Buy A Ultra Wide IPS Monitor 2560X1080 Or Wait For 4K/OLED?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
what is so complicated here? I just told you that you can run 2560x1080 on a 2560x1440 screen. again very few games properly support 21:9 so why would you buy that as opposed to 2560x1440. again if it has not sunk in, 2560x1440 will let you run those games at 21:9 that support it while giving you much more screen for other games that dont and better desk top real estate. and please dont say that black bars will bother you. you will be having black bars on the sides of many games on the 21:9 screen plus its physical height and is no better. in other words you will get the same 21:9 1080 experience on a 27 inch 16:9 1440 screen anyway for the games that support it. is it clear yet? lol

Well seems I made my last post for nothing then, I didn't read that you said this before. I was under the impression that a 27 inch screen would not support 21:9. Still, won't 21:9 look better on the 29 inch Ultra Wide Screen? It might look a little distorted on a 27 inch screen since it is not as wide. I would like to see some gameplay videos of a 27 inch monitor supporting a native resolution of 2560x1440 but playing at 21:9 2560x1080 but I can't seem to find any videos showing this on youtube.
 
Last edited:

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Okay, I think I have finally decided. Everyone who has been critisizing 21:9 at 2560x1080 is simply WRONG. I don't know why some people prefer 16:9 2560x1440 over 2560x1080, I guess they think it looks better and they don't care about an increased field of view at all.

16:9 is a much more immersive experience because the wide screen almost fills up your peripheral vision and you get a significantly increased field of view. I would also be able to run games on higher settings, like Planetside 2 because of the lower resolution than 2560x1440.

See for yourself, it is obvious that 21:9 is superior.

http://pcmonitors.info/articles/the-219-2560-x-1080-experience

Scroll down to see comparisons, even though it is being compared to a 1080p image on various games, the aspect ratio for a 2560x1440 would be the same since they are both 16:9.

The major increase in field of view is amazing and you would see more of what is happening on screen and would beable to kill more enemies you other wise would not see playing on 16:9.

http://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Battlefield-3-2560x1080.jpg 21:9

http://pcmonitors.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Battlefield-3-1920x1080.jpg 16:9

I guess so many people prefer 16:9 at 2560x1440 because they think it looks better, even the people who tried both must think this. They are simply delusional, I doubt a resolution increase of 360 would really make a significant difference. You can notice that the 21:9 looks better than the 1920x1080 in that image but that is still a difference of 640 which is a lot, anything more than 400 would be a lot and you would notice a visual difference. Even so, the difference in quality is not that significant, the 21:9 image looks sharper and has better brightness/contrast.
AGAIN many if not most games do NOT "properly" support 21:9. even eyefinity and surround are much more supported.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Well seems I made my last post for nothing then, I didn't read that you said this before. I was under the impression that a 27 inch screen would not support 21:9. Still, won't 21:9 look better on the 29 inch Ultra Wide Screen? It might look a little distorted on a 27 inch screen since it is not as wide. I would like to see some gameplay videos of a 27 inch monitor supporting a native resolution of 2560x1440 but playing at 21:9 2560x1080 but I can't seem to find any videos showing this on youtube.
lol why did I post then? grr

yes you can run 2560x1440 21:9 just fine on a 2560x1440. it will not be distorted unless its a game issue and that same distortion will show up a 2560x1080 screen anyway. you will have black bars on top and bottom when running 2560x1080 on a 2560x1440 but again you will not be running enough games at that aspect ratio to justify a 2560x1080 only screen. I run some games at 1920x810 21:9 on my 1920x1080 screen and its just fine for the games that support it.
 
Last edited:

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
I do like the wider look of the screen on that 29 inch Ultra Wide LG, it would be more immersive since it would fill more of my peripheral vision.

I can't find any gameplay videos of 21:9 on a 27 inch Monitor though.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
I do like the wider look of the screen on that 29 inch Ultra Wide LG, it would be more immersive since it would fill more of my peripheral vision.

I can't find any gameplay videos of 21:9 on a 27 inch Monitor though.
its going to look the same but with black bars. a 29 inch 21:9 is very small physically and even the 21:9 image on a 27 " 16:9 screen will be larger. again you keep acting as if you are giving up something for the 16:9 screen when the reality is the 21:9 screen is the one with all downsides. everything the 21:9 screen can do can be done on the 16:9 screen.
 

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
Well I did some google searches on 27 inch Monitors 2560x1440 at 21:9 and all I got were results for 29 inch ultra wide monitors, are you sure this can be supported on a 27 inch monitor? I can't find any results at all.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Well I did some google searches on 27 inch Monitors 2560x1440 at 21:9 and all I got were results for 29 inch ultra wide monitors, are you sure this can be supported on a 27 inch monitor? I can't find any results at all.
yes it can support it. all you have to do is set it as a custom resolution in the control panel which takes less than 30 seconds. after that it will be recognized in any game and will become an option from within the game. the upcoming game The Evil Within will be 21:9 only and of course it will play on everyone's 16:9, 16:10 and 4:3 screen with black bars. it will be the very first 21:9 only game and since the game itself is native 21:9 then you would not need to have a custom resolution. plus some games already have 21:9 cutscenes so we should be used to it. it will be just like playing a 16:9 only game on a 16:10 or 4:3 screen which again will simply give you black bars.
 
Last edited:

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
its going to look the same but with black bars. a 29 inch 21:9 is very small physically and even the 21:9 image on a 27 " 16:9 screen will be larger. again you keep acting as if you are giving up something for the 16:9 screen when the reality is the 21:9 screen is the one with all downsides. everything the 21:9 screen can do can be done on the 16:9 screen.

A 21:9 image on a 27" 16:9 screen will not be larger than a 21:9 imagine on a 21:9 29" monitor...

A 27" 2560x1440 might have more pixels and also a larger overall area, but not for 21:9 content.

27" 16:9 is 2.3% more screen area, and obviously more pixels (33% more).
Total Area:
21:9 @ 29" 304.5 square inches
16:9 @ 27" 311.5 square inches

21:9 on a 27" monitor is 235 square inches, approx, or about 23" less for 21:9 content.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
A 21:9 image on a 27" 16:9 screen will not be larger than a 21:9 imagine on a 21:9 29" monitor...

A 27" 2560x1440 might have more pixels and also a larger overall area, but not for 21:9 content.

27" 16:9 is 2.3% more screen area, and obviously more pixels (33% more).
Total Area:
21:9 @ 29" 304.5 square inches
16:9 @ 27" 311.5 square inches

21:9 on a 27" monitor is 235 square inches, approx, or about 23" less for 21:9 content.
yes you are right but a 21:9 image on a 27"16:9 screen is pretty close heightwise to it on a 29" 21:9 screen.
 

Skott

Diamond Member
Oct 4, 2005
5,730
1
76
AGAIN many if not most games do NOT "properly" support 21:9. even eyefinity and surround are much more supported.

This is the main reason I don't suggest the 21:9 monitors to people. The res is not fully supported by most Devs. Also we don't know for sure if they will continue to work to support it. I would think so but if the res really doesn't catch on with consumers they may not. That's why I say wait until it has matured. 1080, 1440, and 1600 is the better choices right now.
 

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
I don't think that the others are a better choice. An increased field of view means a lot to me and every game coming out in the future and most current and past games 2009-2013 support this resolution.

If I have problems with this resolution on some older games I play then I can just play them on the 24 inch 1080p IPS monitor I will buy.

I am probably going with the Ultra Wide LG monitor, knowing that 21:9 won't give me as wide of a field of view that I would get on an Ultra wide monitor is really bad for me.

21:9 is on an Ultra wide monitor is way better in my opinion, assuming you can get it to work fine without image distortion in the game you are playing. The wider viewing angle makes it feel more like a multi monitor set up since it covers more of your peripheral vision. I would also be able to run my most system spec intense games on higher settings like Planetside 2 since the resolution is a little lower.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
I don't think that the others are a better choice. An increased field of view means a lot to me and every game coming out in the future and most current and past games 2009-2013 support this resolution.

If I have problems with this resolution on some older games I play then I can just play them on the 24 inch 1080p IPS monitor I will buy.

I am probably going with the Ultra Wide LG monitor, knowing that 21:9 won't give me as wide of a field of view that I would get on an Ultra wide monitor is really bad for me.

21:9 is on an Ultra wide monitor is way better in my opinion, assuming you can get it to work fine without image distortion in the game you are playing. The wider viewing angle makes it feel more like a multi monitor set up since it covers more of your peripheral vision. I would also be able to run my most system spec intense games on higher settings like Planetside 2 since the resolution is a little lower.
then get the 21:9 screen. no matter how many times we tell you the same thing you are going to keep touting something that no one is arguing about in the first place. yes 21:9 is better aspect for games and we agree BUT please please please let in sink in that you are going to have trouble getting many if not most of your games to work. I have spent days fooling around with that aspect ratio and only a handful of games worked perfectly correct. you were already given the simple solution of just playing games that do properly support 21:9 on a 2560x1440 screen but you dont want to accept that.
 
Last edited:

Black Octagon

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2012
1,410
2
81
OP, if you have to get a monitor now (I ain't buying anything till Gsync is out and thoroughly reviewed) go 2560x1440 IPS or PLS. But then you may want a second 680, hehe
 

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
then get the 21:9 screen. no matter how many times we tell you the same thing you are going to keep touting something that no one is arguing about in the first place. yes 21:9 is better aspect for games and we agree BUT please please please let in sink in that you are going to have trouble getting many if not most of your games to work. I have spent days fooling around with that aspect ratio and only a handful of games worked perfectly correct. you were already given the simple solution of just playing games that do properly support 21:9 on a 2560x1440 screen but you dont want to accept that.

You agreed with what someone else said that 21:9 on a 2560x1440 screen still won't have as much field of view on the screen as the Ultra wide 21:9 monitor does. Even if some older games have problems with it, the games I play the most are newer ones which do have support for it. These are the multiplayer games that I currently play and all of them have full support for this resolution except for maybe 2.

TERA
Battlefield 4 Beta
Star Wars The Old Republic MMO (Might not work at 21:9)
Planetside 2
Command and Conquer 3 Kanes Wrath (Might not work at 21:9)
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
You agreed with what someone else said that 21:9 on a 2560x1440 screen still won't have as much field of view on the screen as the Ultra wide 21:9 monitor does. Even if some older games have problems with it, the games I play the most are newer ones which do have support for it. These are the multiplayer games that I currently play and all of them have full support for this resolution except for maybe 2.

TERA
Battlefield 4 Beta
Star Wars The Old Republic MMO (Might not work at 21:9)
Planetside 2
Command and Conquer 3 Kanes Wrath (Might not work at 21:9)
you only read what you want to read. it will have the SAME fov. and I am so sick of you saying its a few older games that dont have support. I have told you over and over that many if not most game do NOT properly support that resolution/aspect ratio that includes brand new games. I am done replying to you about this because you already have your mind made up.
 

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
A 21:9 image on a 27" 16:9 screen will not be larger than a 21:9 imagine on a 21:9 29" monitor...

A 27" 2560x1440 might have more pixels and also a larger overall area, but not for 21:9 content.

27" 16:9 is 2.3% more screen area, and obviously more pixels (33% more).
Total Area:
21:9 @ 29" 304.5 square inches
16:9 @ 27" 311.5 square inches

21:9 on a 27" monitor is 235 square inches, approx, or about 23" less for 21:9 content.

You are sure about this? Your post is the reason why I want to buy the LG 21:9 Ultra Wide Monitor, Field of View is very important to me and I want to buy the monitor that would give me the largest field of view in the multiplayer games that I currently play.

toyota agreed with what you said yet in his last post he claims that the FOV would be the same.
 

bystander36

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,154
132
106
You are sure about this? Your post is the reason why I want to buy the LG 21:9 Ultra Wide Monitor, Field of View is very important to me and I want to buy the monitor that would give me the largest field of view in the multiplayer games that I currently play.

toyota agreed with what you said yet in his last post he claims that the FOV would be the same.

He is correct. They measure the size of the monitor by its diagonal measurement from top corner to bottom corner. In 21:9 format, a 1440p or 1600p monitor will shrink in its size, as you shrink down the horizontal, while the 21:9 monitor of the same size or larger is already measured for that resolution.

In their native resolution, the square area will favor the 1440p or 1600p monitors of the same size and even a little larger.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
You are sure about this? Your post is the reason why I want to buy the LG 21:9 Ultra Wide Monitor, Field of View is very important to me and I want to buy the monitor that would give me the largest field of view in the multiplayer games that I currently play.

toyota agreed with what you said yet in his last post he claims that the FOV would be the same.

27" 2560x1440
Area with 16:9 content: 311.5" sq
Area with 21:9 content: 237" sq

29" 2560x1080
Area with 16:9 content: 232" sq
Area with 21:9 content: 304.5" sq

Basically 16:9 content on a 21:9 monitor is about 23% less area.
21:9 content on a 16:9 monitor also results in about 23% less area.

The question is, which aspect ratio is more of your content in, 21:9 or 16:9.
If most stuff is 16:9, then a 16:9 monitor gives more area more of the time.
If it's mostly 21:9, then a 21:9 monitor gives more area more of the time.

If it's games that support 21:9 or 16:9, then it depends on whether you want the extra width.


A 21:9 monitor at 29" (304.5" sq) is the equivalent of a 23.3" monitor for 16:9 content (232" sq)
A 16:9 monitor at 27" (311" sq) is the equivalent of a 25.6" monitor for 21:9 content (237.3" sq).

FOV, or what you see on the screen in terms of game world, depends on the game. Some will just stretch out the same content to the larger screen and it will be distorted, or you will need to run it 16:9 with black bars to make it work properly.
Some games will display extra game content to the sides.

http://www.wsgf.org/mgl
Games which are Hor+ will add to the sides on a wider screen monitor, but this may not apply beyond 16:9.
Games which have an icon under "UWS" (Ultra Widescreen support) should work with a 21:9 display. Most games will not though, and you will end up with the same on 21:9 or 16:9 in terms of FOV.

No proper scaling
ingame_16x9.jpg

ingame_21x9.jpg


Proper scaling
ingame_16x9_1.jpg

ingame_21x9.jpg

ingame_3x1_1.jpg


Most games will not increase what you see though, currently. Newer games are more likely to work properly.
 
Last edited:

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
27" 2560x1440
Area with 16:9 content: 311.5" sq
Area with 21:9 content: 237" sq

29" 2560x1080
Area with 16:9 content: 232" sq
Area with 21:9 content: 304.5" sq

Basically 16:9 content on a 21:9 monitor is about 23% less area.
21:9 content on a 16:9 monitor also results in about 23% less area.

The question is, which aspect ratio is more of your content in, 21:9 or 16:9.
If most stuff is 16:9, then a 16:9 monitor gives more area more of the time.
If it's mostly 21:9, then a 21:9 monitor gives more area more of the time.

If it's games that support 21:9 or 16:9, then it depends on whether you want the extra width.


A 21:9 monitor at 29" (304.5" sq) is the equivalent of a 23.3" monitor for 16:9 content (232" sq)
A 16:9 monitor at 27" (311" sq) is the equivalent of a 25.6" monitor for 21:9 content (237.3" sq).

FOV, or what you see on the screen in terms of game world, depends on the game. Some will just stretch out the same content to the larger screen and it will be distorted, or you will need to run it 16:9 with black bars to make it work properly.
Some games will display extra game content to the sides.

http://www.wsgf.org/mgl
Games which are Hor+ will add to the sides on a wider screen monitor, but this may not apply beyond 16:9.
Games which have an icon under "UWS" (Ultra Widescreen support) should work with a 21:9 display. Most games will not though, and you will end up with the same on 21:9 or 16:9 in terms of FOV.

No proper scaling
ingame_16x9.jpg

ingame_21x9.jpg


Proper scaling
ingame_16x9_1.jpg

ingame_21x9.jpg

ingame_3x1_1.jpg


Most games will not increase what you see though, currently. Newer games are more likely to work properly.

Thanks for the help, still that site is probably wrong with some games and there are more games that actually do support 21:9 ultra wide. It says TERA doesn't yet I just found a gameplay video on that same LG Monitor. Skip to 3:54 if you want to see TERA. That list on the site is old and out of date, it doesn't even have Rome 2:Total War on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNMPqrzwTSY No black bars, the image does not look distorted at all and the field of view is greatly increased.

But yes, it looks like the majority of new games coming out in 2012 and onwards are including support for the 21:9 ultra wide monitors.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
having a video of it and it actually being properly displayed are 2 different things. you probably think ACM above works fine too until you see its actually cutting off the top and bottom. I have personally tried probably about 20 games with only 3 or 4 working perfectly fine. some games look fine at first but are distorting the image on the sides. some just stretch it if you look closely. some just cut off the top and bottom and zoom in. some just dont even make the attempt and will have black bars on side such as all the Assassin Creed games and Witcher 2. some games just mess up the hud. but again just get the 21:9 screen since you know its better no matter what anyone else tells you including sites that test this stuff.
 
Last edited:

Cassius101

Member
Aug 29, 2013
155
1
81
It is not my concern whether one is better or not. All I want is the monitor that will give me the larger field of view for the multiplayer games I play.

3 out of 4 multiplayer games that I currently play support 21:9. Planetside 2, BF4 Beta and TERA. I am going to try Darkfall unholy wars soon but I am not sure I will like the game, I doubt it would have support for 21:9 but I don't mind, as long as most of the multiplayer games I play support this then I am happy.

It is a fact though that if I played a game like battlefield 3 on the 27 inch 1440p screen at 21:9 then played it on the ultra wide screen at 21:9, the ultra wide screen will still have a significantly greater FOV.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
you dont understand what the term fov means. 21:9 is the same fov on any screen. thats the whole point of an aspect ratio is to give a certain fov. you are thinking about actual physical size which yes the 29 inch 2560x1080 screen will be physically wider than having 21:9 on a 27 inch 2560x1440 screen. what you will actually see in the game aka fov will be the same if you are using the same 21:9 aspect ratio.
 

omeds

Senior member
Dec 14, 2011
646
13
81
FWIW I can get every game I play to display correctly on the 21:9 monitor, even if it doesn't support it natively and I have to edit configs (except SC2 which was a design choice by the devs as its considered a cheat).

The games I currently play are:

Total War Shogun2 and Rome2
BF3 & 4
BC2
Crysis 3
ArmA2 & 3
Red Orchestra2 & Rising Storm
Metro LL
CS:GO (all source engine games work np)
Skyrim
Bioshock Inf
Stalker series
Hitman ab
FC3
ME series

As I said the only game I currently play that doesnt work is SC2, which is by design (it just displays 16:9 with black bars on the sides).

Love the display (dell U2913WM) :) 21:9 is imo the best aspect ratio for gaming so far and much prefer it over previous 1440p displays I have owned. It also clocks to 75hz and has a low input latency "gaming mode". My only complaint is I wish the display was 1200p instead of 1080p.
 

24601

Golden Member
Jun 10, 2007
1,683
39
86
FWIW I can get every game I play to display correctly on the 21:9 monitor, even if it doesn't support it natively and I have to edit configs (except SC2 which was a design choice by the devs as its considered a cheat).

The games I currently play are:

Total War Shogun2 and Rome2
BF3 & 4
BC2
Crysis 3
ArmA2 & 3
Red Orchestra2 & Rising Storm
Metro LL
CS:GO (all source engine games work np)
Skyrim
Bioshock Inf
Stalker series
Hitman ab
FC3
ME series

As I said the only game I currently play that doesnt work is SC2, which is by design (it just displays 16:9 with black bars on the sides).

Love the display (dell U2913WM) :) 21:9 is imo the best aspect ratio for gaming so far and much prefer it over previous 1440p displays I have owned. It also clocks to 75hz and has a low input latency "gaming mode". My only complaint is I wish the display was 1200p instead of 1080p.

Still doesn't stop people from running 2560x1080 on their 2560x1440 monitors.

You simply have less monitor for the money.