Quick question about ultra wide screens

stratman59 · 19 Oct 2014 at 11:07

Just about to buy a new monitor and had settled on an Asuz VN279QLB 27.
I use two monitors at the moment, a 28 inch where I have autocad at 1920x1200 and a secondary monitor (19 inch) for email etc along side.
I was wondering if i'd be better off with just one ultra wide monitor freeing up desk space. The question is can i split an ultra wide screen? i.e have autocad right in front of me and outlook or a word doc in a separate window next to it.

Thanks for any quick responses as I need to order today as my 28 inch had died.

wunkley · 19 Oct 2014 at 11:33

Well, as long as your autocad prog can run in a window (and I don't know any progs that don't), then of course you can do this. Why would you not be able to?

Is this what what you're asking?

You'd be better going for a 3440 x 1440 34 inch one though for sure (although what's your budget?). Not so much desktop real estate on the 2560 x 1080 ones.

chaparral · 19 Oct 2014 at 11:39

wunkley said:
Not so much desktop real estate on the 2560 x 1080 ones.

Yes a 27" widescreen has more area then a 29" ultra widescreen

27 inch 16x9 = Area 311.50 inches²
29 inch 21x9 = Area 304.50 inches²

http://www.displaywars.com/29-inch-21x9-vs-27-inch-16x9

Nexus18 · 19 Oct 2014 at 11:46

^^

It isn't just about the size, it is more about the res.

You can have two windows side by side just fine on a 29" 2560x1080 screen, although I think if working with something like CAD then it might not be enough and so the 3440x1440 panel will be better but be prepared to pay quite a bit for it!

Here are two browser windows side by side on my 29" 2560x1080 screen:

edit:

a screenshot instead!

stratman59 · 19 Oct 2014 at 12:09

Thanks, who gives the best warranties?

Thanks for the replies, I take the point that going up to 3440x1440 would probably be the ideal but that's a hell of a price difference from a 2560x1080.
Price pretty much going more than double. It's my lively hood though and I can get the V.A.T back. I had budgeted around the £350 mark but i'll be sitting in front of this monitor everyday for the next 5 or more years so more important to get the right one. What about reliability and warranties?

chaparral · 19 Oct 2014 at 12:30

Nexus18 said:
^^

It isn't just about the size, it is more about the res.

You mean with it also being a lower res then a 27" 1440p widescreen ....

wunkley · 19 Oct 2014 at 12:31

stratman59 said:
Thanks for the replies, I take the point that going up to 3440x1440 would probably be the ideal but that's a hell of a price difference from a 2560x1080.
Price pretty much going more than double. It's my lively hood though and I can get the V.A.T back. I had budgeted around the £350 mark but i'll be sitting in front of this monitor everyday for the next 5 or more years so more important to get the right one. What about reliability and warranties?

I'm a big fan of Dell, and they have a 34 inch 3440 x 1440 supposed to be coming out soonish, but I think it may be slightly curved and even more expensive than the LG ones out now.

If you can hang on a bit AOC are releasing a 34 inch 3440 x 1440 IPS soon that is rumoured to be only around £500. Might be worth spending that bit more...

stratman59 · 19 Oct 2014 at 12:48

That's interesting wunkley, I could probably go up to £500. Trouble is it'd mean working on a 19inch until it's released. Any idea of a timescale?

Nexus18 · 19 Oct 2014 at 12:57

Dell the best!

/close thread

LG customer service and QC is shocking.

As wunkley said, wait for the AOC, iirc it is due next month...

chaparral said:
You mean with it also being a lower res then a 27" 1440p widescreen ....

The way you worded your post made it sound like size was the reason for more screen real estate!

stratman59 · 19 Oct 2014 at 13:04

Thanks nexus, I'm afraid I'm not really up to date with all the screen size and resolution thing but I'm researching now. I get that the higher res basically means you can display more for the same screen area, Ummm I think!

It's a shame you can't go and see a selection of monitors anywhere, went to my local PC world and they had two small monitors retailing around £120.. Hopeless

Nexus18 · 19 Oct 2014 at 13:37

Yup, the higher the res. the more you will see on your screen.

Indeed, it is a shame we can't see more monitors at the local PC stores.

Legend · 19 Oct 2014 at 13:38

Speaking to 21:9 and the ultra wide experience you seek, 3440x1440 certainly seems to be the sweet spot (if you have the GPU grunt for it), although I do read a lot that due to these 34" screens being so physically wide, it can appear as though the edges of the screen are going away from you. The curved screen is a great solution to this... but you'll pay through the nose for one right now unfortunately, and that's not going to change anytime soon. One day we may all be gaming on massive curved monitors (plus our Oculus Rifts of course

), but for now they are in the realm of the wealthy. I don't know how bad a FLAT 3440x1440 screen would actually be though, I've never used one. 2560x1080 is a happy medium and won't tax a half decent GPU, but as mentioned, productivity wise, 1440p is where it's at.

You could have course simply jettison the 21:9 idea and go back to 16:9. There are undoubtedly some great monitors around within your budget at that size.