34" UltraWide decision

Poneros

Poneros

Poneros

Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Posts
6,484
leekeene said:
What's he input lag on the AOC. I'm torn between the AOC U3477pqu, benq BL3200PT and the lg 34um57

I believe the benq has an input lag of 23ms, the other 2 I can't find info on although I think the lg wins with free sync at 18 but can not confirm.

Would lime to know about the aoc
Click to expand...

I can tell you from experience the BenQ's input lag is not discernible in games. That being said, I'd definitely advise you to get Freesync.
 

thecremeegg

thecremeegg

thecremeegg

Soldato
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
8,151
Location
Surrey
Got the LG34UC97 yesterday:

image_zpschgrufjb.jpg


Waiting on a mini displayport cable to actually use the thing properly but at the moment I'm in love :D
 

Gimpymoo

Gimpymoo

Gimpymoo

Soldato
Joined
31 May 2005
Posts
15,622
Location
Nottingham
I was all set to get a 1440p 144hz with Freesync after an upgrade to a cheaper 1440p as an upgrade to a 1680x1050 display which was about 8 years old. The problem was, the lag was horrible and something I disliked.

HOWEVER, the 1440p, I loved. Made games really come to life at that resolution.

I now find myself looking at 21:9. I have dabbled in eyefinity in the past but find the "fish eye" distortion to be plain horrible.

I play Arma 3 so know the benefits of 21:9... choices choices...

I could only afford 2560x1080 though and surely to get the max benefit, it has to be 3440 x 1440 to offer increased compatibility? (16:9 games with no scaling).
 
Last edited:

wellibob

wellibob

wellibob

Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Mar 2006
Posts
4,051
I saw the 1080p monitor's 21.9. Gaming it's OK just, but desktop is just not right when your close up at all. Imho it needs to be 1440p and a 34 inch screen.
 

easyrider

easyrider

easyrider

Caporegime
Joined
24 Dec 2005
Posts
40,065
Location
Autonomy
I'm tempted to get the AOC now...it seems reasonable for the cost...

I do miss the dell u34 but that screen ain't worth 650 quid IMO.

I've got a 32 inch Benq VA ...but it's to big for me...although the blacks are black...

So think I'll return it and get the AOC
 

Purgatory

Purgatory

Purgatory

Soldato
Joined
7 Dec 2010
Posts
8,241
Location
Leeds
easyrider said:
I'm tempted to get the AOC now...it seems reasonable for the cost...

I do miss the dell u34 but that screen ain't worth 650 quid IMO.

I've got a 32 inch Benq VA ...but it's to big for me...although the blacks are black...

So think I'll return it and get the AOC
Click to expand...



You won't be disappointed with the AOC mate, grab it while they are still selling for £500, they are starting to creep up in price again and selling out in a lot of places. Only difference you will notice coming from a VA is the blacks are not as black and that is also not a bad thing because VA actually crush the shadow detail due to their blacks. The benefits of the IPS (a lot better colours) win over the VA and then the 21:9 just kills 16:9.

I have one and love it.
 

wellibob

wellibob

wellibob

Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Mar 2006
Posts
4,051
I've moved from a 32" VA 1440p to the AOC. Yes it's different regarding the blacks, quite different but the colours really do pop on the IPS. It'll take some time to adjust to the difference but 21.9 is really ahead of its time and looks fabulous. Just make sure you get a good unit (no blb and very modest ips glow). What I'm going to do with my 32" VA 1440p panel I don't know. A nice dilemma.
 
Last edited:

Haggisman

Haggisman

Haggisman

Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2004
Posts
18,325
Location
Birmingham
Gimpymoo said:
I was all set to get a 1440p 144hz with Freesync after an upgrade to a cheaper 1440p as an upgrade to a 1680x1050 display which was about 8 years old. The problem was, the lag was horrible and something I disliked.

HOWEVER, the 1440p, I loved. Made games really come to life at that resolution.

I now find myself looking at 21:9. I have dabbled in eyefinity in the past but find the "fish eye" distortion to be plain horrible.

I play Arma 3 so know the benefits of 21:9... choices choices...

I could only afford 2560x1080 though and surely to get the max benefit, it has to be 3440 x 1440 to offer increased compatibility? (16:9 games with no scaling).
Click to expand...

A 16:9 with no scaling will run at 1920x1080 in a 1080p 21:9 - so in that respect it would probably be a bit of a backwards step :(
 

wellibob

wellibob

wellibob

Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Mar 2006
Posts
4,051
Bad photography ;-p . RGB Led Strips from the rainforest (with remote). 5m strip (cut to length) and as many colours as you want, Inc fade, flash, strobe etc etc).
 
Last edited:

Haggisman

Haggisman

Haggisman

Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2004
Posts
18,325
Location
Birmingham
Gimpymoo said:
A 21:9 1080 would be a backwards step?
Click to expand...

If you're playing games @ 16:9 on a 2560x1080 monitor, they'll run at 1920x1080 (with black bars either side - assuming the monitor supports 1:1 scaling).

I read your post as you already have a cheap 1440p monitor? In which case you'd effectively be going from 1440p to 1080p, so IMO a downgrade.

It would also depend on the size of your current 1440p and of the 21:9 you were looking at though:

25" 21:9 = 20" 16:9 (~110 PPI @ 1080p / ~147 PPI @ 1440p)
29" 21:9 = 23" 16:9 (~96 PPI @ 1080p / ~128 PPI @ 1440p)
34" 21:9 = 27" 16:9 (~82 PPI @ 1080p / ~109 PPI @ 1440p)

So a 25" 21:9 (the same height as a 20" 16:9) @ 2560x1080 will have roughly the same PPI as a 27" 2560x1440. If your current 1440p monitor is smaller than 27" and/or you want a 2560x1080 monitor bigger than 25", then it will have a lower PPI meaning the picture will be less sharp.
 

wellibob

wellibob

wellibob

Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Mar 2006
Posts
4,051
I'm still trying to adjust to the extra width for Desktop use. There is sooooo much space . Games... LOVE IT. I'm not the type of person who watches any movies at all on my pc monitor but obviously they look good (21.9 movies obviously).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom