1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

is ultrawide really worth it?

Discussion in 'Monitors' started by skiersteve12345, Jul 22, 2018.

  1. Rroff

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 13, 2006

    Posts: 66,866

    21:9 is great and all but I could never adopt it as my main display (even with high Hz) - so I've gone best of both worlds with 21:9 IPS alongside 144Hz gaming G-Sync monitor.
     
  2. D3lirious

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 29, 2004

    Posts: 758

    OK, google human vision aspect ratio and get back to me :)
     
  3. Nexus18

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jun 4, 2009

    Posts: 23,310

    Well, technically our eyes can see far more than what we are unintentionally aware of.... It is called peripheral vision, in terms of focus, our eyes are probably better suited to the likes of 4:3 aspect ratio.... but we all know how **** it is looking at that or similar aspect ratios now.....

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  4. james_2k

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Aug 28, 2012

    Posts: 2,480

    sigh, ok dude. if you say so.
     
  5. CatPlaysGames

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 4, 2018

    Posts: 5

    This is why I'm going for the Alienware AW3418HW. 34" @ 1080p isn't great, but its fine for my view distance, and it's 166hz.
     
  6. D1craig

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Aug 28, 2014

    Posts: 1,619

    surely the extra view at the sides in FPS would be beneficial? even though you are looking at "more" you will see things approaching from further away. no?

    im looking to go UW aswell but the price of monitors that will be ok for me to upgrade to are alot more than i paid for my 27" monitor 4 years ago. basically to have a screen the same height as 27" you want a 34" UW screen.
     
  7. Las Vega

    Associate

    Joined: Apr 19, 2017

    Posts: 92

    As you said, you only have had the Ultrawide monitor for a couple of days. It takes at-least a few weeks to get used to 21:9

    And that's not true about competitive FPS. You will find that the majority of Pro Siege players use Ultrawides. And that is a very fast paced skill based FPS game.

    But to answer OP's question... Yes Ultrawide is really worth it. I am never going back... 34" ultrawide is the optimal size for normal desk use and IMO is better than having two 27" monitors side by side.
     
  8. MasterOC

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 29, 2014

    Posts: 1,470

    Location: Caithness , Wick

    for first person shooters , im far and away a better player with an ultrawide … im far more visually aware , for something like PUBG First person it gives me the ability to scout easily , notice movement and gives me a better depth of surroundings. ultra wide is worth it . 21:9 trumps 16:9 in every way from movies to gaming to productivity.
     
  9. Relentless81

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 18, 2010

    Posts: 10,119

    Hi,

    I currently have a 1440P 27 16:9 Freesync monitor with an AMD Fury Nitro

    I want higher FPS and eventually will lose my desk so will need to use the PC with a TV anyway so thinking of downgrading to 1080P now and selling my 1440p monitor.

    My question is, If I bought a 1080P widescreen will I get better FPS from my GPU than on a standard 1440p screen? If so what sizes do they go up in 1080p with Freesync can anyone recommend a good model?

    Thanks
     
  10. Dirk Diggler

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jan 6, 2013

    Posts: 13,220

    2560*1080 (21:9) = 2.76
    2560*1440 (16:9) = 3.6

    You will get more fps as there's less pixels to push.
     
  11. Stu

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Oct 19, 2002

    Posts: 2,060

    Location: Wirral

    I think we all need circular monitors to better replicate human FOV!
     
  12. Howling

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 14, 2008

    Posts: 1,967

    I know you said it in jest.. but I quite like the idea :D More of an oval, similar sort of dimensions to 21:9 screens - think that'd work to be honest ;)
     
  13. Stu

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Oct 19, 2002

    Posts: 2,060

    Location: Wirral

    I feel a kickstarter coming on!
     
  14. OpenToSuggestions

    Capodecina

    Joined: Aug 5, 2006

    Posts: 10,658

    Location: Derby

    I have a 3440x1440 34" ultrawide which results in 3k pixels.
    It is awesome.
     
  15. NZXT30

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Aug 3, 2010

    Posts: 2,014

    I do not understand the hype for ultrawides. Do they impress people that were stuck with tiny monitors for a long time? Why not get a 40" 4k monitor that will give you the same immersive width but also tons more vertical space?
     
  16. Legend

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 31, 2006

    Posts: 6,992

    Valid, but part of the problem here is that there are no 100Hz+ 40" monitors available with G-Sync/Freesync. Numerous ultrawides are available with those options. You'd probably find many people with an ultrawide would gladly switch to a 40" with those features.

    You can of course pick up a half decent 4K 40"+ TV for a less than half the price of an ultrawide, but you have to accept its limitations. Some people are fine with that, some people aren't.
     
  17. Stu

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Oct 19, 2002

    Posts: 2,060

    Location: Wirral

    Considering human FOV and typical games, and also considering a desktop setup (i.e. 2 foot viewing distance), I think a 40" TV is too big. A 40" TV is nearly 20 inches in height, compared to 13.4 inches high for a 34" UW monitor, which I think is probably outside your natural FOV and the central elements of game play will overly dominate your area of focus. Personally I think a 27 or 32 inch monitor is more appropriate for a desk setup, with a 34" UW being the same screen height as a 27" 16:9.

    The counter argument will be that an UW is too wide and outside the area of focus... this is true, but this extra screen area at the sides provides the "immersive width" mentioned above. Following this logic, why not also have "immersive height" - in my experience, this has limited value in games because you will just see more sky and floor, whereas width provides more useful aspects of the game.

    Just my opinion here, and not eloquently described, but you should get what I'm saying.
     
  18. Legend

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 31, 2006

    Posts: 6,992

    It does ENTIRELY depend on your setup and preference... I have a 1440p UW which is 80cm away from my eyes. This is just perfect for me. 40" would be too much at that distance. My UW is on an arm bracket that extends it from the wall by about 20cm though, so I could get a flat bracket and place a 40" at 100cm, which would probably be OK. Of course, not everyone will be able to do that, it all depends how much space they have and what's comfortable. Some people just don't like big screens. Friend of mine still has a 24" and doesn't like anything bigger. Each to their own at the end of the day. :)
     
  19. Howling

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 14, 2008

    Posts: 1,967

    BUT YOU CAN HAS MOAR SCREEN WITH 16:9!!?!11!one!1
     
  20. dirty

    Associate

    Joined: Jul 31, 2018

    Posts: 45

    Location: Banbury, Oxfordshire

    I've owned both the PG279Q (What's the BLB on yours like?) and the Acer X34a. The only games I had issues with were some newer Telltale games, and watching films with black bars either side was annoying but Netflix has a Chrome extension to fix that. Other than that the gaming experience was amazing, and if a decent HDR ultrawide comes out i'll probably buy it.

    I missed the extra Hz you get from the Asus but not sure this will be an issue with the Alienware.