21:9 100hz VS 4k 60hz?

foster grant · 24 Apr 2017 at 10:00

Doug2507 said:
I went with x34a. I'm now playing rma lottery with Acer.

Thats not good man

, I got mine B-Grade for £500 and no issues at all.....not sure I would have paid £1000 for it though.

Doug2507 · 24 Apr 2017 at 13:37

Wouldn't hold 75hz oc without dropping signal which is the lowest oc it'll do. Not acceptable for me. Also had significant bleed on lower left but I could have put up with that. Unfortunately outside 28 days, would've taken a refund and got my xb271hu back out but only option is to rma now. Tempted just to sell the replacement at a loss and wait for 4k 60gz OLED with gsync or at least a 100hz 4k IPS.

Quite tempted by the Dell OLED but only if vsync will be enough to stop tearing. Sli 1080ti so minimum frames shouldn't be an issue.

Unfortunately we've now got the gpu grunt to a certain extent but not the screens to support it. It's either crap quality or good quality with features (sync) missing. Wish one manufacturer would wake up and make something best of both worlds.

ggidd · 26 Apr 2017 at 14:54

foster grant said:
Thats not good man , I got mine B-Grade for £500 and no issues at all.....not sure I would have paid £1000 for it though.

Managed to pick a B-Grade X34A up last night for £500 too. Fingers crossed for a good panel

gasolin · 29 Jan 2018 at 11:28

Legend said:
For me, that's an easy one owning an X34, and while I appreciate the extra pixels and sharpness you get with 4K, I wouldn't want to lose the immersion of 21:9. The difference in width is nearly 20cm between the 32" 16:9 and 34" 21:9, so that's quite significant. Of course, it all depends what you value the most... for some people that sharpness is the most important factor. Only you can answer that.

Personally, I would want at least 40" before I jumped to 4K... and to be honest, even though the 1080Ti is a stonking card, 4K still demands a lot from it. At 3440x1440 though, you're going to get much more longevity out of it.

Have to respond to you since your so wrong, theres only a difference of 11-12 cm or 4.64" in width, not 20 cm, 8" and a 32" 16:9 is bigger than a 34" 21:9 monitor in total area
https://www.asus.com/uk/Product-Compare/?products=5c59dxjXrRn9Co0w,Agn7FP8fAkHeOOOE&b=0
https://www.asus.com/uk/Product-Compare/?products=5c59dxjXrRn9Co0w,Agn7FP8fAkHeOOOE&b=0

32" is bigger than 34" 437.55 inches² vs 418.55 inches²
http://www.displaywars.com/32-inch-16x9-vs-34-inch-21x9

Legend · 29 Jan 2018 at 13:01

gasolin said:
Have to respond to you since your so wrong, theres only a difference of 11-12 cm or 4.64" in width, not 20 cm, 8" and a 32" 16:9 is bigger than a 34" 21:9 monitor in total area
https://www.asus.com/uk/Product-Compare/?products=5c59dxjXrRn9Co0w,Agn7FP8fAkHeOOOE&b=0

32" is bigger than 34" 437.55 inches² vs 418.55 inches²
http://www.displaywars.com/32-inch-16x9-vs-34-inch-21x9

You're right, not sure how I got that wrong, I must have been half asleep... it is just over 11cm. Still, that's not insignificant. Lopping that amount off my X34 would definitely be noticeable.

nalla · 30 Jan 2018 at 16:46

well i have both a 4k 40" and a predator x34a, for games the 21:9 is better, with the exception of elite dangerous then the 40" 4k is more immersive.