4K or Ultrawide? For 32"

Pulsedriver

Pulsedriver

Pulsedriver

Soldato
Joined
19 Dec 2003
Posts
3,086
Location
UK
Hey folks, I 'almost' ordered the Samsung LU32J590UQUXEN earlier today for £289, as I was attracted to the large resolution it offers, I currently use a dual monitor setup of 2 x DELL U2412M's and wanted a single widescreen instead.

I will be doing barely any gaming in the near future as I use my PC purely for Music Production & some video editing.

One of the things that I was concerned about with the Samsung above, is the 4K Resolution and everything being 'too small' weird considering I wanted that 3840x2160 res, but I am thinking is it better to opt for a 21:9 34" Ultra Wide monitor instead, a 3440 x 1440 resolution being a sweeter-spot as such?

Any advice is welcome, my graphics card is a GTX 770, so you can see I am not really a huge gamer on the PC :D
 
For productivity, 3440x1440 isn't the sweet spot (although it's perfectly fine). For gaming it is (with a decent enough GPU, which you don't have anyway), but for productivity 4K wins hands down.

I'm at 32" 4K myself, having come from the X34 (3440x1440) and no way would I go back now.

I would not go with 27" at 4K though, that is too small IMO. 32" is just about right, 43" 4K would be even better (if you have the space). That would my next upgrade, or perhaps 38" UW (3840x1600). I couldn't go back to 3440x1440 now, although I'd not hesitate to recommend it for gaming.
 
I would say for what you're doing that's a fine choice. It's not a gaming monitor, but you don't have the GPU for that anyway (even at 3440x1440, or even 16:9 1440p for that matter), so with productivity as your sole focus, I wouldn't hesitate with 32" 4K over 34" UW.

The only thing I would question is whether colour accuracy is a concern for you? That Samsung monitor has a VA panel (well, it's MVA actually, but same thing) so it won't be the most accurate (and viewing angles won't be great either), with IPS being better in both regards. The Samsung is by no means the worst example of VA when it comes to colour accuracy though. I did try this monitor briefly before I settled on my XB321HK and it looked decent, but I noticed it was definitely more vibrant than I was used to, coming from an IPS screen before that. This is a typical characteristic of VA though... the colours 'pop', but at the expense of accuracy.

Your Dell's are e-IPS... an older form of IPS. Not quite sure how these compare to modern IPS, but I'd suspect not bad given how slow monitor panel tech develops.

If you could stretch to it and would prefer IPS, there is the Acer ET430K (it is probably cheaper elsewhere), and that would definitely resolve any issues you might have about 32" 4K being too small. Although I don't think you'd struggle with that tbh.

:)
 
Last edited:
Thanks mate, just a bit of an update, I ordered the Samsung 32" 4K, but decided to order (random I know) an RTX 2060 graphics card as well, as the 770 I had was old, and whilst I don't have immediate gaming plans, if a decent RTS was to come out....

Anyhow, the Samsung, I am unsure on, it's very 'saturated' a bit like Samsung phones are, im sure I can adjust that and brightness (it seems very bright compared to the DELL's) but another spanner in the works, is it looks a bit small on the desk setup I have, I am now wondering whether to go back to the idea of a 34" UW The resolution of 4K seems good enough in windows, although not groundbreaking real estate in some of the programs I use, hmmm...
 
Hmm, also is there any reason why the draw seems 'slow' basically an example if you left click and hold it down to highlight all your icons on the desktop it kinda stutters midway through almost like a redraw issue.

In the Nvidia display options there is true 4k option but 30hz only.

Underneath there is a section saying "pc native" with 3840x2160 60hz that's what I have selected.

If I select true 4k it's too juddery just moving the mouse!
 
Pulsedriver said:
Hmm, also is there any reason why the draw seems 'slow' basically an example if you left click and hold it down to highlight all your icons on the desktop it kinda stutters midway through almost like a redraw issue.

In the Nvidia display options there is true 4k option but 30hz only.

Underneath there is a section saying "pc native" with 3840x2160 60hz that's what I have selected.

If I select true 4k it's too juddery just moving the mouse!
Click to expand...

True 4K is 4096 x whatever. Ordinary 4k is UHD and 3840 x 2160.
 
Does your GPU have HDMI 2.0? If not, you will need Display Port for 60Hz. The 2060 will be fine though, it has both... just wasn't clear if you had that yet, or were still using your 770.

As to the size, you will find a 34" smaller... it is physically wider of course, and not as high, but less pixels both ways, and therefore you will definitely see a negative difference regards productivity. An ultrawide is fine in and of itself, and would be my preference over 4K for gaming, but for productivity there isn't any contest vs 4K. You've simply got more pixel real estate to work with, which is better all round, and a 34" would be noticeably worse in that regard. If you want more pixels, you'd have to look at the LG 34WK95U, but I'm guessing that's beyond your budget lol! Otherwise, the Acer 43" 4K I mentioned would give you a bigger screen, although of course the number of pixels is the same. Or, you can always have x2 (or even x3) 4K monitors together of course, but ideally you'd want thin bezel models for that.
 
Last edited:
Freshly installed the 2060 just in time for the new monitor lol!
Yeah I see what you mean about losing the screen estate, now it has thrown another option in addition to yours above in that I am considering say 2 X 27" thin bezel 1440p screens ,could that be the sweet spot...?
 
Pulsedriver said:
Freshly installed the 2060 just in time for the new monitor lol!
Yeah I see what you mean about losing the screen estate, now it has thrown another option in addition to yours above in that I am considering say 2 X 27" thin bezel 1440p screens ,could that be the sweet spot...?
Click to expand...

Well, you'd get some nice pixel width with that option, but you'd still lose out on pixel height. Personally, I found that the biggest difference moving from my X34 Ultrawide to 4K. That's an extra 720 pixels (50% of a 1440p monitor!!), which is rather significant for productivity.
 
Legend is bang in imho. Ultrawide 34/35 inch 1440p gaming. Productivity 4k (32 inch 16.9). I'm lucky I have both (actually I have a 40 inch 4k unit 60htz and 1440p ultrawide 100htz ).
I'm not sure what'd be best for a single monitor set up though.
Spoil yourself whenever possible and if your limited in space terms I'd probably settle for a, ultrawide 1440p . Myself I don't actually run daul screens side by side, just have two different locations and gear to mess about with
 
Pulsedriver said:
He really has raised some good points to be fair! In a typical way I am now all of a sudden thinking of 2 x 27" 4K Monitors... Ahhh! lol
Click to expand...


It's not a bad way to go... although I found that size too small personally. 32" is just right for 4K at the normal viewing distance. You also need scaling up at 150% on 27", but that's not really an issue. If you are already finding the 32" you have appear 'small' for your desk set-up though, you might find 27", even x2 them, more so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom