LG 38GL950G - 3840x1600/G-Sync/144Hz

a5cent said:
Sorry everyone, including you @Daniel - LG , if repeating this isn't helpful. I'm not sure what to make of the silence.

@Daniel - LG
This is the summary of questions you wanted (all of which still need answers):

  1. Can you confirm the July/August release date for the UK (from what I've seen you post elsewhere it seems this might have slipped to Q4)?
  2. On LG's web page for the 38GL950G, one of the key features mentioned is NVIDIA G-SYNC Compatible. LG's plaque at CES 2019 mentioned only G-SYNC. As we've since learned, those are two different things. A G-SYNC Compatible certified monitor lacks the G-SYNC hardware, meaning it's actually a VESA adaptive sync (a.k.a FreeSync) monitor. Which of those two is correct? Is it real G-SYNC, or will it be G-SYNC Compatible certified?
  3. IF the 38GL950G is a real G-SYNC monitor (NOT G-SYNC Compatible), will LG eventually release an "F" version that supports FreeSync?
  4. IF the 38GL950G is a real G-SYNC monitor (NOT G-SYNC Compatible), will it require a fan/blower to cool the v2 G-SYNC module (like Acer's X27 or Asus' PG27UQ)?
  5. Any new info on eventual HDR support?
Click to expand...

Sorry for the silence, I have been a bit off track recently but I am back lol

the spec isn't 100% set yet, I am pushing for this to be a G-Sync Compatible monitor as I think this covers the requirement better - but HQ have gone quiet

once I have some more info I will of course share it with the good people of the OCUK forum :)
 
Daniel - LG said:
if I had to pick one, then yes

BUT

there is the potential there will be both

I have dropped my HQ contact an email asking him to clarify - once I get a response from him I will pass on the info I can
Click to expand...


Interesting. I do wonder how convincing the argument would be for G-Sync over Freesync though... given the latter would in theory play perfectly well with an Nvidia GPU. And also in light of the price hike a full fat G-Sync version would get. I'm sure some die hards would be all over it, but the majority would surely plump for Freesync if it works just as well? I'm a bit hazy on the specific technical variations that might be experienced between the two though, and if there is indeed an argument either way that isn't based solely on price.
 
Legend said:
Interesting. I do wonder how convincing the argument would be for G-Sync over Freesync though... given the latter would in theory play perfectly well with an Nvidia GPU. And also in light of the price hike a full fat G-Sync version would get. I'm sure some die hards would be all over it, but the majority would surely plump for Freesync if it works just as well? I'm a bit hazy on the specific technical variations that might be experienced between the two though, and if there is indeed an argument either way that isn't based solely on price.
Click to expand...

i expect it will depend on how far down the development it is. it might not be easy/feasible to switch to a non G-sync module development here, i don't know. it is likely (i believe) to impact a few areas though for better or worse:
  • would allow additional video connections in theory beyond the currently expected 1x DP 1.4 and 1x HDMI 2.0
  • would allow for additional scaler options like PiP and PbP to be added
  • it would likely need further manufacturer development and focus on providing a low lag, as it's not as simple without the G-sync module being used
  • could limit the currently advertised overclocking feature. The panel as far as i know is a native 144Hz module, and i'm not sure if an overclock to the 165Hz expected is feasible or even possible without the G-sync module's use
  • would allow support for AMD cards as well as NVIDIA for VRR
  • could impact retail price positively
  • would avoid the potential need for a cooling fan we expect
 
@Daniel - LG
Thank YOU! While I consider the G-SYNC vs G-SYNC-Compatible question the most important please don't forget the others.

@Legend
Legend said:
Interesting. I do wonder how convincing the argument would be for G-Sync over Freesync though... given the latter would in theory play perfectly well with an Nvidia GPU. And also in light of the price hike a full fat G-Sync version would get. I'm sure some die hards would be all over it, but the majority would surely plump for Freesync if it works just as well? I'm a bit hazy on the specific technical variations that might be experienced between the two though, and if there is indeed an argument either way that isn't based solely on price.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you wondering about?
  • An argument for classical G-SYNC over FreeSync 1? (I'm not sure FreeSync 1 is still relevant for anything anybody here would be interested in)
  • An argument for classical G-SYNC over G-Sync-Compatible?
  • An argument for G-SYNC as a whole, including classical, compatible and ultimate over FreeSync as a whole including 1 and 2? (I don't think there is any useful answer to that considering how different it all is)
  • Some other combination?
 
Last edited:
Baddass said:
i expect it will depend on how far down the development it is. it might not be easy/feasible to switch to a non G-sync module development here, i don't know.
Click to expand...

Well, you can switch to a non G-SYNC controller. Anytime really. Even 1 day before release. You just have to be willing to scrap your release schedule and development budget. It's not a technical issue. It's a question of economics which asks: "are the costs of switching justified by an improved projected return on investment?".

Baddass said:
  • could limit the currently advertised overclocking feature. The panel as far as i know is a native 144Hz module, and i'm not sure if an overclock to the 165Hz expected is feasible or even possible without the G-sync module's use
Click to expand...

Not sure about the 165 Hz. On LG's website the currently advertised overclocked refresh rate is 175 Hz.

Assuming the DP1.4 controller supports DSC compression (which it must because without it no DP1.4 controller, G-SYNC or otherwise, can support 3840x1600@8bit@165Hz), I see absolutely no problem for a FreeSync controller to achieve 165 Hz or even 175 Hz at the specified resolution. Why do you think that's not feasible or even possible?
 
No I didn’t mean froma technical feasibility point of view. I meant in terms of development, schedules and everything else

Sorry I meant 175Hz overclock of a 144Hz native panel. I still don’t believe that will be possible without using the Gsync module unless the native panel spec changes. Can you name me any main vendor non-Gsync screen that supports any overclock close to that kind of boost (ignoring poor Korean models of old)?
 
I surely hope they stick with the DP 1.4 G-Sync module. This basically guarantees the 175 Hz overclock feature. If the original release date of July/August as Dan pointed to in the past is correct, that means the design is pretty much finalized as of now. My worst fear is they switch to Freesync, lower the 175 Hz overclock and seriously push the monitor to the right.
 
Baddass said:
Sorry I meant 175Hz overclock of a 144Hz native panel. I still don’t believe that will be possible without using the Gsync module unless the native panel spec changes. Can you name me any main vendor non-Gsync screen that supports any overclock close to that kind of boost (ignoring poor Korean models of old)?
Click to expand...

You (and apparently also Vega) think it's either unlikely that a FreeSync monitor can achieve a 175 Hz overclock, or that it's only guaranteed with a G-SYNC module. I just can't figure out why you think that, nor can I figure out why you think the native panel spec has anything to do with this.

FreeSync 1 is just a pile of paper specifications, to which FreeSync 2 adds some more paper specifications and a standardized certification procedure. None of that in any way limits a FreeSync monitor's highest achievable refresh rate nor its highest achievable panel overclock. If a FreeSync controller supports a refresh rate that is higher then the panel's it is paired with, then that monitor has panel overclocking potential. Nothing more is required because a panel overclock isn't a feature a controller must specifically support (that's a little bit oversimplified but generally true). With such a pairing, the only question left is whether the OEM actually wants to deliver a panel overclock as a supported feature.

I think you asked me to name a FreeSync monitor that supports a 31 Hz boost to refresh rate when overclocked. For the reasons given I don't think the extent of the overclocking boost is in any way relevant. More generally, the current lack of ANY specific capability doesn't mean that capability can't be provided in an upcoming FreeSync based 38GL950G. Every capability, ever, always had a specific monitor that brought it to market for the first time.

In this specific case I don't think such a "first" is even necessary. The XV273K incorporates a FreeSync controller that can do 3840x2160@144Hz. A FreeSync controller that accepts that video signal can also accept 3840x1600@175. As far as I can tell that's it. The controller required to build the 38GL950G, as currently advertised, already exists in a shipping product. Maybe (or maybe not) coincidentally, the XV273K is also one of the monitors NVIDIA certified as G-SYNC-Compatible.
 
Last edited:
Not impossible, just an educated assumption. I think every display that has a non-24 divisible refresh rate "over clock" like 165 has been G-Sync. The XV273K referenced has a quite standardized refresh rate that the panel was "spec'd" at.
 
Last edited:
There will be a technical reason why there has never been a FreeSync screen released with an overclocking feature that extends the refresh rate beyond the panels native capability. FS has been around for a long time now, they’ve had plenty of chance to offer it if it was only a matter of the controller like you say it is. All the while there’s been loads of Gsync screens offered with very big overclocks. Many even more than the 31Hz talked about here (eg 144hz to 200Hz). I don’t know the ins and outs of why, but it clearly has something to do with the presence of the Gsync module and lack then of a traditional scaler.

If you think this screen is going to be the first to offer an overclock with FS, I think that’s wishful thinking. The original released spec of this screen was clearly based on it being a Gsync module screen. If LG are now considering whether to change that to FS (with Gsync VRR support) then I believe that will impact this area of the spec.
 
Vega said:
I think every display that has a non-24 divisible refresh rate "over clock" like 165 has been G-Sync. The XV273K referenced has a quite standardized refresh rate that the panel was "spec'd" at.
Click to expand...

Thank you. That's exactly the sort of thing I was trying to understand. While it's certainly uncommon, FreeSync monitors with a non-24 divisible refresh rate do exist. The 75 Hz AOC G2590VXQ or the 155 Hz Dell S2719DGF are two examples.

What I do think is accurate to say (but not 100% sure) is that any monitor with an uneven refresh rate has that specific refresh rate due to the application of a panel overclock.

Baddass said:
There will be a technical reason why there has never been a FreeSync screen released with an overclocking feature that extends the refresh rate beyond the panels native capability.
Click to expand...

I feel I'm still not understanding you correctly. I think the above sentence is the core of your argument, but there obviously have been FreeSync monitors with an overclocking feature that extend the refresh rate beyond the panel's native capabilities. In fact, that's exactly what MUST happen, because "extending refresh rate beyond the panel's native capabilities" is exactly what an overclock is. An example:

The already mentioned Dell S2719DGF is a FreeSync monitor, built using a panel with a native refresh rate of 144 Hz (M270DTN01), which is overclocked to 155 Hz. That overclock extends the panel beyond it's native refresh rate so it does exactly what I think you've said has never been done.

Which of us is missing something? Sorry if I'm being dense.

On this one issue we appear to disagree on almost everything, but addressing those points makes no sense without getting this out of the way first.
 
Last edited:
Hi All,

right

38GL950G - this will be dedicated G-Sync model - we are expecting roughly September 2019 for launch here in the UK

there will be a Freesync/G-sync Compatible model coming as well, but this we wont see till 2020

Currently I do not have access to any specs of either model - but I have asked if I can have some that I can release to you all so once I hear back I will advise
 
Daniel - LG said:
Hi All,

right

38GL950G - this will be dedicated G-Sync model - we are expecting roughly September 2019 for launch here in the UK

there will be a Freesync/G-sync Compatible model coming as well, but this we wont see till 2020

Currently I do not have access to any specs of either model - but I have asked if I can have some that I can release to you all so once I hear back I will advise
Click to expand...

Thank you! Two variants being released is definitely not what I expected but very good to know. On the other hand, September is unexpectedly GREAT! Looks like this will be my next screen.

Looking forward to info on fan and HDR as soon as specs become available.
 
Last edited:
Daniel - LG said:
Hi All,

right

38GL950G - this will be dedicated G-Sync model - we are expecting roughly September 2019 for launch here in the UK

there will be a Freesync/G-sync Compatible model coming as well, but this we wont see till 2020

Currently I do not have access to any specs of either model - but I have asked if I can have some that I can release to you all so once I hear back I will advise
Click to expand...

It would be good to know where it will land regards HDR. I know early leaks suggested HDR 1000, then corrected to HDR 600 (but no confirmation), but you said yourself a while back you didn't think, in your opinion, that it would have HDR. Certainly anything below HDR 600 then it might as well not.
 
I was going to add that I think it looks blatantly like this will be Gsync not Freesync... But LG rep has confirmed that before I posted!

Name says "G"... HDR1000.... 175hz... Gsync!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom