Love my Ultrawide but I want a 16:9 144hz hdr display that is at least 32 inches. 21:9 brakes immersion during cutscenes but is more immersive during gameplay. What happened to BFD and the ultrawide 200hz hdr gsync displays?
I'll add to that viewpoint. Widescreens are very immersive for any first person or just behind first person camera views which take in landscape or whole "scenes" (flight sims are a good example). Isometric views, like the Diablo series for example, don't benefit as much from the wide taken as a whole. So some of the "it's great" "it's horrible" concept depends quite a bit on what genres you gravitate to for games and how much you value having a wider workspace for productivity. For some people every creep up in vertical space has been a huge win and they aren't fans as much of wider. So it will vary. But just keep in mind that what you like has a lot to do with what you happen to do with a PC.
VR is the way to go for flight sims and driving. No monitor(s) can compare to the immersion from VR. Monitors have higher resolution but it is painful to go back to them after VR.
You can always run an ultra-wide resolution letterboxed (black bars on top and bottom) on a 55" 4K 120Hz display. Not only is it cheaper than a "real" ultrawide, but you don't have to sacrifice vertical screen space for when you need/want it, just run a 16:9 resolution whenever you want.
According to TFTCentral this monitor will use LG's new LM375QW2 panel, which promises a 1ms G2G response time. Since it uses nVidia's G-SYNC module it is also expected to have very low input lag.
I have no idea if those promises will be kept, but this will be an incredible monitor if it does.
IPS with 1 ms? I think not. All I can find of that panel is that its 5 ms and has been promised for almost a year. In any case, I wasnt talking about PC monitors, I was replying to this guy claiming to just use a TV.
I've been reading for well over a year that LG and AUO have invested heavily in reducing response times. It's one of their main R&D efforts. The fruits of those efforts have long been expected to hit the market in 2019 or 2020. I can't vouch for any of it, but I'd tend to believe what TFTCentral publishes:
As shown by the huge quantity of dual and triple (or more) monitor setups used by businesses and homes worldwide, there is quite a bit more demand for wider setups rather than taller. Taller is not unneeded, don't get me wrong. And gradually we are seeing taller setups. I think the gravity to wider is part of 2 things. It's pretty easy to take any current size and simple cut the panel 50% or 100% wider from the current size (think of it as a long roll of glass). And also they are trying to feed the highest potential demand first, with more specialty displays coming after they have fed the higher demand sizes. The larger screens are coming but the demand for them on desktops is not as big, that's all. And remember that making larger screens costs more to make backlights, so they are both lower demand and have higher quality control and manufacturing/engineering costs.
Only compared to 4k monitors in case of the 38" one or 4k and old school 30" 1600p ones compared to the 49" one. There are a lot worse ultrawide monitors out there.
Whether you lose or gain space depends on what you compare it to. For the 49" monitor, you lose vertical space compared to a 55" 5k monitor, but you gain horizontal space compared to a 27" 1440p monitor. I don't know about you, but I personally see a whole lot more 27" 1440p monitors than 55" 5k monitors, so I think it's fair to call it an increase in horizontal space, instead of a decrease in vertical space.
1) Why is it that the 38" one can have a vertical resolution of 1600, while the 49" one must regress to 1440?
2) There is not nearly enough of a curve on the 49" monitor. The eye strain when repeatedly moving one's gaze between the edges of the monitor and its center, will be epic.
The 38" monitor is 21:9 whereas the 49" is 32:9, which is just 16:9 and 16:9 or two 24" monitors next to each other at a resolution of 2560x1440 each. That is why it is at a lower resolution vertically; it is much higher resolution horizontally.
When the center of the monitor is much closer to your eye than the edges of the monitor, moving your gaze across the monitor will force your eyes to keep refocusing. This constant bending/unbending of your eye's lens will wear out the respective muscles in your eye, in other words causing excessive eye strain. Avoiding this is the main rationale for curving the monitor around you, so that its surface maintains a more-nearly constant distance from your eyes no matter which part of the screen surface you happen to be looking at.
Actually unfocusing and refocusing is good for your eye. Looking at one point and not refocusing leads to vision loss. However you are correct in that the work your eye does is fatiguing. But it is good for you. :)
I have been waiting a long time for something like the 38GL950G. I just hope someone makes it with Gsync HDR not the old DP 1.2 based Gsync. It'd be a shame to make such a capable panel, such a capable backlight and then fall short. BUT, Nvidia needs to get smart and bring the Gsync HDR pricing to reasonable levels before VRR takes over and the cat gets away from them (Intel and AMD both moving in this direction). And they need to understand that FALD is pricey enough that not all Gsync HDR screens need it. Also they should update Gsync HDR to include USB C connectors with DP 1.4, because, well they have it on all their 2xxx series cards so they already know it just makes sense. For me, if this panel falls to DP 1.2 (which can't carry 10 bit color at this resolution I don't believe) then it's time to still wait. Someone will do it right. Just takes time. And the panel will be available to all. I do like the bias lighting. That's a good idea. HDMI 2.0 is good. 2.1 would be better, but at least it's not 1.4. The 450 brightness is also just fine for something that is 2 feet from your eyes. 1000 nits isn't something I care to witness from that distance without sunglasses :p All in all I think these will be great monitors. Polarizing filters to limit IPS glow should make a comeback. I can't imagine they are all that expensive and it's the #1 thing people comment about. Backlight uniformity also needs to be pretty carefully controlled. We'll see how this does in the market. I think people will like them and we'll have a hard time finding them at retail at first just due to demand.
While Anandtech claims the 38GL950G will be a non-HDR DP1.2 monitor, TFTCentral claims the opposite, namely that it will come with a DisplayHDR 600 certification and support DP1.4. I suspect TFTCentral is correct.
I also suspect the monitor will be insanely expensive due to nVidia's overpriced G-SYNC HDR module.
For the gaming & pro monitor, why Displayport 1.2 instead of 1.4? Why not use HDMI 2.1 like your 2019 TVs? Why use USB Type-A instead of USB-C and/or Thunderbolt 3?
For something someone would buy to use without thinking about updating for ~4-5 years, it seems a bit dated the specs.
Does DisplayPort 1.2 have the bandwidth for HDR @ 3840x1600? I have the 38WK95C-W, and it's a pretty pricey piece of kit. But, you can't have both FreeSync support (only via DisplayPort) and HDR (only via HDMI) with it. I'm considering another monitor for my workstation, and may consider the 38GL950G, but for what LG is most likely going to charge for this, it better be able to support HDR on the DisplayPort input.
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
32 Comments
Back to Article
SL4KR - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
Lots have been waiting for this monitor. Hopefully it's out before Q'4 2019.godrilla - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
Love my Ultrawide but I want a 16:9 144hz hdr display that is at least 32 inches. 21:9 brakes immersion during cutscenes but is more immersive during gameplay.What happened to BFD and the ultrawide 200hz hdr gsync displays?
Lolimaster - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
Don't really get this ultrawides at such a small sizes, would be better to get a 4k 55" monitor @120Hz.LancerVI - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
Try an ultrawide with a flight sim or driving and then you'll understand immediately.....and to some extent, RTS and strategy games.
FXi - Sunday, December 23, 2018 - link
I'll add to that viewpoint. Widescreens are very immersive for any first person or just behind first person camera views which take in landscape or whole "scenes" (flight sims are a good example). Isometric views, like the Diablo series for example, don't benefit as much from the wide taken as a whole. So some of the "it's great" "it's horrible" concept depends quite a bit on what genres you gravitate to for games and how much you value having a wider workspace for productivity. For some people every creep up in vertical space has been a huge win and they aren't fans as much of wider. So it will vary. But just keep in mind that what you like has a lot to do with what you happen to do with a PC.Steven D - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
VR is the way to go for flight sims and driving. No monitor(s) can compare to the immersion from VR. Monitors have higher resolution but it is painful to go back to them after VR.nathanddrews - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
You can always run an ultra-wide resolution letterboxed (black bars on top and bottom) on a 55" 4K 120Hz display. Not only is it cheaper than a "real" ultrawide, but you don't have to sacrifice vertical screen space for when you need/want it, just run a 16:9 resolution whenever you want.https://imgur.com/GIWzP6B
p1esk - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
Are there any 4k 120Hz monitors of that size other than BFGD?xTRICKYxx - Sunday, December 23, 2018 - link
27" ones.Beaver M. - Tuesday, December 25, 2018 - link
Input lag? Response time?Yeah right.
No thanks.
a5cent - Tuesday, January 1, 2019 - link
According to TFTCentral this monitor will use LG's new LM375QW2 panel, which promises a 1ms G2G response time. Since it uses nVidia's G-SYNC module it is also expected to have very low input lag.I have no idea if those promises will be kept, but this will be an incredible monitor if it does.
Beaver M. - Tuesday, January 1, 2019 - link
IPS with 1 ms? I think not. All I can find of that panel is that its 5 ms and has been promised for almost a year.In any case, I wasnt talking about PC monitors, I was replying to this guy claiming to just use a TV.
a5cent - Wednesday, January 2, 2019 - link
I've been reading for well over a year that LG and AUO have invested heavily in reducing response times. It's one of their main R&D efforts. The fruits of those efforts have long been expected to hit the market in 2019 or 2020. I can't vouch for any of it, but I'd tend to believe what TFTCentral publishes:http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/monitor_panel...
See the entry for the LM375QW2 panel. It clearly states 1ms. That number has been repeated in TFTCentral's news articles many times at this point.
As for TV's, yes, I agree.
FXi - Sunday, December 23, 2018 - link
As shown by the huge quantity of dual and triple (or more) monitor setups used by businesses and homes worldwide, there is quite a bit more demand for wider setups rather than taller. Taller is not unneeded, don't get me wrong. And gradually we are seeing taller setups. I think the gravity to wider is part of 2 things. It's pretty easy to take any current size and simple cut the panel 50% or 100% wider from the current size (think of it as a long roll of glass). And also they are trying to feed the highest potential demand first, with more specialty displays coming after they have fed the higher demand sizes. The larger screens are coming but the demand for them on desktops is not as big, that's all. And remember that making larger screens costs more to make backlights, so they are both lower demand and have higher quality control and manufacturing/engineering costs.Lolimaster - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
For gimmick you lose a ton of vertical space.Death666Angel - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
Only compared to 4k monitors in case of the 38" one or 4k and old school 30" 1600p ones compared to the 49" one. There are a lot worse ultrawide monitors out there.Inteli - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
Whether you lose or gain space depends on what you compare it to. For the 49" monitor, you lose vertical space compared to a 55" 5k monitor, but you gain horizontal space compared to a 27" 1440p monitor. I don't know about you, but I personally see a whole lot more 27" 1440p monitors than 55" 5k monitors, so I think it's fair to call it an increase in horizontal space, instead of a decrease in vertical space.p1esk - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
If you care about vertical space you should get this one: https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-34WK95U-W-ultraw...boeush - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
1) Why is it that the 38" one can have a vertical resolution of 1600, while the 49" one must regress to 1440?2) There is not nearly enough of a curve on the 49" monitor. The eye strain when repeatedly moving one's gaze between the edges of the monitor and its center, will be epic.
quiksilvr - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
The 38" monitor is 21:9 whereas the 49" is 32:9, which is just 16:9 and 16:9 or two 24" monitors next to each other at a resolution of 2560x1440 each. That is why it is at a lower resolution vertically; it is much higher resolution horizontally.TheWereCat - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
The 38" is 21:10 3840x160021:9 would be 3840x1440
Diji1 - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
Sorry, you seem to be under the impression that moving your eyes will strain them.nevcairiel - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
If you ever used a badly setup screen setup, you would know that it actually does.boeush - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
When the center of the monitor is much closer to your eye than the edges of the monitor, moving your gaze across the monitor will force your eyes to keep refocusing. This constant bending/unbending of your eye's lens will wear out the respective muscles in your eye, in other words causing excessive eye strain. Avoiding this is the main rationale for curving the monitor around you, so that its surface maintains a more-nearly constant distance from your eyes no matter which part of the screen surface you happen to be looking at.FXi - Sunday, December 23, 2018 - link
Actually unfocusing and refocusing is good for your eye. Looking at one point and not refocusing leads to vision loss. However you are correct in that the work your eye does is fatiguing. But it is good for you. :)darkchazz - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
And here I am, waiting for updated 16:9 1440p 144hz IPS panels that will replace AUOs poor QC AHVA panel...prophet001 - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
lolFXi - Sunday, December 23, 2018 - link
I have been waiting a long time for something like the 38GL950G. I just hope someone makes it with Gsync HDR not the old DP 1.2 based Gsync. It'd be a shame to make such a capable panel, such a capable backlight and then fall short. BUT, Nvidia needs to get smart and bring the Gsync HDR pricing to reasonable levels before VRR takes over and the cat gets away from them (Intel and AMD both moving in this direction). And they need to understand that FALD is pricey enough that not all Gsync HDR screens need it. Also they should update Gsync HDR to include USB C connectors with DP 1.4, because, well they have it on all their 2xxx series cards so they already know it just makes sense. For me, if this panel falls to DP 1.2 (which can't carry 10 bit color at this resolution I don't believe) then it's time to still wait. Someone will do it right. Just takes time. And the panel will be available to all.I do like the bias lighting. That's a good idea. HDMI 2.0 is good. 2.1 would be better, but at least it's not 1.4. The 450 brightness is also just fine for something that is 2 feet from your eyes. 1000 nits isn't something I care to witness from that distance without sunglasses :p
All in all I think these will be great monitors. Polarizing filters to limit IPS glow should make a comeback. I can't imagine they are all that expensive and it's the #1 thing people comment about. Backlight uniformity also needs to be pretty carefully controlled. We'll see how this does in the market. I think people will like them and we'll have a hard time finding them at retail at first just due to demand.
a5cent - Tuesday, January 1, 2019 - link
While Anandtech claims the 38GL950G will be a non-HDR DP1.2 monitor, TFTCentral claims the opposite, namely that it will come with a DisplayHDR 600 certification and support DP1.4. I suspect TFTCentral is correct.I also suspect the monitor will be insanely expensive due to nVidia's overpriced G-SYNC HDR module.
PloniAlmoni - Monday, December 31, 2018 - link
Hmm... those are some interesting New Year's Resolutions LG has. (No pun intended.)lilkwarrior - Friday, January 4, 2019 - link
The I/O decisions in 2019 make no sense.For the gaming & pro monitor, why Displayport 1.2 instead of 1.4?
Why not use HDMI 2.1 like your 2019 TVs?
Why use USB Type-A instead of USB-C and/or Thunderbolt 3?
For something someone would buy to use without thinking about updating for ~4-5 years, it seems a bit dated the specs.
S4Lee - Friday, March 15, 2019 - link
Does DisplayPort 1.2 have the bandwidth for HDR @ 3840x1600? I have the 38WK95C-W, and it's a pretty pricey piece of kit. But, you can't have both FreeSync support (only via DisplayPort) and HDR (only via HDMI) with it. I'm considering another monitor for my workstation, and may consider the 38GL950G, but for what LG is most likely going to charge for this, it better be able to support HDR on the DisplayPort input.