Pixel count for productivity. 2x 34WK95U's.

Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
2,837
Hello folks - it's game time.

I'm currently running 3 U3011's (wide) on my desktop and I'm looking to upgrade.

2x 34WK95U's stacked seems to be my current preference as I'm using this for productivity almost exclusively. I'm interested in the resolution more than anything else. Side by side might work, but not sure how I'd feel with the bezel in the middle again.

Based my my whack math, I'm currently at 12,288,000 pixels (2560x1600x3). My math tells me that I'll be at 11,059,200 with one 5kx2k and 22,118,400 with two.

I'm currently running a Titan X for video processing, Windows 10. It LOOKS like I should be fine at 2x 5kx2k on each display port. Can anyone validate?

Is there anything about to hit the market or very new on the market to compete with the 34WK95U 's?

Ideally, I'd LOVE to do an OLED, but I don't think that will work at 55 or 65" and get me the pixel count I'm at or above. I'm also not interested in 1440 screens.

Any and all input is welcome, please.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,065
You haven't listed a price.
However, I think you'll do well with that setup. The only other option would be to go with 3x 4k or 2x full 5k (of which the only monitor I know of requires Thunderbolt input).
Ergonomically I would probably get your monitor arms out and actually figure out how tall having two monitors stacks would be. I finally got a 31" DCI-4k monitor on my desk and it would be (personally) a hard sell to want to put another one on top of this display. For me it would be just craning my neck too much and too often. I'd rather go triple side by side 4k.

Otherwise, it's impossible to know what is coming down the pike. But what is more certain is that "odd" resolutions that are greater than 4k are still in very short supply and likely will be for sometime.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
2,837
The 34WK95U's are $1600 each.

I don't have a specific budget in mind - just looking at my options to replace these old U3011's.

I've only partly considered triple 4k's - the aesthetics of an ultra-wide are appealing.
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,236
You have to remember that it's not just pixels. You will end up with less desktop space due to having to use DPI scaling so text isn't tiny on a 4K ultrawide. I would say the effective space with DPI scaling applied is the same as a 34" 3440x1440 ultrawide.

I use a 5K 27" at work and a 49" 5120x1440 super ultrawide at home. The sharpness of text on the 5K is lovely but otherwise I will take the massive desktop space of my super ultrawide. I really hope we get more "4K ultrawide" resolution displays in the next few years.
 

tchalikias

Weaksauce
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
102
I do believe that this particular monitor has been discontinued. I can't seem to be able to find it in stock or available for order anywhere in the EU. Perhaps LG is preparing its successor, hopefully with the kinks ironed out (image retention etc.). The only other monitor I know of that uses this same panel is the MSI PS341WU.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
2,837
I do believe that this particular monitor has been discontinued. I can't seem to be able to find it in stock or available for order anywhere in the EU. Perhaps LG is preparing its successor, hopefully with the kinks ironed out (image retention etc.). The only other monitor I know of that uses this same panel is the MSI PS341WU.

Looks like it's easy to get from a few vendors here in the US.

You have to remember that it's not just pixels. You will end up with less desktop space due to having to use DPI scaling so text isn't tiny on a 4K ultrawide. I would say the effective space with DPI scaling applied is the same as a 34" 3440x1440 ultrawide.

I use a 5K 27" at work and a 49" 5120x1440 super ultrawide at home. The sharpness of text on the 5K is lovely but otherwise I will take the massive desktop space of my super ultrawide. I really hope we get more "4K ultrawide" resolution displays in the next few years.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this.

I don't do DPI scaling and generally feel that I can see 4k just fine. I have a Lenovo X1 with the OLED screen on it and I don't do DPI scaling.

I think going from 1600 to 1440 is going to be a killer for me.

Going the other way to 3 4k's would be a better option I think.

Beginning to wonder if I already have my magic bullet at these 3 U3011's - I just hate the heat they put off.

edit: U3219Q looks interesting......

What's the current game version of a 4k HDR, 30+"ish gaming display?
 
Last edited:

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,236
I don't do DPI scaling and generally feel that I can see 4k just fine. I have a Lenovo X1 with the OLED screen on it and I don't do DPI scaling.

I think going from 1600 to 1440 is going to be a killer for me.

Going the other way to 3 4k's would be a better option I think.

Beginning to wonder if I already have my magic bullet at these 3 U3011's - I just hate the heat they put off.

edit: U3219Q looks interesting......

What's the current game version of a 4k HDR, 30+"ish gaming display?

I don't think I would use 4K at anything smaller than 40" without some DPI scaling and I have laser corrected vision.

There are no good 30 inch-ish models suited for gaming on the market. It's incredibly annoying. Pretty much all 4K gaming monitors worth buying are 27" size.

HDR support is rubbish on 99% of desktop monitors.
 

ZzBloopzZ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
Messages
1,325
I don't think I would use 4K at anything smaller than 40" without some DPI scaling and I have laser corrected vision.

There are no good 30 inch-ish models suited for gaming on the market. It's incredibly annoying. Pretty much all 4K gaming monitors worth buying are 27" size.

Thanks for pointing this out. I agree 100%, I have to use scaling for my BenQ 32” 4k IPS. It is a gorgeous monitor but I regret it as I thought for productivity it would be fine but actually outside of the no flicker and blue light reduction, I liked my older 2x 24” 1920x1200 setup for productivity. Even with trying different zoning software not feeling the 32” 4k.

Now I am getting back into gaming after a decade too. Wondering if a 27” 1440P at 144hz is the sweet spot. Thoughts?
 

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
2,236
Thanks for pointing this out. I agree 100%, I have to use scaling for my BenQ 32” 4k IPS. It is a gorgeous monitor but I regret it as I thought for productivity it would be fine but actually outside of the no flicker and blue light reduction, I liked my older 2x 24” 1920x1200 setup for productivity. Even with trying different zoning software not feeling the 32” 4k.

Now I am getting back into gaming after a decade too. Wondering if a 27” 1440P at 144hz is the sweet spot. Thoughts?

I'd say at this point 34" 3440x1440 is the sweet spot if you have a higher end GPU. Significantly lower performance requirements than 4K while giving you a wider view than 27" 1440p.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,123
5120x2160@34" have almost the same PPI as 3840x2160@27" which I use without scaling without any issues from about meter away so it is usable PPI if you have good eyes. Then again most people do not have good enough eyes for such pixel densities to work comfortably from distances they like. It would not be a good idea if you had to have your face in monitors all the time... better double check if from viewing distance you use your monitors you will be able to comfortably work with such high PPI. I write this because laptops are usually are usually placed very close to eyes...
 

jeremyshaw

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
12,512
Just for fun, without bezels.

30" 16:10 is 25.44" wide, 15.90" tall.
34" 21:9 is 31.25" wide, 13.39" tall.

3x30" 16:10 side by side, is ~75" wide, ~16" tall. Equivalent to 48:10, without bezels. Total area ~1200 in^2.
2x34" 21:9 stacked, is ~31.25" wide, ~26.8" tall. Equivalent to 7:6 display, without bezels, around 41" diagonal. Total area ~836 in^2.

Again, this is all for fun. I'm still working with one 32" monitor :D
 

Iratus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
1,537
It almost certainly doesn't matter to you but they do look exceptionally cheap in the flesh. Offends my sense of aesthetics in the office, we've got a bunch. They're good screens though. If you're getting two though I'd genuinely look at getting one inset into the desk ala a production desk, rather than looking up. It's much more natural to use. Generally though you will find that ultrawide is far more useful a setup than multiscreen as you tend to use a lot more of the screen. I've only had a couple of people that didn't change over and those were programmers that have a vertical screen next to their main panel.

I think they're just out of stock (most things seem to be) there isn't a replacement coming as far as I know.
 

ZzBloopzZ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
Messages
1,325
I'd say at this point 34" 3440x1440 is the sweet spot if you have a higher end GPU. Significantly lower performance requirements than 4K while giving you a wider view than 27" 1440p.

I have been research all week about this. For gaming, seems that 144Hz actually does make a difference. I was skeptical but tried it at a friends, and gosh I have been itching for one ever since. Seems the sweet spot for quality and higher Hz right now is 27" 1440P 144Hz. Seems one of the best ones is the Lenvo Y27q-20, which is based off the LG 27GL850 but with better contrast ratio and better quality control/stand. Hopefully things will get bit better in the Fall with better prices so that is when I plan to pick one up as a secondary screen but for gaming.

After playing around with scaling and learning more about my 3 year old BenQ 32" 4k IPS, I am actually loving it for office work so plan to keep it.
 
Top