It is a shame that 16:10 is all but dead at this point. For dual monitors where you have lots of horizontal space, the extra vertical was so nice.
I do love my 21:9 LG ultrawide screen though for home use. It fits much nicer on a small desk than 2 screens while having most of the horizontal. For games that support it, ultrawide is also pretty cool.
My HP zr30w is an IPS 2560x1600. This is the first monitor that feels like an upgrade.
Anandtech, what is the Radius of Curvature? This is a most important fact. I look forward to the day when I can buy three curved monitors that form a perfect arc with a radius 2 to 3 feet in front of me, minimal bezels, and 90 degrees or arc wide. I want every pixel pointing towards me.
Lots of HP professional monitors are still 16:10. It isn't dead, far from it. Just don't expect to find one at Best Buy among the Acer's and AOC's and Lenovo's...
The HP LP2470 is one of the most legendary 16:10 displays, mostly because it's introductory price was ridiculous, but also because it was the most accurate monitor made up until that point, using cold cathod backlighting no less. The successors the hp zr24, zr27 and zr30 are all excellent, modern replacements, but I'd never talk anybody out of buying an LP2470 for $200-$300 used. The control boards are known to fail around 20,000 hours but that's because owners rarely clean the cooling vents (the monitor is cooked by two fans to keep temperatures consistent in aiding color reproduction) but even if the control boards fail, or even lamps fail, everything is surprisingly inexpensive to service. I replaced the lamps and inverter on one a few years ago that has 30,000 hours on it and was too dim to calibrate. Parts were $170 and that is basically a new monitor at that point,
Besides, 3840x1600 across 38" diagonal is "retina" quality (your eye can't see the pixels) 31" from the monitor...which is about where your eyes would be. Fact is, you couldn't see any additional pixel density anyways.
But then people will complain you're not using the 96 PPI standard and what's the point of having less relative real estate?
For example, a lot of people would say a 27" 4K monitor is dumb because things are too small to read and you have to turn up the scaling to make the relative resolution the same as a 1440p monitor, so what's the point?
I've been a holdout for higher resolution, but I've come to realize that monitors like this are really where things should be in PPI. It's a bit sharper than the 96 PPI standard, which will make the pixels less noticeable, but not such a high PPI that it will make everything tiny. Basically I realized that while I want a really sharp display, as far as desktop and UI size this is right where it should be, and unless they come out with something 4x the pixels there won't be a better option for me. I've already learned from my MacBook Pro that I don't like the performance hit of mismatched-scaling, and I don't expect they'd come out with this in a 7680 x 3200 resolution any time soon.
A screen that size pretty much needs to be curved. I've used a flat 34 and a curved 34, and the edges of the flat one were very obviously angled away from me in a way that was distracting (not color shift but just distortion and some luminance shift in the corners).
Ultrawide is basically the best monitor solution for productivity and in my opinion a very strong option for gaming, hopefully a widened 4K happens so there's a 21:9 option for everyone. For those curious, I've used 2 27" 1440s and rate a 34" 1440 ultrawide as being similarly good for productivity and more pleasant to use, so you can imagine my opinion about this one.
I work in visual FX and graphics. It doesn't, at least for me.
I imagine you're thinking of straight lines needing to be straight, and there might be situations there that comes up, but not for me so far. The main benefit of the curve on my 40' Samsung TV "monitor" is that I can sit closer before the corners become useless.
I can't speak for photo work or graphic design, but for CAD work the curved screen improves the situation, since the delta between your eye and the screen remains the same. On a flat screen, the distance between your eye and the screen increases the further away from the centre you look, which creates an artificial perspective (most CAD work is done in parallel rendering mode and not perspective). This isn't a huge issue since your brain typically realises the abberation and compensates for it when working on a flat screen, but working on a curved screen removes the effect all together.
I've had an LG 3440x1440 21:9 monitor for a year and a half now and love it to death. I do wish it was curved though as the edges start to have a severe angle compared to the curve. I really like that this new one is exactly 2x 1080p monitors wide but with lots of extra vertical resolution.
If I figured it correctly, the display area on this monitor is about 15.5" inches high, and about 34" inches wide. For comparison, a 4:3 display of this height would be about 26" diagonal, or about the same as the old 27" tube TVs.
My goodness! For a while there, I was entranced by the monitor's seductive curves and unparalleled viewing experience, which even tops my current 34". Thank you for breaking that spell! Now I can go back to hating everything I can't afford, and being free from the yoke of the curvature-industrial-complex. A million blessings on you!
A pox on thee foul monitor! Go back to the shadows and don't return until yee are split in half! Long live the glorious Four-to-Three!
Lol. Try it before you knock on it. I've been using one for a year and wish it actually curved more. I've got an lg 34uc97 and believe the curvature is rated at 2800 or 3000.
Well it's more expensive than I'd like, but I'd love to have one. it's the resolution I've been waiting for, exactly 2x 1920 wide. Seems like a good replacement for 2 screens plus you gain some verticale resolution.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
Back to Article
Lolimaster - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
What about 16:10 or 3:2 monitors, those will be awesome for mixed productivity.saratoga4 - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
It is a shame that 16:10 is all but dead at this point. For dual monitors where you have lots of horizontal space, the extra vertical was so nice.I do love my 21:9 LG ultrawide screen though for home use. It fits much nicer on a small desk than 2 screens while having most of the horizontal. For games that support it, ultrawide is also pretty cool.
Eidigean - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
My HP zr30w is an IPS 2560x1600. This is the first monitor that feels like an upgrade.Anandtech, what is the Radius of Curvature? This is a most important fact. I look forward to the day when I can buy three curved monitors that form a perfect arc with a radius 2 to 3 feet in front of me, minimal bezels, and 90 degrees or arc wide. I want every pixel pointing towards me.
ImSpartacus - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
Can you really complain once you have this many pixels at your disposal?This appears like a wider 30" 2560x1600 display. What's not to like about that?
Samus - Sunday, September 4, 2016 - link
Lots of HP professional monitors are still 16:10. It isn't dead, far from it. Just don't expect to find one at Best Buy among the Acer's and AOC's and Lenovo's...The HP LP2470 is one of the most legendary 16:10 displays, mostly because it's introductory price was ridiculous, but also because it was the most accurate monitor made up until that point, using cold cathod backlighting no less. The successors the hp zr24, zr27 and zr30 are all excellent, modern replacements, but I'd never talk anybody out of buying an LP2470 for $200-$300 used. The control boards are known to fail around 20,000 hours but that's because owners rarely clean the cooling vents (the monitor is cooked by two fans to keep temperatures consistent in aiding color reproduction) but even if the control boards fail, or even lamps fail, everything is surprisingly inexpensive to service. I replaced the lamps and inverter on one a few years ago that has 30,000 hours on it and was too dim to calibrate. Parts were $170 and that is basically a new monitor at that point,
seerak - Monday, September 5, 2016 - link
Funny, my first thought was that it's just a cut-down 4k 40" 16x9.stephenbrooks - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
Wouldn't something as "tall" as 3:2 (or even worse 4:3 or 5:4) have to be curved spherically rather than cylindrically?xthetenth - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
An ultrawide is two monitors in that aspect ratio range with no bezel in between them so you can dynamically allocate screen space between them.ddriver - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
Need highres 21:9 monitor. This is a notch up from the usual 1440, but at that size, ppi is disappointing.solipsism - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
The the technologies are technically here, but it'll take awhile before you'll. get in the 200 PPI range with this size monitor.Brownshoe - Monday, November 14, 2016 - link
Besides, 3840x1600 across 38" diagonal is "retina" quality (your eye can't see the pixels) 31" from the monitor...which is about where your eyes would be. Fact is, you couldn't see any additional pixel density anyways.xenol - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
But then people will complain you're not using the 96 PPI standard and what's the point of having less relative real estate?For example, a lot of people would say a 27" 4K monitor is dumb because things are too small to read and you have to turn up the scaling to make the relative resolution the same as a 1440p monitor, so what's the point?
(but those nice crisp GUI elements...)
ImSpartacus - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
For the record, I am one of those people. 27" 16:9 monitors should be 1440p (or 5K if you must have your pretty pixels).This LG has me wetter than a national guard patrol during a hurricane.
sor - Monday, November 7, 2016 - link
I've been a holdout for higher resolution, but I've come to realize that monitors like this are really where things should be in PPI. It's a bit sharper than the 96 PPI standard, which will make the pixels less noticeable, but not such a high PPI that it will make everything tiny. Basically I realized that while I want a really sharp display, as far as desktop and UI size this is right where it should be, and unless they come out with something 4x the pixels there won't be a better option for me. I've already learned from my MacBook Pro that I don't like the performance hit of mismatched-scaling, and I don't expect they'd come out with this in a 7680 x 3200 resolution any time soon.zepi - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
High-PPI desktop monitors are still hard to come by. Where is DP1.3?Should I just get some 24" 4K display as a stepping stone while waiting for the "perfect" 10bit HDR ~200ppi monitors?
Chaotic42 - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
I've got three of the 34" 3440x1440 LGs and I love the form factor, but we need some higher pixel densities.xthetenth - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
A screen that size pretty much needs to be curved. I've used a flat 34 and a curved 34, and the edges of the flat one were very obviously angled away from me in a way that was distracting (not color shift but just distortion and some luminance shift in the corners).Ultrawide is basically the best monitor solution for productivity and in my opinion a very strong option for gaming, hopefully a widened 4K happens so there's a 21:9 option for everyone. For those curious, I've used 2 27" 1440s and rate a 34" 1440 ultrawide as being similarly good for productivity and more pleasant to use, so you can imagine my opinion about this one.
Impulses - Monday, September 5, 2016 - link
Some productivity... I imagine the curve wrecks havok for photo work, graphic design, CAD, etc.seerak - Tuesday, September 6, 2016 - link
I work in visual FX and graphics. It doesn't, at least for me.I imagine you're thinking of straight lines needing to be straight, and there might be situations there that comes up, but not for me so far. The main benefit of the curve on my 40' Samsung TV "monitor" is that I can sit closer before the corners become useless.
joos2000 - Wednesday, September 7, 2016 - link
I can't speak for photo work or graphic design, but for CAD work the curved screen improves the situation, since the delta between your eye and the screen remains the same. On a flat screen, the distance between your eye and the screen increases the further away from the centre you look, which creates an artificial perspective (most CAD work is done in parallel rendering mode and not perspective). This isn't a huge issue since your brain typically realises the abberation and compensates for it when working on a flat screen, but working on a curved screen removes the effect all together.Arbie - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
FYI the phrase is "wreaks havoc".bill44 - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
UltaHD?HDR, WCG, 10bit springs to mind.
This has non of the above.
ImSpartacus - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
But dem pixels tho.Larger ultrawides are a welcome sight. Can't wait until we get cheaper 34" 3440x1440 options.
szalkerous - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
WHY LG, WHY NO G-SYNC?! T_TThis monitor is perfect except for that one glaring flaw. Add the $200 and put G-Sync on it, and tell me where to send my money.
saratoga4 - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
I think LG is mostly (all?) Freesync, probably because they market more towards Pro users than hardcore gamers.AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, September 3, 2016 - link
Adaptive-Sync: VESAG-Sync: proprietary crap
szalkerous, complain to nvidia.
Hxx - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
I can already see a G Sync 100 Hz monitor in the making with this panel ... can't wait :))invinciblegod - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
What I really want is some sort of IR receiver or remote control so I can control the monitor when I'm laying back.garrek99 - Monday, September 5, 2016 - link
Piece of cake to set that up on the PC. Why would you want it on the monitor itself? (Charge inputs perhaps?)invinciblegod - Tuesday, September 6, 2016 - link
That and to turn it off if I fall asleep and wake up in the middle of the night.Ikefu - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
I've had an LG 3440x1440 21:9 monitor for a year and a half now and love it to death. I do wish it was curved though as the edges start to have a severe angle compared to the curve. I really like that this new one is exactly 2x 1080p monitors wide but with lots of extra vertical resolution.sonofgodfrey - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
If I figured it correctly, the display area on this monitor is about 15.5" inches high, and about 34" inches wide. For comparison, a 4:3 display of this height would be about 26" diagonal, or about the same as the old 27" tube TVs.madwolfa - Friday, September 2, 2016 - link
Please stop this curved nonsense. Nobody needs it.TesseractOrion - Saturday, September 3, 2016 - link
That told 'em madwolfa! Guess they'll now stop making these things, phew!Dukenukem117 - Saturday, September 3, 2016 - link
My goodness! For a while there, I was entranced by the monitor's seductive curves and unparalleled viewing experience, which even tops my current 34". Thank you for breaking that spell! Now I can go back to hating everything I can't afford, and being free from the yoke of the curvature-industrial-complex. A million blessings on you!A pox on thee foul monitor! Go back to the shadows and don't return until yee are split in half! Long live the glorious Four-to-Three!
AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, September 3, 2016 - link
madwolfa, you don't want the screen facing you?garrek99 - Monday, September 5, 2016 - link
Lol.Try it before you knock on it. I've been using one for a year and wish it actually curved more. I've got an lg 34uc97 and believe the curvature is rated at 2800 or 3000.
seerak - Tuesday, September 6, 2016 - link
Hell, we don't even need flat screens. Bring back the CRT fishbowl!scanex - Sunday, September 4, 2016 - link
Since when did 3840x1600 become 21:9! But now I guess I am asking to much...ajhix36 - Sunday, September 4, 2016 - link
Shouldn't this monitor be called 12:5 not 21:9?andrewaggb - Tuesday, September 6, 2016 - link
Well it's more expensive than I'd like, but I'd love to have one. it's the resolution I've been waiting for, exactly 2x 1920 wide. Seems like a good replacement for 2 screens plus you gain some verticale resolution.Gradius2 - Tuesday, October 18, 2016 - link
They are shipped in 10/26, however it should be $1399. Not $1499.dog299 - Sunday, November 6, 2016 - link
I have been using this for a wkend and it is amazing.https://youtu.be/o8SmpyXAxJI