Sell Ultra-wide and buy 4K..? A couple of Q's

no_1_dave

no_1_dave

no_1_dave

Soldato
Joined
7 Jul 2004
Posts
7,902
Location
Gloucester
I currently have the LG 34" 34UC97C Ultra-wide monitor, I've had it 4 years and it's done me proud. I am starting to get that 4K itch though and will be purchasing a 3080 at some point.

Currently I can get the Dell 32" Curved 4K UHD S3221QS for £297 delivered and it's awfully tempting. Is it worth it? I like the thought of 4K, having more screen real-estate and not wondering if the resolution will be supported or not. But at the same time the Ultra-wide is nice.

A couple of things I need clarity on:

1) Rough selling price of current monitor?
2) Nvidia DLSS... Does it work with Ultra-wide or is it strictly a 4K thing? Reading the internet gives mixed results
3) The Dell is Freesync, is it likely to be compatible with Nvidia's Gsync/Freesync compatibility?
4) What would you do?
 
If you're purchasing a 3080, which is a VERY capable 4K card, you're leaving FPS on the table with 4K @ 60Hz. It would make more sense to wait until 144Hz 4K 32" is available. It will be more expensive of course, but if you're getting a 3080, then it would really make the most of it.
 
The best reasonably priced 4K monitor you can buy at the moment is the 27” LG 27GN950-B. It’s still £ 749 inc VAT but ticks all the boxes. It’s 4K 144hz and Gsync / freesync compatible which is what you want, if you want your monitor to keep up with the frame rates the 3080 can provide at 4K.

The difference in size between that and a 32” one isn’t going to make much difference, desktop scaling will still be required and most pro gamers prefer smaller monitors.

As far as I know there isn’t any 32” 4K 144hz monitors available at the moment any way and expect them to be expensive when they do start to appear.
 
My current monitor is 60Hz, I'm not searching for 144Hz, that doesn't bother me too much. Been there done that and it's not a priority.
Main thing is 4K (32") vs 3440x1440 (34") :confused:
 
nlel1975 said:
The best reasonably priced 4K monitor you can buy at the moment is the 27” LG 27GN950-B. It’s still £ 749 inc VAT but ticks all the boxes. It’s 4K 144hz and Gsync / freesync compatible which is what you want, if you want your monitor to keep up with the frame rates the 3080 can provide at 4K.

The difference in size between that and a 32” one isn’t going to make much difference, desktop scaling will still be required and most pro gamers prefer smaller monitors.

As far as I know there isn’t any 32” 4K 144hz monitors available at the moment any way and expect them to be expensive when they do start to appear.
Click to expand...


From personal experience, the difference between 32" and 27" 4K is significant and very noticeable. I couldn't deal with 4K @ 27" after spending a while with 32". You'd have to be sat pretty close to the screen not to need it also.

Scaling at 125% is generally still needed at 32" though, unless you have razer sharp 20/20 vision.

There are a couple of 32" 144Hz 32" monitors due Q1 2021, priced just over a thousand euros.
 
Nexus18 said:
As someone with 4k and 3440x1440, meh to 4k..... imo, it is such little improvement, at least to my eyes.

21.9 1440 > 4k
Click to expand...

Depends what your use case is. For productivity 4K wins hands down due to the significant extra vertical space you gain. For gaming, I'd be more inclined to stick with high refresh 1440p or ultrawide.
 
Speaking specifically about your last point, I have had both for some years now and if you are only going to have one monitor I would think quite carefully about actually doing this, 4K is nice but it's a different experience to 21:9 1440P ultrawide (actually it's a more 'standard' experience), provided games you play support the 21:9 aspect ratio properly you can see so much more with an ultrawide and for general desktop work I find 3440x1440 better too, as it's just much more usable and so useful being able to work on two decent sized windows side by side etc. At the end of the day an ultrawide monitor gives you a whole new perspective and a different experience, where as a 4K display is 'just' a 16:9 display with more pixels so the experience is the same just at a higher resolution and frankly in gaming specifically I don't find it that amazing, 4K is useful for photo editing and such though I will tip my hat to it there, but on a 32" display unless you have eyes like a hawk you will be running with some level of scaling (bot like a 27" though) which will reduce the gains you make it terms of desktop 'real estate' in practice aswell. If I could only keep one for all things, it would be my 3440x1440 ultrwawide.

Above all though, for gaming at least, more important than the aspect ratio you choose is the refresh rate, unless it's strictly an office PC or a second monitor for Youtube or something like that I would never recommend anyone buy a 60Hz display now, their time has passed and 144Hz or at least 120Hz + offers so much for a gaming PC.

In short, I think you would be going backwards making this move in many respects.
 
Last edited:
no_1_dave said:
I currently have the LG 34" 34UC97C Ultra-wide monitor, I've had it 4 years and it's done me proud. I am starting to get that 4K itch though and will be purchasing a 3080 at some point.

Currently I can get the Dell 32" Curved 4K UHD S3221QS for £297 delivered and it's awfully tempting. Is it worth it? I like the thought of 4K, having more screen real-estate and not wondering if the resolution will be supported or not. But at the same time the Ultra-wide is nice.
Click to expand...

4k? yes. 32" ? and when you have a 34" UW? no way. nope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom