Sweet is the ultrawide really that much better over a plain monitor you guys reckon? Also does going from 4ms to 1ms really make that much of a difference?
Id be willing to spend a bit more, if the monitor is going to be a much better investment for the extra 100 or so then id spend it but id like to be on the 1000.
Theres so many different monitors, im a touch overwhelmed, also as I understand depending on the monitor I get, im probably locked into nvidia or amd then?
I've went from 16:9 monitor to 4k 65inch 16:9 TV to 21:9 monitor and I've used a 32:9 monitor in store for about an hour.
Now ontop my opinion on spending more than £1000 is that we're kind of split in regards to how everyone is moving forwards with ultrawide technology. Samsung have their CRG9 which favours 32:9. A few of the big boys have 1.5k and 2.5k monitors which use FALD backlights but have some blooming issues (I find it hard to tolerate this in such an expensive device). LG are releasing a 38 inch 29:10 monitor. I don't think any specific monitor for over £1000 is going to leave you better re: day to day experience of the monitor. IMO get the best VALUE 21:9 monitor you can get which has a 100hz + refresh rate.
In regards to Gsync vs Freesync. Gsync ties you into Nvidia cards. Some Freesync monitors play well with Nvidia cards and allow adaptive sync.
Given these monitors are quite high resolution and high refresh rate, realistically speaking IMO (in my opinion) 90% of users will be using Nvidia cards so I'd prioritise them playing well with Nvidia cards. Some freesync ultrawides do, some don't.
Just ignore HDR on these monitors IMO if you've used an OLED or FALD TV.
I think the monitors you should be looking for at £1k are:
1. AW 3418DW
2. CRG 9
3. LG 34-F
The AW has the best warranty period with a brilliant return and replace program. Dell are known for their customer service; LG and Samsung aren't. Its 120hz, IPS, Gsync.
The LG 34-F has a wider colour gamut, newer panel and has an extra 24hz. Its been documented that there have been a fair few quality concerns (just search on this forum) and LG aren't that well known for their customer service.. lol. Its Freesync but works with Gsync so you aren't tied to Nvidia.
So between the two, prioritise if you'd rather have the 24hz and a newer panel with potentially higher colour depth for the content you might use or the better customer service and build quality. I would not have HDR factor into the decision because the LG has redundantly poor HDR performance, just like very screen without a dedicated backlight or OLED. Also if you hate Nvidia, the LG is a no brainer but I'm not sure which card you'd buy from AMD outside of the Radeon VII whcih will power it to 144hz.
Now we move onto the CRG 9. Its 32:9, and therefore its very demanding. It has a weird aspect ratio which is much wider, much more immersive but it is VERY big. Using it for normal desktop use caused me to have neckstrain as I was literally turning my head to different parts of the screen but for gaming, its quite amazing. Its like that extra jump from 21:9. It is freesync but plays well with nvidia cards adaptive sync.
So...
Is 21:9 worth it? Yes. 21:9 feels like what PC monitor gaming should be. 4k TV 65 inch was amazing for me. I' loved it for the bigger screen immersion but 21:9 with a higher refresh rate beats it. Its strange but I almost feel some sensations like falling at times which is quite cool. It looks plain better and games stop feeling cramped and look much more cinematic. The con is which games don't work with it. Most games do, and its a popular format so hacks are available. 21:9 monitors also make films and 21:9 youtube videos look amazing. Navigating and using the screen is almost perfect. No neck turning.
Is 32:9 worth it? I used it for a short while and I LOVED it. I didn't get one because it requires huge graphical grunt, it wouldn't fit on my desk without me sacrificng speaker placement and therefore sound quality and it's compataibility is really hit and miss. I've researched it for hours and the games I'm about to play on my 21:9 monitor just have no documented fixes or patches available online. You can switch it to a 21:9 custom resolution but meh.. black bars are black bars. also using a 32:9 i imagine would take ahuge learning curve of moving your head a lot... I struggled to find the mouse pointer when I used it.
I'm going to summarise what I've said in a shorter sentance because I've probably bored you do death and you've skipped most of that.
My experience is 16:9 feels cramped now and just doesn't feel right. Games feel like games.
21:9 feels immersive and it feels right. It doesn't feel like too much, it feels like the perfect ammount.
32:9 feels really immersive but has its teething problems as you can imagine, just not many people own a 32:9 montior.
I have a 21:9 now and contemplating changing to 32:9 because basically I'm just weird and always want more.
If you're not an AMD fanboy or an Nvidia hater, just make sure the monitor plays well with Nvidia because they're the ones who are going to be pushing the graphical grunt for these higher end displays whilst price gouging us along the way. I don't think AMD are going to be able to power the CRG9 anytime soon compared to what Nvidia will offer next year.
