Ultrawide vs standard 1440p vs 4k

[OttoVonBismarck]

hey there,

 

back when i first got my original monitor, its a 60hz, 34" ultrawide with IPS for really nice colours. It's the u3415w. Now i'm trying to decide between a lot of different high end monitors for a new one. I'm really indecisive right now, with the main ones that interest me being ultrawides that can do 120hz, or 1440p standards that can do 165hz. I've been gaming on a 60hz ultrawide for quite some time, and want to see some g-sync + high refresh rate action.

 

What do you recommend in these areas? should i stick with ultrawide or get a standard 1440p? does 4k even matter anymore? 

[lervayy]

https://www.amazon.com/LG-34UC89G-B-34-Inch-21-UltraWide/dp/B0728JH3RQ/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1544081635&sr=8-3&keywords=ultrawide+144hz

[KnightSirius]

When it comes to the high-end gaming monitor market, the differences are really down to preference and what games you play most and how they benefit from the monitor type. You gotta decide what's most important to you in games: Ultra-wide/1440p + high refresh rate or 4K with normal 60hz? Of course you CAN drop 2 grand on the PG27UQ and have everything but you probably have a reasonable budget

[OttoVonBismarck]

Just now, KnightSirius said:

When it comes to the high-end gaming monitor market, the differences are really down to preference and what games you play most and how they benefit from the monitor type. You gotta decide what's most important to you in games: Ultra-wide/1440p + high refresh rate or 4K with normal 60hz? Of course you CAN drop 2 grand on the PG27UQ and have everything but you probably have a reasonable budget

i think i want high refresh rate rather than 4k, but i don't know if i should stick with an ultrawide again vs a standard 1440p monitor that can have an even higher refresh rate and usually be cheaper for it

[KnightSirius]

Well when you take high refresh rate and budget into consideration 16:9 displays WILL be cheaper.

Acer XB271HU (TN) ($500) - TN Panel / 1440p / 144Hz / G-Sync

Asus MG279Q ($510) - IPS Panel / 1440p / 144Hz / FreeSync

Those are some solid picks that checks the most important boxes, but If you want BOTH G-Sync and IPS you'll be spending a bit more and at that point is where ultrawides start in price.

Acer XB271HU (IPS) ($680) IPS Panel / 1440p / 144Hz / G-Sync

 

Acer Predator Z35 ($680) TN Panel / 2560x1080 / 144Hz / G-Sync

The Z35 ultra-wide is significantly worse than the 16:9 Acer at that price...

Asus UWQHD ($730) - VA Panel / 1440p / 100Hz / FreeSync

You can spend another hundred bucks for a higher resolution panel but you lose G-Sync support, and a VA panel is an improvement over TN... but to get G-Sync and IPS you have to jump all the way to nearly $1000...

Asus PG348Q ($950) - IPS Panel / 1440p  / 100Hz / G-Sync

That checks all the boxes but you're paying ~40% more coming from the Acer XB271HU (IPS).

So if it's down to budget and you want high refresh, 16:9 is the clear winner.



 

[OttoVonBismarck]

33 minutes ago, KnightSirius said:

Well when you take high refresh rate and budget into consideration 16:9 displays WILL be cheaper.

Acer XB271HU (TN) ($500) - TN Panel / 1440p / 144Hz / G-Sync

Asus MG279Q ($510) - IPS Panel / 1440p / 144Hz / FreeSync

Those are some solid picks that checks the most important boxes, but If you want BOTH G-Sync and IPS you'll be spending a bit more and at that point is where ultrawides start in price.

Acer XB271HU (IPS) ($680) IPS Panel / 1440p / 144Hz / G-Sync

 

Acer Predator Z35 ($680) TN Panel / 2560x1080 / 144Hz / G-Sync

The Z35 ultra-wide is significantly worse than the 16:9 Acer at that price...

Asus UWQHD ($730) - VA Panel / 1440p / 100Hz / FreeSync

You can spend another hundred bucks for a higher resolution panel but you lose G-Sync support, and a VA panel is an improvement over TN... but to get G-Sync and IPS you have to jump all the way to nearly $1000...

Asus PG348Q ($950) - IPS Panel / 1440p  / 100Hz / G-Sync

That checks all the boxes but you're paying ~40% more coming from the Acer XB271HU (IPS).

So if it's down to budget and you want high refresh, 16:9 is the clear winner.



 

Hey thanks for the really comprehensive response. Yeah you're definitely right. the two main sexy ultrawides that i can see are the X34P (120hz with overclocking, some users report flickering and other problems at this level based on temps) at $1400 AUD and the Alienware monitor that shares the same panel which can be had in australia for like $2000. 

 

the Acer Predator XB271HU IPS goes for $889 here with 144hz, IPS, G-sync and an overclock to 165hz. i think i will have to go for this baby just considering the sheer staggering price difference between the $2000 alienware, the $1400 x34p, and the $889 predator XB. I might be convinced to get the x34p but god damn thats a pricy monitor considering i already have an ultrawide but i don't have a 165hz monitor

 

thanks for the help the price discussion really cleared it up for me. a lot of the great features i really want come waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay cheaper than i thought on standard 16:9

[Sahl]

I can recommend the Asus PG279q . It is IPS Panel - 1440p - 165hz - with G-Sync

I've had no issue with backlight bleed, dead pixels and no input lag/ghosting/etc when playing fast paced FPS ie. It has pretty good colouring atleast from what I am used at watching.

 

I guess the only drawback is that its pretty expenssive.

[jones177]

For playing most games I prefer ultra wide. Mine is an older 60hz 3440 x 1440 curved monitor,

 

I have a 1440 144hz 32" monitor but it is no substitute for an ultra wide and if you have powerful hardware like I do it is no substitute for 4k either. To me it is only good for competitive games and if I get into a game like that I will temporarily replace my 4k monitor with it but never my ultra wide monitor. 

 

I would only upgrade my wide screen with another widescreen. I am torn between a LG UltraGear 34GK950G-B 34" and a LG 38WK95C-W 38".  I will need at least $300 off to buy one so which one drops first I will get.