21:9 UW monitor for gaming, worth it?

Starbreaker

Starbreaker
I'm thinking about buying a new monitor for gaming use, I've singled out 2 that I'm interested in. First is the LG 34GL750-B, it's a 2560x1080 144Hz IPS panel. Second is the ASUS TUF Gaming VG35VQ which is a 3440x1440 100Hz VA panel, also a couple of hundred $ more expensive. Both of these should support G-Sync and Freesync, the LG is verified by Nvidia, the ASUS is adaptive and should support it too, I consider this important since I might switch between AMD and Nvidia down the line.

My current monitor is an old 24" ASUS 60Hz, from what I've gathered should be the max for 1080p when considering PPI. At work I use 27" monitors that run at 1080p which is the same PPI as a 34" UW 2560x1080, personally I found this acceptable. The advantage is better frames with the LG, and as games become more demanding it might give me a couple of years more before I need to upgrade the GPU, The ASUS is more future proof I feel, but it's only 100Hz. The rig is a Ryzen 3700x and a RTX 2070 Super.

Any experiences to share? Is the difference between 100Hz and 144Hz noticable? And what's better, IPS or VA panels?
 

Chris Simon

Chris Simon
Okay - personal opinion:

UW monitors are "worth" it in some cases more than others.
I've been going through this process myself this spring. For the longest time I was gaming on a 23'' 1080p monitor and wanted to upgrade.

1) Resolution
First of all, I wouldn't recommend the 2560x1080. For the simple reason that it won't feel like an upgrade. It may not seem like it from the numbers, but the jump in the pixel density between 1080p and 1440p is huge. So much so, that now that I'm using 1440p, I can't watch anything on a 1080p monitor because I am now noticing the pixels and it's really distracting. The fact that the new monitor would be wider doesn't change that.
Sencondly, there is the matter of 1440p UW. The one very important fact you have to realize is that when comes to pixel count, UW 1440p is almost exactly between normal 1440p monitor and 4K one. That comes with a performance cost. So much so, that I am confident to say that with both 2070S and 3700XT, you will need to lower some graphics settings in new games to get comparable framerates.

In the end, after trying out several options, I opted out for a normal 27'' 16:9 1440p monitor. But if you really want the ultrawide, I'd go with 1440p as well.

2) Refresh rate
In new games, you will be under 100FPS on your 1070S or 3700XT. If you are one of those people who deliberately gimp their graphical fidelity to play on framerates as high as possible, go for 144Hz. If you like pretty graphics and tend to play on highest settings your GPU can handle (I do), monitor's refresh rate doesn't matter. Mine only has 75Hz as I found out that very few of the games I play exceed 70FPS on the settings I use.
What I would point out, though, is that every Freesync monitor has a range in which it can actually... well... freesync. Mine has a range of 55Hz-75Hz.
That means that if you buy a 144Hz monitor that has a sync range, say, 100Hz-144Hz and you will be playing games under 100FPS, the freesync won't work.

3) panel types
I don't see much into this, but the rule of thumb is:
TN panels - best response times (low input lag), worst image quality (black, contrast, colour accuracy), worst viewing angles (colour and brightness changes when you look at the monitor at an angle)
VA panels - mediocre response times, good contrast and colour accuracy, mediocre black, good viewing angles
IPS - worst input lag, best image quality, best viewing angles

But this also differs from monitor to monitor. I've seen some IPS panels with really good input lag, I've seen VA panels with colour accuracy better than a bad IPS panels, etc...
Personally I've chosen VA panel. Mainly because it feels like a good middle ground between gaming (input lag, contrast) and content creation (colour accuracy) and also because I've read a review of this exact monitor I'm using and they said it's good. :LOL:

TL/DR:
VA panels are a little better for gaming, bigger 16:9 1440p monitor (27-34'') of a decent quality is IMHO better than most UWs, unless it's a really expensive and curved one.
If I was choosing between your two monitors, though, I'd choose ASUS
 
Last edited:

Starbreaker

Starbreaker
Chris Simon said:
Okay - personal opinion:

UW monitors are "worth" it in some cases more than others.
I've been going through this process myself this spring. For the longest time I was gaming on a 23'' 1080p monitor and wanted to upgrade.

1) Resolution
First of all, I wouldn't recommend the 2560x1080. For the simple reason that it won't feel like an upgrade. It may not seem like it from the numbers, but the jump in the pixel density between 1080p and 1440p is huge. So much so, that now that I'm using 1440p, I can't watch anything on a 1080p monitor because I am now noticing the pixels and it's really distracting. The fact that the new monitor would be wider doesn't change that.
Sencondly, there is the matter of 1440p UW. The one very important fact you have to realize is that when comes to pixel count, UW 1440p is almost exactly between normal 1440p monitor and 4K one. That comes with a performance cost. So much so, that I am confident to say that with both 2070S and 3700XT, you will need to lower some graphics settings in new games to get comparable framerates.

In the end, after trying out several options, I opted out for a normal 27'' 16:9 1440p monitor. But if you really want the ultrawide, I'd go with 1440p as well.

2) Refresh rate
In new games, you will be under 100FPS on your 1070S or 3700XT. If you are one of those people who deliberately gimp their graphical fidelity to play on framerates as high as possible, go for 144Hz. If you like pretty graphics and tend to play on highest settings your GPU can handle (I do), monitor's refresh rate doesn't matter. Mine only has 75Hz as I found out that very few of the games I play exceed 70FPS on the settings I use.
What I would point out, though, is that every Freesync monitor has a range in which it can actually... well... freesync. Mine has a range of 55Hz-75Hz.
That means that if you buy a 144Hz monitor that has a sync range, say, 100Hz-144Hz and you will be playing games under 100FPS, the freesync won't work.

3) panel types
I don't see much into this, but the rule of thumb is:
TN panels - best response times (low input lag), worst image quality (black, contrast, colour accuracy), worst viewing angles (colour and brightness changes when you look at the monitor at an angle)
VA panels - mediocre response times, good contrast and colour accuracy, mediocre black, good viewing angles
IPS - worst input lag, best image quality, best viewing angles

But this also differs from monitor to monitor. I've seen some IPS panels with really good input lag, I've seen VA panels with colour accuracy better than a bad IPS panels, etc...
Personally I've chosen VA panel. Mainly because it feels like a good middle ground between gaming (input lag, contrast) and content creation (colour accuracy) and also because I've read a review of this exact monitor I'm using and they said it's good. :LOL:

TL/DR:
VA panels are a little better for gaming, bigger 16:9 1440p monitor (27-34'') of a decent quality is IMHO better than most UWs, unless it's a really expensive and curved one.
If I was choosing between your two monitors, though, I'd choose ASUS
Click to expand...

Just the kind of feedback I was looking for (y), I was ready to pull the trigger on the LG, but now I'm leaning more towards the ASUS. Since it's just a few months since it hit the market there's very limited info and reviews for it. However, there's a review for the ASUS VG32VQ which is a VA panel like the UW and this guy didn't seem happy about it. :LOL:

Didn't expect it to be this difficult to find a suitable monitor. When I limit the price range to $500-700 I need to accept a few compromises, just need to figure out what those are, or keep looking for a month or two more.

CMDR Dizzy said:
144Hz monitors are noticeably crisper.
Click to expand...

+1 for the LG monitor, still worried about backlight bleed since it's an IPS monitor, and you can get unlucky with some of them from what I've read.
 

Chris Simon

Chris Simon
Starbreaker said:
Didn't expect it to be this difficult to find a suitable monitor. When I limit the price range to $500-700 I need to accept a few compromises, just need to figure out what those are, or keep looking for a month or two more.
Click to expand...
I'll just reiterate what I said earlier. For 500 bucks you can have a really good 16:9 1440p monitor, or a mediocre UW one with the added difficulty of the UW one being about 50% more demanding when comes to your GPU.
I agree with Dizzy that 144Hz IS noticeably better, but you have to ask yourself if your PC is going to actually be able to reach those 120FPS+ numbers.
IMO 100FPS with Freesync on a 100Hz monitor is going to give you better experience than 100FPS without Freesync on a 144Hz monitor.

If you can widen your search I would recommend checking ACER Predator lineup and some of the iiyama monitors as well, btw.
 

Starbreaker

Starbreaker
Chris Simon said:
I'll just reiterate what I said earlier. For 500 bucks you can have a really good 16:9 1440p monitor, or a mediocre UW one with the added difficulty of the UW one being about 50% more demanding when comes to your GPU.
I agree with Dizzy that 144Hz IS noticeably better, but you have to ask yourself if your PC is going to actually be able to reach those 120FPS+ numbers.
IMO 100FPS with Freesync on a 100Hz monitor is going to give you better experience than 100FPS without Freesync on a 144Hz monitor.

If you can widen your search I would recommend checking ACER Predator lineup and some of the iiyama monitors as well, btw.
Click to expand...
I decided to buy the LG 34GL750-B, the ability to push higher fps and being able to use ultra settings were the deciding factors.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
YES! I don't have a lot of cash, so I went with the 2560 * 1080 LG 21:9 which matches my GT 1030 perfectly well.

On a number of levels 21:9 is fantastic. ED is great with a fantastic field of view. Productivity is better (its like having two monitors bolted together), and its great for films. It feels claustrophobic on a regular monitor afterwards, so be careful :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom