sammaye

Aha, that's what I was missing, the way games scale

In fact those 16:9 which are 1440 are normally the same people who make ultra-wide monitors too, Acer, Asus being the two main culprits who make screens intentionally that size, while every other manufacturer doesn't, I got an Acer that didn't fall prey to that manufacturing method it seems ( https://www.ebuyer.com/727526-acer-predator-xb321hk-32-4k-ips-monitor-um-jx1ee-001?mkwid=s_dc&pcrid=51482416139&pkw=&pmt=&gclid=CjwKCAjw9-HZBRAwEiwAGw0QcZWbg6No-U6eBeKs3YbH6q1m24iA9g52m0m1hjLtmMKh5DQc-TBRBxoCrmUQAvD_BwE ) but I have also noticed that the new HDR and G-Sync enabled monitor by Acer does not follow the 1440 rule either.

Ok, one problem with that, most 16:9, i.e. my 32" is actually 2160 high, not 1440

Actually getting back to my observation, one app would be sony Vegas, aka video editors, they would be awesome on 21:9

Well, it isn't more screen space, my 32" Predator produces more screen space in real terms than a 35" Asus, mostly since the vertical space, when used practically, exceeds the gain of the horizontal space. I can fit three windows side by side while also reading up to 600 lines of code on my 32". I guess they would not be 2 full sized windows, so that could be a case for it, but I cannot think of one site or app (that's not a game) that uses the full width of 4K and I find a common complaint from ultrawide owners is that sites and apps don't make use of any of the room, so I guess it is down to exactly what app you have open. How do they produce better immersivity in games? To me it would seem like wearing a helmet, you would loose nearly 800px of vertical view from my monitor. I mean I agree curved monitors can be good here, but ultra-wide, seems like the two should be separated.

This may sound like a troll and I am a monitor noob but it is an honest question, mostly since most G-Sync monitors are now 21:9 (in fact all are, the 16:9s have been discontinued, apart from one Dell I saw). What is the point in 21:9? I have recently had my Acer 32" G-Sync Predator break on me so I am having to go in search of a new monitor. It seems all G-Sync monitors are now "ultra wide". I see people saying that it is good for programming/work, but as a programmer myself (who also uses it for social/trading work), having half the vertical resolution I would have on my 32" (even down to 1080 on the new Samsung) would not be very good, especially if you are a serious programmer with any clout, since your files would likely be bigger than a few hundred lines, so would any preview of your coding. You can get better screen placement by buying a 49" 16:9 and using display fusion to create custom virtual window layouts, from what I see. It seems that everyone who raves about 21:9 here are actually using it for video editing specifically. It's not good for videos either since 90% of videos (movies and TV Shows) out there don't support above widescreen. I see many people post-process their videos to remove the scaling factor most encoders put in. It's not really that great for games either since such a small view port would be like wearing a medieval helmet on your face, you'd be missing the top and bottom half of the image which I get on my 32", I mean it would help for very specific FPS games like CS:GO but any other game it would be pointless and actually restricting, probably wouldn't help in games like LoL either since you would restrict your view of the field in the horizontal direction. I always thought that ultra wide was basically (near) 4k + some extra width, but it isn't, it totally breaks monitors from what I see. So, can someone help me out here and tell me what's such the big deal with 21:9+? Could this be a sign that G-Sync is only really useful for FPS-ers who only use their system for FPS-ing?