LG 34GK950G, 3440x1440, G-Sync, 120Hz

Stu said:
Interesting that you can tell the difference between 120 and 144 Hz refresh... something I always wondered about.
Click to expand...

honestly, can't tell. i just like that it's higher. i reconnected the alienware yesterday before giving it off to the friend i'm selling it to and i could not tell the difference, actually the perceived smoothness was better on the alienware i think, i think the gsync module does something better there.

i have the issue with the F model that manifested yesterday and this morning too. the computer was off during the night, but i do not turn the monitor off. when i cold start the computer, the screen is all purple tinted and has a bright green vertical stripe in the middle. it fixed itself when i turned the screen off and on again. IT crowd style.

have to google this, i think i saw someone mention that it might be the DP cable (using the supplied one) and if not, i will have to return. problem is, i already sold the AW :-\

edit: found a photo of the same issue on reddit:

https://i.redd.it/sd53rr9745m21.jpg

i have 2 weeks to diagnose this before my return expires, so we'll see.
 
Last edited:
60hz to 120hz/144hz - very noticeable difference in fast motion smoothness.
120hz to 144hz - minimal actual noticeable difference in fast motion smoothness (but it is faster, so timings are tad tighter).

It's the old how fast is fast enough scenario.
But if you were to ask me I would always prefer and opt for a native 144hz, over a 100hz overclock to 120hz refresh.
From a motion clarity / smearing point of view I still prefer gaming on my Dell S2716DG.
As TN scene transitions are noticeable faster than what IPS panels can ultimately achieve.

Everything is a compromise when it comes to monitor technologies, I've never seen a 'perfect in every respect' monitor, they just don't exist.
 
The Old School Gamer said:
As TN scene transitions are noticeable faster than what IPS panels can ultimately achieve.
Click to expand...

Coming from an ASUS ROG Swift GSync TN panel to the LG 34GK950F IPS I very much disagree.
That could be that GSync never worked very well for me using a GTX770 card and FreeSync works better using my now Vega64LC making blanket statements about TN or IPS is pretty false these days.

We have good TN panels and bad TN panels - the same holds true for IPS panels.
 
NirK said:
Hm not sure because the LG's are actually slower than the X34P or AW3418 (according to the TFTcentral review).
Click to expand...

The X34P and AW3418DW use the LM340UW4 panel and the new LG monitors use the newer LM340UW5... both panels are produced by LG, and the LM340UW5 is literally the successor to the LM340UW4, so I think it is fair to say theese LGs are packing the latest IPS tech when comparing these models (some might argue otherwise if comparing to the 4k 144Hz panels).
 
Stu said:
The X34P and AW3418DW use the LM340UW4 panel and the new LG monitors use the newer LM340UW5... both panels are produced by LG, and the LM340UW5 is literally the successor to the LM340UW4, so I think it is fair to say theese LGs are packing the latest IPS tech when comparing these models (some might argue otherwise if comparing to the 4k 144Hz panels).
Click to expand...


He said that the newer panels "pack the latest tech" and are "faster".. But just saying from the measurements on TFTcentral, the AW3418 and X34P are faster....

I think with these LG's personally... Newer does not seem to be better... well actually the F is better with 144hz, but its just not worth the price difference at the current prices... Also the difference between 120 and 144 is quite small, much less than the difference between 100 > 120 IMO.

For example these monitors DO have newer tech yes, but it is not implemented in a way that is of much use, for example YES DCI colours are very nice, but only if the monitor has the hardware for HDR, or an SRGB mode for normal SDR use...
 
Last edited:
NirK said:
He said that the newer panels "pack the latest tech" and are "faster".. But just saying from the measurements on TFTcentral, the AW3418 and X34P are faster....

I think with these LG's personally... Newer does not seem to be better... well actually the F is better with 144hz, but its just not worth the price difference at the current prices... Also the difference between 120 and 144 is quite small, much less than the difference between 100 > 120 IMO.
Click to expand...

someone also said that even though the 950F is natively 144Hz, the G2G is too slow for that to matter and so that effectively it's still a 120Hz screen....not sure how they came to that conclusion.

fact is, the newer panel has a wider gamut, colors pop more and it's brighter. take that for what it's worth.
 
skuko said:
someone also said that even though the 950F is natively 144Hz, the G2G is too slow for that to matter and so that effectively it's still a 120Hz screen....not sure how they came to that conclusion.

fact is, the newer panel has a wider gamut, colors pop more and it's brighter. take that for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

I would have to argue that, if you want CORRECT colours, the G version is extremely oversaturated with no way of correcting that (NO SRGB mode) and the F model DOES have an SRGB mode, but also it is only 96% SRGB vs the X34P which is 100% SRGB, also the X34P has adjustable gamma whereas you cannot change the gamma in SRGB mode...

Could be that the "nano" panel coating makes the colours look better though, but technically they do not have better colours for SRGB. Personally I find over saturated colours very irritating, I don't mind SLIGHTLY oversaturated, for example 5%. As I just said could be that the new Nanodots or whatever they are called, improve the appearance of colours... But technically the new monitors are worse for standard SRGB, and IMO the DCI colour space is useless without proper HDR...

Also does anyone use their monitor at 100% brightness anyway? IMO that looks just horrible.. Even if I liked using very high brightness, the contrast ratio on IPS is not good enough for it. Just not sure what the actual use of 400nits brightness is, unless it has HDR hardware such as FALD etc. Does anyone seriously use their monitor at 100% 400 nits brightness?! OR do you use your LG at above 65% brightness? Because that would be 250nits as on the older panels.

I don't think these monitors are BAD, I just think they are overprced.
 
Last edited:
Also I sound very negative about these here... They are obviously good and probably overall the best UW monitors, BUT from the amount of problems I am seeing on this thread, I am just not seeing what is worth another 60% cost over the X34P. I also find it a bit irritating that OCUK decided to increase the cost of the F version, thus completely removing the FREE from freesync!!
 
NirK said:
I would have to argue that, if you want CORRECT colours, the G version is extremely oversaturated with no way of correcting that (NO SRGB mode) and the F model DOES have an SRGB mode, but also it is only 96% SRGB vs the X34P which is 100% SRGB, also the X34P has adjustable gamma whereas you cannot change the gamma in SRGB mode...
Click to expand...

Where did you get that 96% number from? TFTCentral measured the F at 131.6% versus the 135% claimed by the manufacturer.
 
96.9% coverage in SRGB mode on the F model

The 131-135% is not much use for normal SRGB colour space, it is the DCI colour space. If you like everything very over saturated, then ok... But personally I do not like that at all.

"With the ChromaPure software we measured now an sRGB gamut volume of 96.9% which was close to the required colour space although a little under-covered in green shades."

Marginal difference from 100% at the end of the day, but just saying.

The 131% with the G and no option for SRGB, would be a problem for me, not a good thing.

As I said might be that the nano coating makes colours look more vivid in SRGB mode on the F, similar to how the AG coating can effect the appearance of colours etc. Or maybe not I don't know.

My overall point here is : Yes the LG's are newer and have newer panels, but do these advantages actually make any difference for what you are using them for ?

HDR - Not really because there is no dimming or HDR hardware
SDR - The colours are less accurate depending on F or G model
Brightness - Do you need more than 250nits for SDR? Not really esecially on IPS with low contrast ratio.

If this monitor had something like the new Gsync module with FALD, then it would be easily worth the cost.

Anyway at the end of the day, get whatever you want, just giving my opinion... I don't think the F model looks bad at all, at the same price I would get it over the X34P... but at a 60% cost difference not so much!
 
Last edited:
At the current price point it's hard to justify for many. For me a native 144Hz panel without an overclocked module combined with poor warranty experience with Acer in the past was more than enough to justify the price for me. Then again, I got it at the pre-order price of £989 (actually less since I claim back the VAT). I was tempted by the Alienware but the fixed gamma put me off and the price wasn't far off the 950F at the time (less then £100 difference).
 
NirK said:
How is the white uniformity on these new LG panels? This is one area they could definitely improve from the older ones.
Click to expand...

Seems to vary a lot from monitor to monitor, like pretty much everything else out there which is pretty poor at the "premium" end of the consumer price range.
 
skuko said:
someone also said that even though the 950F is natively 144Hz, the G2G is too slow for that to matter and so that effectively it's still a 120Hz screen....not sure how they came to that conclusion.

fact is, the newer panel has a wider gamut, colors pop more and it's brighter. take that for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

I think they would say that because if the response times as not fast enough for the refresh rate, you will actually get more blur. For example on the 27" monitors, at 144hz they have less blur than at 165hz. You still get more HZ and lower lag, but you actually get more blur because the response times are not fast enough for the refresh rate.

Bugbait said:
At the current price point it's hard to justify for many. For me a native 144Hz panel without an overclocked module combined with poor warranty experience with Acer in the past was more than enough to justify the price for me. Then again, I got it at the pre-order price of £989 (actually less since I claim back the VAT). I was tempted by the Alienware but the fixed gamma put me off and the price wasn't far off the 950F at the time (less then £100 difference).
Click to expand...

Yes well in your case and with your VAT situation, that is not bad at all.

I am not sure but apparently the LG only has a 1 year warranty? Not sure if that is correct and if it is 1 or 2. I can agree that Acer service is not great, but you at least get 2 years warranty. I also agree that the fixed 2.6 gamma on the alienware is a problem. I do think the X34P when it is at the cheap prce like it was last week... Seems like by far the best option currently. If they reduce the F model significantly then that would be the best option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom