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

I'm expecting a stupidly good bonus and tax return in the Spring and my grip on the triple monitor wagon is starting to cramp up. This plus a 3080Ti might be just the ticket.
 
upload_2019-10-5_19-31-7.png


It has a VESA mount, so basically no cons?
 
View attachment 191254

It has a VESA mount, so basically no cons?

Is anyone else completely out of patience when it comes to idiotic websites?

He talks about the stupid RGB lights on the back of the monitor more than the monitor itself.

Who has TWO GRAND to drop a monitor yet is going to use built in monitor speakers instead of a surround setup?

Why is basically every professional media writer dumb? Geezus.
 
The most important thing is that the sRGB mode is confirmed. That is the only info I was looking for. This monitor is the tits. This is quite clear.
 
The most important thing is that the sRGB mode is confirmed. That is the only info I was looking for. This monitor is the tits. This is quite clear.

I don't want to be naive, but I have the feeling that this is going to be a legendary HP ZR30W level monitor because it's really obvious that they didn't go for gimmicks and shit that isn't really ready for prime time. It just looks like a solid meat and taters monitor, which is exactly what I wanted.

People cry about HDR but the truth is that you'll be upgrading to a new monitor before that nightmare's sorted out on the PC anyway.
 
His talk of sRGB is very questionable... the 148.9% doesn't sound right, and he mentions the Alienware AW3418DW has 127.2% coverage which it absolutely doesn't. I think this guy is just a work experience dope who somehow wangled his way round to getting this review despite being completely unqualified to do so.
 
I don't want to be naive, but I have the feeling that this is going to be a legendary HP ZR30W level monitor because it's really obvious that they didn't go for gimmicks and shit that isn't really ready for prime time. It just looks like a solid meat and taters monitor, which is exactly what I wanted.

People cry about HDR but the truth is that you'll be upgrading to a new monitor before that nightmare's sorted out on the PC anyway.

The problem is still the price. I don't think being the only 3840x1600 high refresh rate monitor available this year is enough to warrant 1800-2200 euros. Here in Finland they are trying to peddle it for 2500€ which might be just a preorder price but still really steep for what it is. If you were able to buy it for the lowest price it would still be a few hundred euros too much IMO. The LG 34GK950-F costs about 1100 euros and I have a hard time believing a slight size/resolution bump is worth 700+€ but people are free to spend their money however they want.

I updated my pic comparing 32:9 to other display sizes, see bottom right corner. It's not a whole lot added to height or width compared to a much cheaper 34" 21:9.

XkoTKKh.png
 
The problem is still the price. I don't think being the only 3840x1600 high refresh rate monitor available this year is enough to warrant 1800-2200 euros. Here in Finland they are trying to peddle it for 2500€ which might be just a preorder price but still really steep for what it is. If you were able to buy it for the lowest price it would still be a few hundred euros too much IMO. The LG 34GK950-F costs about 1100 euros and I have a hard time believing a slight size/resolution bump is worth 700+€ but people are free to spend their money however they want.

I updated my pic comparing 32:9 to other display sizes, see bottom right corner. It's not a whole lot added to height or width compared to a much cheaper 34" 21:9.

View attachment 191284

There's more to it than size, though. You have to figure that you can't really buy a 55" or 49" IPS monitor with equivalent specs to these.

This monitor is the whole package in terms of solid baseline features. It's the right type of panel, the right resolution, the right aspect ratio, and the right refresh rate.
 
There's more to it than size, though. You have to figure that you can't really buy a 55" or 49" IPS monitor with equivalent specs to these.

This monitor is the whole package in terms of solid baseline features. It's the right type of panel, the right resolution, the right aspect ratio, and the right refresh rate.

IPS ain't the right type of panel. If it was self emissive tech like OLED or MicroLED then it would be the right panel. Or at least have a crapton of local dimming zones.
 
IPS ain't the right type of panel. If it was self emissive tech like OLED or MicroLED then it would be the right panel. Or at least have a crapton of local dimming zones.

For what use case though? OLED won't ever make it into a monitor like this, not at prices mortals can afford anyway, but I highly doubt any manufacturer would even do it. The risk of burn-in is too great for PC monitors used day in/day out for productivity. Even EIZO are issuing this warning with their just announced Foris 21" OLED.

MicroLED shows great promise but is a decade away if we're lucky.

This LG monitor is wayyyyy overpriced for IPS with useless HDR-400, but I can't say I'm surprised. Monitor prices have gone insane the last few years, and LCD tech is hardly improving to justify that. I think Mini LED and more dimming zones holds promise, but again, that seems to be a way off in respect to anything affordable. Asus' ProArt range is getting an interesting looking 32" model next year, but that's going to be silly money, as the ProArt range always is... maybe in a couple of years this will trickle down though.

Apart from this, I see nothing else exciting on the horizon, so I can certainly understand why some may want to take the risk with an LG 55" TV (and 48" next year), but that size obviously isn't even practical for 99% of desktop set-ups. For more casual lounge PC gaming though, OLED would certainly be my preference.
 
Last edited:
useless HDR-400

I don't find that useless at all; it's perfect.

Because while I might try HDR, that's far from the top of my list for games. Movies? Minimum requirement. But game support is barely there and OS support is mostly not there.

All HDR400 tells me is that the monitor will properly process an HDR signal, and that's all I'd ever want it to do.
 
I don't find that useless at all; it's perfect.

Because while I might try HDR, that's far from the top of my list for games. Movies? Minimum requirement. But game support is barely there and OS support is mostly not there.

All HDR400 tells me is that the monitor will properly process an HDR signal, and that's all I'd ever want it to do.


But it IS useless in respect to its ability to display HDR. Just accepting a signal is, generally speaking, worthless, and I'm puzzled why that's ALL you'd ever want it to do? Especially at this price point. Some games (and many films) offer very good HDR experiences, which will not be provided at all on this monitor... and again, let's not forget, it comes with a VERY high price tag. On a cheap monitor it's less of a concern, although no monitor should have a premium for HDR-400, but on something so expensive it's completely unacceptable. It needs to do better. The PG35VQ/X35 are worlds better in respect to HDR performance, and not far off the price of this.
 
But it IS useless in respect to its ability to display HDR. Just accepting a signal is, generally speaking, worthless, and I'm puzzled why that's ALL you'd ever want it to do? Especially at this price point. Some games (and many films) offer very good HDR experiences, which will not be provided at all on this monitor... and again, let's not forget, it comes with a VERY high price tag. On a cheap monitor it's less of a concern, although no monitor should have a premium for HDR-400, but on something so expensive it's completely unacceptable. It needs to do better. The PG35VQ/X35 are worlds better in respect to HDR performance, and not far off the price of this.

And the PG35VQ is about as tall as Danny Devito and has awful haloing, which are far worse than not having HDR in a few games where it really doesn't make a big difference anyway.
 
And the PG35VQ is about as tall as Danny Devito and has awful haloing, which are far worse than not having HDR in a few games where it really doesn't make a big difference anyway.

Yes, but it does at least offer a solid HDR experience, and the best you will get on a PC monitor for the foreseeable future, outside of an OLED TV (which would make more sense if you want HDR). Of course HDR is pointless in games that don't feature it, but that IS changing and more will in time. In respect to the 38GL950G though, it comes back to cost at the end of the day, and it's wayyyy overpriced given its absence of effective HDR. It would be a moot point if it were closer to the $1000 mark, but 38" monitors at this resolution have been around a long time... they're whacking a massive OTT premium on it seemingly just because of G-Sync and the high refresh.
 
I don't find that useless at all; it's perfect.

Because while I might try HDR, that's far from the top of my list for games. Movies? Minimum requirement. But game support is barely there and OS support is mostly not there.

All HDR400 tells me is that the monitor will properly process an HDR signal, and that's all I'd ever want it to do.

this post makes no sense. “Perfect” in this context must mean it offers absolutely zero improvement to dynamic range and so has absolutely no relation to HDR ;)

Great!
 
this post makes no sense. “Perfect” in this context must mean it offers absolutely zero improvement to dynamic range and so has absolutely no relation to HDR ;)

Yes, exactly. Basically, happy with no HDR functionality other than the acceptance of its signal, but with no noticeable benefit.

To be fair to LG, I don't see them harping on about HDR on this monitor, but the mere fact HDR-400 exists in the first place is a crime really... it needs to be junked as a standard because it's essentially meaningless.
 
this post makes no sense. “Perfect” in this context must mean it offers absolutely zero improvement to dynamic range and so has absolutely no relation to HDR ;)

Great!

I literally just want it to be able to handle the signal. That's it.

The utility of the feature is nonexistent, so I'm quite happy that they didn't sacrifice anything else in the process.

To be fair to LG, I don't see them harping on about HDR on this monitor, but the mere fact HDR-400 exists in the first place is a crime really... it needs to be junked as a standard because it's essentially meaningless.

Anything less than 1000 is a travesty to HDR and is halfassed. That's every LCD, really -- none can do HDR properly. OLED goes about halfway.

That's why just having the signal processing is enough. Remember that the 'HDRn' is talking about maximum brightness -- again, fairly meaningless on a desktop monitor.
 
Guys just my thoughts here. Who can sit inches away from a monitor that has the potential to display 1000 nits of brightness in HDR mode? I use computers all day long and I have to lower it to 20% brightness since anything higher bothers my eyes.
 
Guys just my thoughts here. Who can sit inches away from a monitor that has the potential to display 1000 nits of brightness in HDR mode? I use computers all day long and I have to lower it to 20% brightness since anything higher bothers my eyes.

Nits are light output(candela) per area. Smaller monitor = smaller area and less total light output for the same nit value. I don't understand the concerns about brightness. Have you seen 900 nit highlights on an OLED TV? It's not a bother and so there's no reason a PC monitor would be either.

What can be a bother is certain LEDs that deliberately overshoot brightness, but even then, it's not really a big deal in my experience.
 
Guys just my thoughts here. Who can sit inches away from a monitor that has the potential to display 1000 nits of brightness in HDR mode? I use computers all day long and I have to lower it to 20% brightness since anything higher bothers my eyes.

you don’t get a full 1000 cd/m2 screen at once, it’s more for specular highlights and small areas of bright content. HDR content should be mastered in an appropriate way to avoid it blinding you from a compatible display don’t worry :)
 
Yes, but it does at least offer a solid HDR experience, and the best you will get on a PC monitor for the foreseeable future, outside of an OLED TV (which would make more sense if you want HDR). Of course HDR is pointless in games that don't feature it, but that IS changing and more will in time. In respect to the 38GL950G though, it comes back to cost at the end of the day, and it's wayyyy overpriced given its absence of effective HDR. It would be a moot point if it were closer to the $1000 mark, but 38" monitors at this resolution have been around a long time... they're whacking a massive OTT premium on it seemingly just because of G-Sync and the high refresh.

My thoughts exactly. At that price it should have FALD at least, and I'm not even talking about for HDR either. My Acer X27 with a mere 384 FALD zones is worlds better than any previous glowfest edge lit IPS crap I've used in the past. When you have the brightness set to only 100-120 nits for SDR the blooming is practically non existent and you end up with much higher contrast than any of the crap 2000-2500 ratios that VA monitors offer, all without any of the smearing and viewing angle issues and no IPS glow on top of that! IPS with FALD is the best SDR experience you can get if you don't want to go the OLED TV route and the lack of FALD on this thing is the dealbreaker for me, not the price.
 
For me the dealbreaker would be the inablity to control the sRGB mode. If it's only contrast and brightness, without even gamma options and if it's badly calibrated... I am screwed. Stuck withe the 55" 4K 60hz oled... Or maybe I will have to learn to live with the wide gamut display and bad sRGB mode. I want hardware gsync that badly.
 
For me the dealbreaker would be the inablity to control the sRGB mode. If it's only contrast and brightness, without even gamma options and if it's badly calibrated... I am screwed. Stuck withe the 55" 4K 60hz oled... Or maybe I will have to learn to live with the wide gamut display and bad sRGB mode. I want hardware gsync that badly.

I thought this monitor does have an sRGB color space mode? As for the gamma, well the majority of monitors that do have OSD gamma adjustments end up being inaccurate anyways, you would set it to 2.2 gamma then take measurements and find out it's actually 2.0 or 2.1 instead. Having the options is still better than nothing I guess.
 
I thought this monitor does have an sRGB color space mode? As for the gamma, well the majority of monitors that do have OSD gamma adjustments end up being inaccurate anyways, you would set it to 2.2 gamma then take measurements and find out it's actually 2.0 or 2.1 instead. Having the options is still better than nothing I guess.
Having some gamma options is definitely beter than nothing, that's for sure. Quite often the sRGB mode disables the RGB and CMYK controls, leaving only the contrast and brightness sliders. Sometimes, I saw that in Eizo gaming monitors, the sRGB mode allows you to choose the gamma value. But normally, the sRGB mode just locks everything down in the menu, leaving you with the factory calibrated profile, and if it's bad, your pretty much stuck with it, unless you have access to the factory menu. I'm afraid this will be the case with this LG - just a moderately calibrated sRGB mode with no means to adjust it. If they allowed sRGB mode calibration... this display would be absolutely over the top.
 
Good luck with that lol... it may get a slight reduction, but not that much lol! Not unless it ends up being a big pile of poop.
Yeah... so before it has come out it already has had a $200 price cut. You were saying :p
 
My thoughts exactly. At that price it should have FALD at least, and I'm not even talking about for HDR either. My Acer X27 with a mere 384 FALD zones is worlds better than any previous glowfest edge lit IPS crap I've used in the past. When you have the brightness set to only 100-120 nits for SDR the blooming is practically non existent and you end up with much higher contrast than any of the crap 2000-2500 ratios that VA monitors offer, all without any of the smearing and viewing angle issues and no IPS glow on top of that! IPS with FALD is the best SDR experience you can get if you don't want to go the OLED TV route and the lack of FALD on this thing is the dealbreaker for me, not the price.
How does FALD work for desktop use and SDR content (movies/games)? I’ve never had an HDR screen before; I thought it was only used during HDR content and that all zone illuminated at the same brightness during desktop use. Is the cursor haloing really gone at low brightness with just 384 zones?
 
That's not the issue. The issue is that OLED doesn't exist at the right size. People really, REALLY overflow the burn-in thing. Plasma didn't burn-in half as bad as people pretend OLED does.

People love to embellish as it garners them attention. "The sky is falling".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Panel
like this
That's not the issue. The issue is that OLED doesn't exist at the right size. People really, REALLY overflow the burn-in thing. Plasma didn't burn-in half as bad as people pretend OLED does.

OLED, and obviously not Plasma, have never been used as mainstream dedicated PC monitors... i.e for 12-16+ hours a day, same windows open, Photoshop, video editing, DTP applications etc. You cannot compare a technology which, for virtually its entire history, has been used for casual gaming/viewing up to only a few hours a day, if that. This is an ENTIRELY different use case scenario we're talking about, and one that far more closely resembles those torture tests the likes of Rtings carry out, and see inevitable burn-in as a result.

We've just seen EIZO issue a warning with its Foris Nova 21" OLED monitor, telling people to turn it off periodiclally to avoid burn-in... this says it all really. If OLED ever became an affordable and common PC monitor tech (which I'm quite certain it won't), it's a dead cert forums across the internet will be bombarded with people complaining about burn-in and rejected warranty claims, as no manufacturer is ever going to cover it.
 
That's not the issue. The issue is that OLED doesn't exist at the right size. People really, REALLY overflow the burn-in thing. Plasma didn't burn-in half as bad as people pretend OLED does.

Actually, people are underrating how serious the burn in issue is. It's bad. Really bad. You could not do a Windows task bar scenario on OLED screens without major problems.

World of Warcraft players would have their HUD burned in after about a week of normal play for them.
 
Actually, people are underrating how serious the burn in issue is. It's bad. Really bad. You could not do a Windows task bar scenario on OLED screens without major problems.

World of Warcraft players would have their HUD burned in after about a week of normal play for them.

100%... but it's never actually going to be an issue because OLED will never become a mainstream affordable tech for PC monitors anyway. Outside of TV's (which won't be used the same way as a dedicated monitor), it's always going to be an ultra expensive niche, even if they do ever release one in a practical desktop size. LCD will always remain many orders of magnitude cheaper, and offer more than enough for most people, especially those playing World of Warcraft. It absolutely WOULD be a problem if OLED became a dominant monitor tech, but it absolutely won't. It's like saying how much chaos and insanity there would be in the skies if we all had flying cars... quite true, there would be, but that's never going to be our reality. :D
 
100%... but it's never actually going to be an issue because OLED will never become a mainstream affordable tech for PC monitors anyway. Outside of TV's (which won't be used the same way as a dedicated monitor), it's always going to be an ultra expensive niche, even if they do ever release one in a practical desktop size. LCD will always remain many orders of magnitude cheaper, and offer more than enough for most people, especially those playing World of Warcraft. It absolutely WOULD be a problem if OLED became a dominant monitor tech, but it absolutely won't. It's like saying how much chaos and insanity there would be in the skies if we all had flying cars... quite true, there would be, but that's never going to be our reality. :D

OLED is just this generation's plasma. Expensive tech marketed as "superior" even though it has fatal flaws that prevent it from actual being practical and will be replaced by superior technology (MicroLED) before those problems are resolved.
 
OLED is just this generation's plasma. Expensive tech marketed as "superior" even though it has fatal flaws that prevent it from actual being practical and will be replaced by superior technology (MicroLED) before those problems are resolved.

I would gladly pay to replace the burnt out panel of a 32" 4k144hz OLED VRR every single year than deal with the LCD dick dance ever again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Panel
like this
I would gladly pay to replace the burnt out panel of a 32" 4k144hz OLED VRR every single year than deal with the LCD dick dance ever again.

Yes, and some people would buy a new Ferrari every year when it needs an oil change. You are in the 0.01% and monitor manufacturers don't cater for you, and never will. What happens at the upper echelons of monitor tech is hard to predict, but in the mainstream OLED will never arrive. LCD will be around for the rest of our lifetimes, I am quite certain of that.
 
I still don't understand what this monitor has that is requiring LG to ask almost double the price than previous offerings.
 
Yes, and some people would buy a new Ferrari every year when it needs an oil change. You are in the 0.01% and monitor manufacturers don't cater for you, and never will. What happens at the upper echelons of monitor tech is hard to predict, but in the mainstream OLED will never arrive. LCD will be around for the rest of our lifetimes, I am quite certain of that.

Pretty soon OLED will be as cheap to make as toilet paper and take a bigger market share from craptastic LCD. I have been hearing SED and MicroLED fantasies for ages now, but OLED seems to be making much farther consumer progress. And yes manufactures do cater to me.... *pets my Alienware 55 OLED*
 
Back
Top