***21.9 Ultrawide Thread***

[Nexus18]

Nope haven't used one, no need to either as that is what reviews are for

PCmonitors.info and TFTcentral mentioned about the motion issues as well as some users on reddit, motion clarity is a very personal thing, some are sensitive to it where as others aren't.

The z35 and the aoc equivalent certainly isn't bad "overall" for motion clarity but there are a few problematic areas with certain transitions, I should have probably explained that better in my previous post.

And yup 2560x1080 @ 35" for gaming will be fine in terms clarity/sharpness especially if you are sitting pretty far back, it is just text stuff where it will be rather unpleasant. I would also take 2560x1080 over 3440x1440 for gaming, give me higher graphic settings with higher FPS over lower FPS & lower graphic settings @ 1440P

 

[montymint]

I hear you about waiting, when I decide I'm going to get something I have to have it now - has cost me considerably over the years but hey, you are you are right? Anyways, I ran the X34 freesync with a 390X for a couple of weeks (tried 390x crossfire but turned out to be a disaster so replaced them with a Fury X) and it coped pretty well with the resolution. Expect averages of around 45 - 50 FPS with everything maxed in the newest titles which, with freesync, is silky smooth. For Rise of the Tomb Raider I had to knock down the anti-ailsing and a few other little tweaks here and there to hit 40FPS.

thanks for the feedback on the card / monitor combo!

 

[altus]

Nope haven't used one, no need to either as that is what reviews are for

PCmonitors.info and TFTcentral mentioned about the motion issues as well as some users on reddit, motion clarity is a very personal thing, some are sensitive to it where as others aren't.

The z35 and the aoc equivalent certainly isn't bad "overall" for motion clarity but there are a few problematic areas with certain transitions, I should have probably explained that better in my previous post.

And yup 2560x1080 @ 35" for gaming will be fine in terms clarity/sharpness especially if you are sitting pretty far back, it is just text stuff where it will be rather unpleasant. I would also take 2560x1080 over 3440x1440 for gaming, give me higher graphic settings with higher FPS over lower FPS & lower graphic settings @ 1440P

Fair enough, I had seen both the PCmonitors.info and TFTcentral reviews before trying the Z35 and decided it was still worth a punt for gaming.
I know there is a problem with certain transitions but they arnt jumping out at me, like say IPS glow would.
Either way I am very happy with 21:9, I could even go for a stronger curve than the Z35`s (2000R) tbh.

 

[montymint]

God dman you Nvidia. Throwing a spanner in my plans with your cheapy 1070's!

It'd be stupid not to get one over the 390x at the price point.

Changes how i approach the panel choice should I want g / freesync

 

[yeungster]

This is a great thread and the video posted by the OP has really sealed it for me.
I'll be looking for a 3440 x 1440 SW display and waiting out to see whether there will be a Ti version of the 1080 in the near future

 

[BananaDunka]

Standard 1080 will max out everything out today on 3440x1440 easily. A single 980 can max most games with some FSAA for starters.

 

[montymint]

Going to get a none-gsync and a 1070/1080. Frame rates tanking in games I want to play won;t be an issue by the sounds of things. I've also never experienced 100fps + so again, I don't think I'll care.

I simply refuse to spend 1000 on a monitor

 

[Nexus18]

Wait until polaris, it is "probably" unlikely that AMD will offer anything better than nvidia but their cards shouldn't be much slower than nvidia's i.e. within 5-10% and chances are they could be even cheaper, if anything, it could drop the prices of the 1070/1080 even further.... Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some stock issues with pascal and if so, etailers will take the **** with the pricing...

The 1080/1070 isn't quite as ground breaking as what nvidia's marketing would have people believe.

Standard 1080 will max out everything out today on 3440x1440 easily. A single 980 can max most games with some FSAA for starters.

Depends what FPS you are happy with though.

Most new AAA games on max settings are very demanding, even a heavily OC 980ti can't maintain a constant 50FPS for the majority of the time i.e. the division, fallout 4, the witcher 3 & rise of the tomb raider being the main performance hogs.

I believe people are estimating that the 1080 will be about 10-20% faster than an OC 980ti. Of course the 1080 could be a good overclocker too but we will have to wait and see....

 

[easyrider]

Standard 1080 will max out everything out today on 3440x1440 easily. A single 980 can max most games with some FSAA for starters.

How do you know ?

You don't

 

[JediFragger]

Standard 1080 will max out everything out today on 3440x1440 easily. A single 980 can max most games with some FSAA for starters.

You obviously have neither. Please make statements only based on personal experience, thanks.

 

[BananaDunka]

How do you know ?

You don't

You obviously have neither. Please make statements only based on personal experience, thanks.

Read what I said fully again.

I have a 980, it plays most games at 3440x1440 and ultra settings perfectly fine. A 1080 /is/ better than a single 980, nVidia even state it's faster than SLi 980s... So it would be safe to assume that a single 1080 is going to be able to max out any game out today at 3440x1440.

 

[easyrider]

Read what I said fully again.

I have a 980, it plays most games at 3440x1440 and ultra settings perfectly fine. A 1080 /is/ better than a single 980, nVidia even state it's faster than SLi 980s... So it would be safe to assume that a single 1080 is going to be able to max out any game out today at 3440x1440.

Assumption.

 

[BananaDunka]

Based on everything I've read so far from tech sites covering the 1080/1070 stuff. I'm pretty confident this will be the case.

 

[easyrider]

Based on everything I've read so far from tech sites covering the 1080/1070 stuff. I'm pretty confident this will be the case.

How can we take you seriously when you said...

"I have a 980 and it plays games on ultra setting at 2k perfectly fine.."

My 980ti won't play rise of the tomb raider perfectly fine so I have no idea how your 980 does...

 

[BananaDunka]

I've posted plenty of screenshots of rise of the tomb raider running at 50fps+ at 3440x1440. Believe it or not, I had zero problems running RoTR. It actually runs better than the previous one on my system.

 

[easyrider]

I've posted plenty of screenshots of rise of the tomb raider running at 50fps+ at 3440x1440. Believe it or not, I had zero problems running RoTR. It actually runs better than the previous one on my system.

50fps is pants...

 

[BananaDunka]

For a first person shooter, sure. But Tomb Raider isn't that.

 

[easyrider]

Playing any game below the 60hz refresh rate sucks unless you have Gsync.and a 100hz panel at 2k

 

[BananaDunka]

That's your opinion. I'm perfectly fine with 60Hz monitors until a 34" 21:9 OLED panel is out. Don't care about freesync/gsync.

 

[pooley]

Going to get a none-gsync and a 1070/1080. Frame rates tanking in games I want to play won;t be an issue by the sounds of things. I've also never experienced 100fps + so again, I don't think I'll care.

I simply refuse to spend 1000 on a monitor

what monitor(s) are looking at monty? im on the lookout for something that takes my fancy that don't cost a grand!