So how are ultrawide monitors? mainly for gaming
I know windows is pretty shitty with resoultions higher than 1440p how is it with handling different aspect ratios?
also if buying a monitor in 2016 should i be looking for a freesync or gsync model or is that just a meme
Pretty decent. Got one myself, it's a nice resolution for Workingand for newer games if you're interested. The biggest plus is that it's not that much more expensive compared a normal full hd IPS monitor.
Would recommend.
But I've got to say, you might want to get a 25 inch monitor and it doesn't seem like a very big screen due to the aspect ratio so you might want to get a 29 Inch.
>I know windows is pretty shitty with resoultions higher than 1440p
How come? Do you mean 1920x1440?
They're nice, but a hit too pricey still.
I have one at 1440p and a second 16:9 1440p.
I use them both for music production and the 16:9 for anime and IMAX movies (the uktrawide one for movies).
I just had an idea
How is split screen gaming on an ultra wide?
the scaling is awful.
i currently have a 27inch so i was thinking maybe the 29-34 inch as the height should be similar just wider.
its not too wide for your peripheral vision?
They're bretty good now pham, especialy now since game devs have started adding support for ultrawide resolutions. Shooters and RPGs are amazing with a wider FOV. They're good IPS panels to begin with, so you'll have a nice experience even if you play at 16:9 with black bars.
As said, get a 29 inch minimum. Get a variable refresh model if possible. If not, most vanilla ones can be overclock to 75Hz with no issues or image quality degradation.
I'll post some comparison screenshots. Starting with diablo at 16:9.
Diablo@21:9
...
This is heroes of the storm, same scene. Should I continue?
what kind of massive retards buys a "ultra wide monitor" ?
Our eyes can barely cope with 16,9 without moving the head.
looks weird af, i would hate having to move my eyes so much horizontally
So? Doesnt matter shit when DPI is less than 130.
>I have one at 1440p and a second 16:9 1440p.
1440p at some(what?) aspect ratio and 1440p at different aspect ratio. You make absolutely no sense. That suffix is meant to differentiate between interlaced and non-interlaced signals with television standard resolutions and there is no television resolution with 1440 horizontal lines.
Is this again some marketing sperm eating?
can you play Diablo 2 at 21:9
Well, you don't move your eyes. The screen is centered on your character anyway.You just have more information from your peripheral vision, such as monsters coming in from the side.
Games and movie editing yes, maybe even movies because many of them have a similar ratio, but other than that... ehhh. It's not that amazing. I bought one because it was still cheaper than the cheapest 2k monitor I could find
Ofc you can. How do you think I took that screenshot? You just to set it borderless windowed mode.
Honestly I think there's more potential with HMD's and eventually, glasses that work like HMD's.
I'd absolutely love to build myself a programming environment is "VR".
I bought an LG 34"... And then had to switch from HDMI to DP to get to even 60Hz. And DP kvm gear is both expensive and shitty, because those kvms don't emulate a persistent connection. All day long literally like plugging a monitor in and out on two machines. Window positions will not survive the switching either. Sucks that HDMI taps out at 60hz, but there you have it.
that looks like all the display items are set to 16:9 and its offering 21:9 screen real estate
Potential, Yes.
Right now? No.
Coming from someone who owns one and has tried Virtual Desktop, the display is horrid for reading text and viewing some content because of the screen door effect since you're magnifying the display in front of your eyes, you see the lines between each pixel. You'll here this a lot, the resolution isn't there yet. 4K will solve this.
can you go wider m8
Also bought an LG 34", did not dissapoint at all. Games are more immersive, and the extra screen estate is a small bonus. 21:9 movies also work out very nice ofcourse.
Btw, mine was overclockable to 77hz, currently have it running at 75 for dat extra smoothness
>gaming
Reevaluate your life
Games lack support for 21:9, and 4k is usually cheaper anyways.
windows only sucks with high ppi displays
and a free-sync ultra-wide starts at 1K, G-sync is even more
2560x1440 you fucking mongoloid.
Without a doubt.
I actually recently "downgraded" from three 1080p screens to a single 21:9 1440p screen. And I don't think I'll ever go back from 21:9. I do a lot of gaming, but, also a lot of photo and video editing and this monitor is a dream.
>Dell U3415W
You probably could have bought a 40" 4k display for the same price
also how does one even get into elite? it seems highly boring, like a truck driving simulator
It's pretty fun, but can also boring. Then again, so can other games. It helps if you like astronomy and space in general.
I could have bought a 4K screen, but, a 40" 4K screen would have been significantly taller/bigger over-all. I really appreciate this form factor. And, the best part, is it doesn't require scaling. It's about the same PPI as 27" 16:9 2,560x1,440. Or 1080p at 21.5".
Been playing a fair bit of Doom since it released.
Got on the 21:9 bandwagon when the first high-end LG ones came out a few years back. Used a single 29in one as my daily driver for work and play (I work from home).
It was a good run, but it required a custom resolution configuration for my work laptop(mac) to be able to display at 2560x1080. Being an IPS display the colors were great, but it just took up too much horizontal desk space for me.
In the end after using it for a few years I went back to 16:10 and bought myself a 2560x1600 30in Dell. I couldn't even sell the ultrawide, normies don't want them.
>Bezels
>Screen being so tall is out of useable peripheral vision.
No thanks.
I have a dell 29" 2560x1080
For games that support this resulution so you get a larger field of view, its fucking awsome!
Same goes for watching with this aspect ratio.
on the flipside, games that dont fully support this often looks wierd or stretched, and movies in 16:9 you get quite smaller screen.
For me its better than 16:9 screens, and more and more games supprt it. When the price drops I'll get a 34" for sure.
watching movies*
I use both a 34" curved Dell and a 43" Crossover 434K. I like the aesthetic more on the ultrawide, but it squashes or crops too much video content, and many games don't work right with 21:9.
3440x1440 is a lot easier to push with a single 980, too. Mine goes to 75hz without frame skipping, so if you want fluidity I'd go for the ultrawide. Otherwise the 4k are better for multitasking and streaming video.
My laptop has a gsync display. It's aight but it raised the price of it a shot ton
FreeSync and G-Sync are cool, but you are basically locked into a GPU company from then on, until you get a new monitor. You have to weigh if that is ok for you. As for Ultrawide, I have one. For multitasking its really nice, as I have more space for that work. However, sometimes websites have whitespace that may be redundant, and YouTube videos play with black bars unless they are recorded for 21:9. I recommend saving up for 3440x1440. Windows handles fine, I run windows and linux. No rendering issues. For games, they feel awesome. Just have to make sure that your games support it. Most western games do, but some jap devs and other eastern devs dont ever offer support. Usually community fixes come out that work just fine however. Overall, ultrawide is amazing, I highly recommend it if you like that extra space and don't want to deal with 16:10.
Was pretty surprised that I could still play the original Bioshock and Stalker at this resolution. Also OpenRCT2.
Most modern 3d games after 1999 support all resolutions either with hacks/open engines or just a simple ini edit most of the time
i tried gzdoom2 at 4k that was a fucking trip
Tomb Raider is a pretty generic game, but goddamn does it look nice on this kind of aspect ratio