is the best IPS monitor I've ever owned. Not sure why it's constantly being compared to an OLED television. The two products are in entirely different categories. I use this monitor to game and work remotely from home. I can do both extremely well so I'm very happy with my purchase. Is it expensive, absolutely but I was using an Acer X34 for many years and this is a substantial upgrade from that so I have no regrets.
I also use my setup for gaming and to connect to my work laptop. Can you tell me how easy it is to switch inputs from DP to HDMI? The Dell Monitors I had in the past let you program a button to make it super easy. The Asus panels I have currently make you use the joy-nipple to navigate through a menu - I'm used to it, but it's not really ideal.

I tent to switch back and forth a lot so the easier, the better...
 

DoubleTap

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
2,413
OLED is better for everything. There's nothing LCD does better, save maybe for refresh rate, but OLED motion is superior so it's pretty much cancelled out. This would be fine if LCD was more affordable, but it's actually more expensive! This is the issue more than anything else. I object to paying such an obscene amount of money for a panel which is really nothing special. Some people don't seem to realise the 38" inch 3840x1600 panels have existed for years, albeit at max 75Hz up until now! The justification at the price only comes from people who've bought it, which is to be expected.

The biggest problem with OLED is the lack of smaller sizes available and the burn-in risk, although this is overblown significantly and can be mitigated. Still, I understand why the 38GL950G will be the perfect monitor for some people, and they have no choice but to pay its stupid price... but that doesn't actually make it the perfect monitor, because it's a long, long way from being that.
Refresh rate and aspect ratio are more important to me than almost any other aspect of the monitor and as someone who works from home, I use my screen for work and play. $1800 is a lot but for something I used all day, every day, it's really not that much.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,461
I get that you guys are speaking about things from the side lines. Once this product gets out there do me a favor and go see it for yourself before making judgement calls on what is or isn't the perfect monitor. The only thing that can be critiqued by anyone before actually using this is the price. I agree with the majority of the forum that the price is too high right now. If LG lowers the price by $200 I personally would consider it as one of the best choices for wide screen gaming in 2020.
The European prices are absolutely bonkers for this. It's 2000 euros in central Europe and anything from 2300-2500 in the Nordics. I don't think anyone can agree that is a sane price. If it was 1500 I might consider it, 1200-1300 would be fine. So at least over here the features vs price is significantly off.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,188
I also use my setup for gaming and to connect to my work laptop. Can you tell me how easy it is to switch inputs from DP to HDMI? The Dell Monitors I had in the past let you program a button to make it super easy. The Asus panels I have currently make you use the joy-nipple to navigate through a menu - I'm used to it, but it's not really ideal.

I tent to switch back and forth a lot so the easier, the better...
All you have to do it push the control stick at the bottom of the monitor to the left and it switches from DP to HDMI. It's quite fast.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,188
The European prices are absolutely bonkers for this. It's 2000 euros in central Europe and anything from 2300-2500 in the Nordics. I don't think anyone can agree that is a sane price. If it was 1500 I might consider it, 1200-1300 would be fine. So at least over here the features vs price is significantly off.
I agree with you 100%.
 

KiwiCanuck

n00b
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Messages
25
Mine is shipping today so look forward to testing it when i get it in a few days, see how much better it is over my current AW3418DW
 

Murzilka

Gawd
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
699
The European prices are absolutely bonkers for this. It's 2000 euros in central Europe and anything from 2300-2500 in the Nordics. I don't think anyone can agree that is a sane price. If it was 1500 I might consider it, 1200-1300 would be fine. So at least over here the features vs price is significantly off.
I'd have to pay $2,100 for it. OLED C9 55" costs $1,360 for comparison. Pricing is insane for gaming monitors.
 
Last edited:

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
Refresh rate and aspect ratio are more important to me than almost any other aspect of the monitor and as someone who works from home, I use my screen for work and play. $1800 is a lot but for something I used all day, every day, it's really not that much.
Refresh rate for work is important? Over resolution? That doesn't make much sense. 4K destroys this for productivity, and you don't need more than 60Hz for that. Even putting aside OLED for a minute, you could get two solid monitors, 4K and 1440p, covering both bases with better results, for HALF the price of this LG! You may want an all-in-one solution, but you are paying an insane price for that convenience, and compromising on the work aspect of your use-case scenario. And with refresh rate, you'd be able to hit far higher FPS on a 165Hz 1440p monitor FAR more easily in most games with a 2080Ti. You won't be do that that with this. FPS and aspect ratio are in direct contradiction with each other, for obvious reasons, so you've settled for middle ground at maximum price. Makes zero sense to me, but each to their own of course.

The price is what makes it so dumb, irrespective of whether you can afford it or not, which is besides the point in the grand scheme of things.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,188
Refresh rate for work is important? Over resolution? That doesn't make much sense. 4K destroys this for productivity, and you don't need more than 60Hz for that. Even putting aside OLED for a minute, you could get two solid monitors, 4K and 1440p, covering both bases with better results, for HALF the price of this LG! You may want an all-in-one solution, but you are paying an insane price for that convenience, and compromising on the work aspect of your use-case scenario. And with refresh rate, you'd be able to hit far higher FPS on a 165Hz 1440p monitor FAR more easily in most games with a 2080Ti. You won't be do that that with this. FPS and aspect ratio are in direct contradiction with each other, for obvious reasons, so you've settled for middle ground at maximum price. Makes zero sense to me, but each to their own of course.

The price is what makes it so dumb, irrespective of whether you can afford it or not, which is besides the point in the grand scheme of things.
You've made it clear that you're a fan of OLED televisions but it seems that you don't even want to consider the fact that a lot of people either don't want or don't have the space to use a 55" OLED television as their computer display. This monitor gives the user a 3840x1600 display that works great for productivity (2 X 1920x1200 documents side by side). You also have the ability to bump up the refresh rate to 175hz which absolutely helps with said productivity (smoother mouse movement and scrolling). Then you add the PC gaming benefits of gsync and the Nano IPS color improves. It's a great product but as everyone is mentioning at the moment the price is high. That's usually the case with new tech. OLED televisions were insanely expensive when they were first introduced to the market. I get that this monitor doesn't work for you but we've heard your take on it. Not sure if repeating it is over and over is going to get your point across any clearer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sufu
like this

DoubleTap

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
2,413
You are wrong on every single point - mostly because you seem to imagine that your preferences and sense of value are anything like mine.

Refresh rate for work is important? Over resolution? That doesn't make much sense. .
Refresh rate for work is not important, but my work monitor must have a high refresh rate option because I use my gaming PC and my work PC at the same desk, just on different inputs.

4K destroys this for productivity, and you don't need more than 60Hz for that.
Yeah, I hate 4K monitors, The DPI is either too high or the monitor is too tall.

Even putting aside OLED for a minute, you could get two very good screens, 4K and 1440p, covering both bases with better results, for HALF the price of this LG!
I'm currently running three 1440P Gsync monitors and they were nearly the price of the LG. Ignoring that 4K monitors are inherently bad and pointing out that center bezels are just as bad (ie: no dual monitor, side by side configs, ever) managing multiple monitors is a hassle and the dual monitor aesthetic is ugly and obnoxious. I like NV Surround, but I no longer play the game which I mainly used in this configuration.

3X 27" monitors is bit too much and dual monitors (side by side) is a visual abomination.

You may want an all-in-one solution, but you are paying an insane price for that convenience, and compromising on the work aspect of your use-case scenario.
Yes, thank you - I guess you're not wrong here, except that you seem to think this is a bad thing.

And with refresh rate, you'd be able to hit far higher FPS on a 165Hz 1440p monitor FAR more easily in most games with a 2080Ti. You won't be do that that with this.
If you don't know what I play, you really don't know whether this is an issue or not. (hint: it's not an issue)
In any case, this thing is a breeze to push compared to 7680x1440 @ 144Hz

The price is what makes it so dumb, irrespective of whether you can afford it or not, which is besides the point in the grand scheme of things.
The price is fine. I'll take a loss on the ROG panels so the net conversion will probably be $500 or so - less than 5% of my total system cost (https://pcpartpicker.com/list/6mtJzY)

Well worth it in my view which is that I regard my system as a system and it needs to work for me. If you take the "pixels as a commodity" view, then yeah, this monitor sucks, but that's not how I see things.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
You've made it clear that you're a fan of OLED televisions but it seems that you don't even want to consider the fact that a lot of people either don't want or don't have the space to use a 55" OLED television as their computer display. This monitor gives the user a 3840x1600 display that works great for productivity (2 X 1920x1200 documents side by side). You also have the ability to bump up the refresh rate to 175hz which absolutely helps with said productivity (smoother mouse movement and scrolling). Then you add the PC gaming benefits of gsync and the Nano IPS color improves. It's a great product but as everyone is mentioning at the moment the price is high. That's usually the case with new tech. OLED televisions were insanely expensive when they were first introduced to the market. I get that this monitor doesn't work for you but we've heard your take on it. Not sure if repeating it is over and over is going to get your point across any clearer.
This isn't a "great product"... poor contrast, IPS glow (it will be on every monitor), an entry into the bleed lottery with every purchase and the non-existent joke that is HDR-400. I'm not suggesting it's a hunk of junk, but it's a $1K monitor AT BEST. I get that it ticks a lot of boxes for people, and I acknowledged 55" OLED wasn't practical, but let's not pretend this is some kind of holier than thou monitor sent from high above which answers all our prayers... far from it.


You are wrong on every single point - mostly because you seem to imagine that your preferences and sense of value are anything like mine.
My point in regards to value pertains to the fact that it can exist outside of what you consider it to be... it is not solely a subjective question, because if that were the case, technically it would have no meaning and be nothing but a philosophy. It is quite easy to look at the features and level of quality it offers and see how it compares to other options available... the fact YOU consider certain features worth so much to you doesn't impact its actual value in that sense, it only alters your perception of value and what you are willing to pay for it... and that will be different for everyone. I'm sure some people wouldn't mind paying twice the price, while others wouldn't want to pay half. I could afford it, but I wouldn't pay ANY price because personally I would not find this monitor useful for any purpose, but even if I could, I vehemently object to how LG have chosen to price it and on principal alone I would simply refuse to buy it.

I can see in your situation however that no other monitor will suffice, and that obviously, and understandably, alters your perception of its value... to you. I'm not saying that's wrong, but it's unfortunate if this kind of pricing is actively encouraged as it doesn't paint a very bright picture for the future.

I'm puzzled as to how you can say 4K is "inherently bad"? Subjective surely... I've used 4K for years and cannot abide anything less when it comes to productivity. 1600p is nearly half the height of a 1440p monitor less, which is just a MASSIVE amount of screen real estate to lose, immediately obvious the moment you look at the screen. DPI at 32" is perfect, at normal seating distance with 20/20 vision.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,188
bananadude with the amount of venom you’re spewing on a product you’ve only seen in pictures I’m curios to know why are you even in this thread? If you’re not interested in the product then what’s the point?
 

Lateralus

More [H]uman than Human
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
15,208
I'll just chime in and say that if I hadn't been spoiled by OLED -- and again, fully acknowledging here that the currently-smallest size of 55" won't work for everyone and that some people simply prefer ultrawide aspect ratios to 4K -- this monitor would be on my short list as it ticks a hell of a lot of boxes if you're content with LCD. The price is unfortunate, I think we all agree there. My dilemma would be between the high refresh 43" 4K monitors from Acer/Asus (which so far have turned out to be far less than perfect) and this one. I'd likely want to play with both before making a decision. At first glance, the 43" 4K gaming monitors seem to offer far more value but the execution was again, far from perfect...but it's about the best we currently have in that space. But, hardcore IPS types usually aren't willing to deal with the drawbacks of VA panels (without even mentioning the other flaws of those 43" monitors). Similarly, people who prefer VA panels are probably none to eager to pay $1,800 for a monitor with IPS's drawbacks.

At the end of the day I'm glad to see some discussion around this thing as it's beneficial for us all and will help guide future purchases. I'm following along to see how this all shakes out...let's try to keep it civil. :)
 

KiwiCanuck

n00b
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Messages
25
I am guessing the high cost is in part to gsync v2 module and nvidias crazy prices these days. Regardless of cost it’s up to people to buy if they want it. I am personally looking forward to mine to arrive.
 

bigbluefe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
749
If next year's 48" OLEDs let you run at 120hz at 4k and there are HDMI 2.1 GPUs, it might pull ahead, but today, I'd rather have this LG for a computer monitor.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
bananadude with the amount of venom you’re spewing on a product you’ve only seen in pictures I’m curios to know why are you even in this thread? If you’re not interested in the product then what’s the point?
Spewing venom lol! Poor contrast... fact... IPS glow... fact... poor and non-existent HDR implementation... fact... hyper inflated price... fact. Venom?? Seriously? Some people, I tell ya... :facepalm:
 

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,001
I am guessing the high cost is in part to gsync v2 module and nvidias crazy prices these days. Regardless of cost it’s up to people to buy if they want it. I am personally looking forward to mine to arrive.
There really isn't any such thing as gsync v2(nvidia uses FPGAs for g-sync modules which no doubt have had hundreds or thousands of revisions over the years). It's extremely unlikely this display uses the same FPGA as the one used in the G-sync HDR displays, especially since it doesn't have a fan, and it doesn't need to do anything special. The G-sync HDR displays have specialized algorithms to control the dimming array.
 

Skott

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,054
I too am curious about the performance aspect. Yes its over priced. We all agree on that. Forget price as a discussion and focus on performance vs other monitors please. That's what I am interested in. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sufu
like this

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
I too am curious about the performance aspect. Yes its over priced. We all agree on that. Forget price as a discussion and focus on performance vs other monitors please. That's what I am interested in. :)
Look at the LG 27GL850, very comparable specs regards the IPS panels used, just different sizes and resolution, but it's likely they will perform broadly similar.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,537
Spewing venom lol! Poor contrast... fact... IPS glow... fact... poor and non-existent HDR implementation... fact... hyper inflated price... fact. Venom?? Seriously? Some people, I tell ya... :facepalm:
This is trolling.

We're aware of the limitations of IPS technology -- however, we're also aware of the limitations of other LCD technologies too. Out of all of the mixes of strengths and weaknesses, IPS is the best for the broadest range of uses.

We're also aware that OLED is a superior technology, and that OLED monitors may be purchased at a lower price. As you're aware, OLED TVs aren't suitable for most computing environments due to size.


None of this needs to be brought up again.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
369
This is trolling.

We're aware of the limitations of IPS technology -- however, we're also aware of the limitations of other LCD technologies too. Out of all of the mixes of strengths and weaknesses, IPS is the best for the broadest range of uses.

We're also aware that OLED is a superior technology, and that OLED monitors may be purchased at a lower price. As you're aware, OLED TVs aren't suitable for most computing environments due to size.


None of this needs to be brought up again.

Lol, facts are trolling now? Brilliant, just brilliant.

I never said OLEDs WERE suitable btw. And it's not that LCD or IPS isn't good for anything, but it comes back to price because unless someone is an extremely wealthy individual for whom money literally doesn't matter (which would be besides the point), the value/performance DOES matter to 99% of people buying this thing and isn't something that should be ignored, or labelled as trolling when its pointed out, which is just absurd.
 

Lateralus

More [H]uman than Human
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
15,208
Steering the topic just a bit, since some of you probably keep up with these gaming monitors a bit more than I do... I know this thing was highly anticipated due to its combination of size and features. Now that it's here, are there any other monitors on the horizon that have been announced that might be competitive or even better? I haven't heard much about what's on tap for 2020. Just wondering for anyone who is contemplating purchasing this one if there's anything in the works that might be worth waiting for. I'm kind of struggling to think how much this one could be improved on but if nothing else, a competing display might help bring the price down a bit. Seems like LG kind of did a mic drop with this one so I'm wondering if anyone is going to try to top it anytime soon.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,461
Steering the topic just a bit, since some of you probably keep up with these gaming monitors a bit more than I do... I know this thing was highly anticipated due to its combination of size and features. Now that it's here, are there any other monitors on the horizon that have been announced that might be competitive or even better? I haven't heard much about what's on tap for 2020. Just wondering for anyone who is contemplating purchasing this one if there's anything in the works that might be worth waiting for. I'm kind of struggling to think how much this one could be improved on but if nothing else, a competing display might help bring the price down a bit. Seems like LG kind of did a mic drop with this one so I'm wondering if anyone is going to try to top it anytime soon.
Acer X38 is basically their take on this. Same panel and all. We might see more contenders at CES 2020 in January. Hopefully to market faster than this one.

The things I would like to see is a decent HDR version of this and a model that offers PbP. I would not mind if Samsung jumped in the fray as well and made a VA model with this size/res. I'm happy with the display performance on my CRG9 so if they could get something similar to that it would be a pretty strong option.
 

Lateralus

More [H]uman than Human
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
15,208
Acer X38 is basically their take on this. Same panel and all. We might see more contenders at CES 2020 in January. Hopefully to market faster than this one.

The things I would like to see is a decent HDR version of this and a model that offers PbP. I would not mind if Samsung jumped in the fray as well and made a VA model with this size/res. I'm happy with the display performance on my CRG9 so if they could get something similar to that it would be a pretty strong option.
Ah yes, I forgot about CES announcements at the beginning of the year. I guess we'll see where the cards fall by this time next year. :) Definitely interesting times for display enthusiasts (even though I totally get all of the frustrations, too). Seems it wasn't that long ago that we were using the Dell/HP 30" monitors and those were godlike at the time, hehe. Or the 37" Westy - I bet that huge thread is still here somewhere.

I agree that a VA version would be interesting if it could be executed well, like the 32GK850G/F.
 

shadow2761

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Messages
163
Steering the topic just a bit, since some of you probably keep up with these gaming monitors a bit more than I do... I know this thing was highly anticipated due to its combination of size and features. Now that it's here, are there any other monitors on the horizon that have been announced that might be competitive or even better? I haven't heard much about what's on tap for 2020. Just wondering for anyone who is contemplating purchasing this one if there's anything in the works that might be worth waiting for. I'm kind of struggling to think how much this one could be improved on but if nothing else, a competing display might help bring the price down a bit. Seems like LG kind of did a mic drop with this one so I'm wondering if anyone is going to try to top it anytime soon.
Yes I am sure there is plenty of better monitors coming in 2020.

For example the XG43UQ should be out soon according to Asus.

First DSC monitor
4K 144hz 4:4:4
HDR1000

VA panel though, hopefully it is a good one!
 
Top