Associate
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 2,325
- Location
- Droitwich, UK
The newer model was on offer for £650 recently, looks a very good piece of kit for that money.
Recommend me an OLED for gaming
- Thread starter Mr G
- Start date
What's the feeling between 32" UHD versus 34" UWQHD?
In some cases you can get otherwise identical monitors with that the only difference (examples of the concept, not in any way recommendations):
www.overclockers.co.uk
www.overclockers.co.uk
Which would people go for given that type of choice?
In some cases you can get otherwise identical monitors with that the only difference (examples of the concept, not in any way recommendations):
MSI 34" MPG 341CQPX QD-OLED 3440x1440 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Curved Gaming Monitor
Order MSI 34" MPG 341CQPX QD-OLED 3440x1440 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Curved Gaming Monitor now online and benefit from fast delivery.
www.overclockers.co.uk
MSI 32" MPG 321URX QD-OLED 3840x2160 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Gaming Monitor
Order MSI 32" MPG 321URX QD-OLED 3840x2160 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Gaming Monitor now online and benefit from fast delivery.
www.overclockers.co.uk
Which would people go for given that type of choice?
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 1,984
I've switched between ultrawides of 34, 39, 49 and 57" in the last two years and I always end up wanting to go back to 16:9 (much prefer ultrawides if the display is used for work, and multi tasking however) but if my main gaming titles are games that will suffer from fish lens effect then a 16:9 is the choice every time.What's the feeling between 32" UHD versus 34" UWQHD?
In some cases you can get otherwise identical monitors with that the only difference (examples of the concept, not in any way recommendations):
MSI 34" MPG 341CQPX QD-OLED 3440x1440 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Curved Gaming Monitor
Order MSI 34" MPG 341CQPX QD-OLED 3440x1440 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Curved Gaming Monitor now online and benefit from fast delivery.
MSI 32" MPG 321URX QD-OLED 3840x2160 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Gaming Monitor
Order MSI 32" MPG 321URX QD-OLED 3840x2160 240Hz 0.03ms A-Sync Gaming Monitor now online and benefit from fast delivery.
Which would people go for given that type of choice?
Especially if they're the same price, the 32" is more future proofed also and 4K hits better if you have the GPU to drive it. Having said that if you lean into racing games/sports games more - UW is better for those games.
Just speaking from my own experience (and I also haven't been happy with every 16:9 display either, but for other reasons - HDR brightness, 4/8/16 hour forced pixel refresh timers and so on)
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 2,325
- Location
- Droitwich, UK
I went 34" as it's less demanding on the GPU and to me feels very immersive due to the aspect ratio, but 4K has the benefit of extra pixel density, alongside a newer version of the QD-OLED panel with better text clarity.
If you can pop along to a store to compare the two then that could help you decide. If at the same price I'd say you're getting more for your money with the 32".
I changed to a 16/9 32" UHD at start of this year after using 34" & 35" UW for around 9 years and am really liking it.
16/9 is much better for media like youtube/Netflix and even for reading forums like this one etc
Last edited:
45 is far to big for the very close viewing distance of a monitor right in front of you, be needing to move your head all the time to look around the screen.
Same would go for a 42".
I find even the height of my 32" monitor is a little to high and i need to look up/down
Last edited:
I'd disagree, down to personal preference of course but I don't find I need to keep moving my head during a game and it lends itself to more immersive gaming experience.
On saying that though, I did find I needed to move the HUD more to the middle of the screen for the BF6 beta so I could see it better.