Jump to content

What's the big deal with 21:9+?

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem forced to me, personally don't like them. I guess they started to came out cause they're like cinema ratio but whatever. I mean I could use them for like work and productivity, but don't like gaming on it. Specially FPS games. CSGO won't give you extra FoV and many tend to disable G-sync. 

| Ryzen 7 7800X3D | AM5 B650 Aorus Elite AX | G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5 32GB 6000MHz C30 | Sapphire PULSE Radeon RX 7900 XTX | Samsung 990 PRO 1TB with heatsink | Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 | Seasonic Focus GX-850 | Lian Li Lanccool III | Mousepad: Skypad 3.0 XL / Zowie GTF-X | Mouse: Zowie S1-C | Keyboard: Corsair K63 Cherry MX red | Beyerdynamic MMX 300 (2nd Gen) | Acer XV272U | OS: Windows 11 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is for better immersivity in gaming and having more screen space (pretty much two displays) in one without the screen border split and the cable mess. 

 

I personally would rather see 16:10 make a comeback over 21:9, 16:9 too wide for me. 

Ryzen 5 3600 stock | 2x16GB C13 3200MHz (AFR) | GTX 760 (Sold the VII)| ASUS Prime X570-P | 6TB WD Gold (128MB Cache, 2017)

Samsung 850 EVO 240 GB 

138 is a good number.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like 21:9, but for movies mostly. My ultrawide I usually use for multi-tasking, being able to have 2x full scale windows is helpful to me.

I can see why some don't like it though, it takes some getting used to at first.

Please quote my post, or put @paddy-stone if you want me to respond to you.

Spoiler
  • PCs:- 
  • Main PC build  https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/2K6Q7X
  • ASUS x53e  - i7 2670QM / Sony BD writer x8 / Win 10, Elemetary OS, Ubuntu/ Samsung 830 SSD
  • Lenovo G50 - 8Gb RAM - Samsung 860 Evo 250GB SSD - DVD writer
  •  
  • Displays:-
  • Philips 55 OLED 754 model
  • Panasonic 55" 4k TV
  • LG 29" Ultrawide
  • Philips 24" 1080p monitor as backup
  •  
  • Storage/NAS/Servers:-
  • ESXI/test build  https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/4wyR9G
  • Main Server https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/3Qftyk
  • Backup server - HP Proliant Gen 8 4 bay NAS running FreeNAS ZFS striped 3x3TiB WD reds
  • HP ProLiant G6 Server SE316M1 Twin Hex Core Intel Xeon E5645 2.40GHz 48GB RAM
  •  
  • Gaming/Tablets etc:-
  • Xbox One S 500GB + 2TB HDD
  • PS4
  • Nvidia Shield TV
  • Xiaomi/Pocafone F2 pro 8GB/256GB
  • Xiaomi Redmi Note 4

 

  • Unused Hardware currently :-
  • 4670K MSI mobo 16GB ram
  • i7 6700K  b250 mobo
  • Zotac GTX 1060 6GB Amp! edition
  • Zotac GTX 1050 mini

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some games look better if you go 3440 X 1440. 

I prefer it to my 4k gaming rig.

The down side is that some games don't support it at all. That is one of the reasons why I have 2 gaming computers. 

 

For 21:9 100hz 3440X1440 a GTX 1080 ti is required. A GTX 1080 will only get you into the 80s.

 

I prefer 16:9 1440 over 21:9 1080 because of the vertical pixel count. They are only ok if you can't afford a GTX 1080 & want to go WS.

 

21:9 monitors are prone to screen tear if you under power them. A GPU or CPU/motherboard upgrade has as much chance of fixing it as G-Sync.

I use modern i7s & GTX 1080 tis so I don't need G-Sync.

 

I mainly play action RPGs and that is where 21:9 shines the most.

RIG#1 CPU: AMD, R 7 5800x3D| Motherboard: X570 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3200 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 2TB | Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG42UQ

 

RIG#2 CPU: Intel i9 11900k | Motherboard: Z590 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3600 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1300 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO | Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 | SSD#1: SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX300 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k C1 OLED TV

 

RIG#3 CPU: Intel i9 10900kf | Motherboard: Z490 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 4000 | GPU: MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Crucial P1 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

 

RIG#4 CPU: Intel i9 13900k | Motherboard: AORUS Z790 Master | RAM: Corsair Dominator RGB 32GB DDR5 6200 | GPU: Zotac Amp Extreme 4090  | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Streacom BC1.1S | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD: Corsair MP600 1TB  | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sammaye said:

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 is a 3440 X 1440 Skyrim SE screen shot showing the difference between it & a 2560 X 1440 image.

Hope it helps.

 

BhAPWeR.jpg

RIG#1 CPU: AMD, R 7 5800x3D| Motherboard: X570 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3200 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 2TB | Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG42UQ

 

RIG#2 CPU: Intel i9 11900k | Motherboard: Z590 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3600 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1300 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO | Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 | SSD#1: SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX300 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k C1 OLED TV

 

RIG#3 CPU: Intel i9 10900kf | Motherboard: Z490 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 4000 | GPU: MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Crucial P1 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

 

RIG#4 CPU: Intel i9 13900k | Motherboard: AORUS Z790 Master | RAM: Corsair Dominator RGB 32GB DDR5 6200 | GPU: Zotac Amp Extreme 4090  | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Streacom BC1.1S | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD: Corsair MP600 1TB  | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2160 is 4k. They don't make 21:9 4k monitors. The largest are 1600.

 

On a 4k 16:9 you will see the same as in the 16:9 part of the image but with higher pixel density. The same goes with 1080 resolution with less pixel density.

 

If you want to see the extra real estate go 21:9.  

 

RIG#1 CPU: AMD, R 7 5800x3D| Motherboard: X570 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3200 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 2TB | Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG42UQ

 

RIG#2 CPU: Intel i9 11900k | Motherboard: Z590 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3600 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1300 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO | Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 | SSD#1: SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX300 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k C1 OLED TV

 

RIG#3 CPU: Intel i9 10900kf | Motherboard: Z490 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 4000 | GPU: MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Crucial P1 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

 

RIG#4 CPU: Intel i9 13900k | Motherboard: AORUS Z790 Master | RAM: Corsair Dominator RGB 32GB DDR5 6200 | GPU: Zotac Amp Extreme 4090  | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Streacom BC1.1S | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD: Corsair MP600 1TB  | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sammaye said:

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.

 

 

Games scale by aspect ratio, not by resolution. Wider ratios will result in a wider field of view, regardless of the resolutions involved. 1366 × 768 will allow you to see more than 4096 × 3072 (depending on the game; there are exceptions, but most games operate this way).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 1.7.2018 at 7:39 PM, Glenwing said:

Games scale by aspect ratio, not by resolution. Wider ratios will result in a wider field of view, regardless of the resolutions involved. 1366 × 768 will allow you to see more than 4096 × 3072 (depending on the game; there are exceptions, but most games operate this way).

Not a 100% true, isn't it? Most modern games provide you a FOV slider in the settings, which you would need to use in FPS titles to really get the additional space to your left and right.

 

So here is the point, if you have a 21:9 Screen with the same actual height as a 16:9 model, then yes, you would have added some pixels to left and right and added some screen to your horizontal peripherical view. But i still don't really get what that would be good for, because you will in reality lose on vertical peripherical view. So you could say a 16:9 aspect ratio adds that to a 21:9, if they both share the same width. In fact if we were talking about peripherical view then the optimal monitor would need to have an aspect ratio of about 3:2, thats how we really see. And thats how Microsoft built the screens of their surface books. The same aspect ratio is used for all camera sensors, just because its natural.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't lose anything vertically. It is exactly like the image I put up. You gain horizontally.

 

My 34" 21:9 monitor is as tall as a 27" 16:9 monitor. It has 1440 pixels vertically just like a 16:9 1440 monitor. It has more pixels horizontally. This is nice for open world games like Witcher 3 & Fallout 4. 

 

FOV is more like changing the focal length on a camera lens. The wider you go the more distorted the image will be at the edges. 

 

I use both types of monitors every day so it is not a concept to me. It is reality. 

 

 

 

 

RIG#1 CPU: AMD, R 7 5800x3D| Motherboard: X570 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3200 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 2TB | Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG42UQ

 

RIG#2 CPU: Intel i9 11900k | Motherboard: Z590 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 3600 | GPU: EVGA FTW3 ULTRA  RTX 3090 ti | PSU: EVGA 1300 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO | Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 | SSD#1: SSD#1: Corsair MP600 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX300 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k C1 OLED TV

 

RIG#3 CPU: Intel i9 10900kf | Motherboard: Z490 AORUS Master | RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB DDR4 4000 | GPU: MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Lian Li O11 Dynamic | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD#1: Crucial P1 1TB | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

 

RIG#4 CPU: Intel i9 13900k | Motherboard: AORUS Z790 Master | RAM: Corsair Dominator RGB 32GB DDR5 6200 | GPU: Zotac Amp Extreme 4090  | PSU: EVGA 1000 G+ | Case: Streacom BC1.1S | Cooler: EK 360mm AIO | SSD: Corsair MP600 1TB  | SSD#2: Crucial MX500 2.5" 1TB | Monitor: LG 55" 4k B9 OLED TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my monitor.

 

16:9, 1440p, 144hz, 4ms, 31.5inch size. Little curve.

 

I havn't measured it but if you up the FOV sliders to the max it feels like I am getting the best of both worlds.

https://www.asus.com/uk/Monitors/ROG-Strix-XG32VQ/

CPU Intel i7 8700K @5Ghz Motherboard ROG Maximus Hero 10 RAM Corsair Vengeance 32GB 3600MHz 

GPU MSI Gaming X 1080ti Case Thermaltake Core P3  Storage SSD Boot plus Samsung 960 Evo M.2 nvme storage 

PSU Corsair RM750W Gold Display Asus ROG Strix XG32VQ 144Hz 1440p Cooling Corsair H100i V2 

Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK FX Mouse Roccat Kone Aimo Audio MK3 Fostex T50RP + Schiit Magni 3 AMP and Modi 2 DAC 
Operating System Win 10

VR HTC Vive, Audio Strap Motion Platform DOF Reality 2 DOF

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 22.7.2018 at 1:15 AM, jones177 said:

You don't lose anything vertically. It is exactly like the image I put up. You gain horizontally.

 

My 34" 21:9 monitor is as tall as a 27" 16:9 monitor. It has 1440 pixels vertically just like a 16:9 1440 monitor. It has more pixels horizontally. This is nice for open world games like Witcher 3 & Fallout 4. 

True, in that case you gain the horizontal pixels. I'm just saying its a circle. Because you could get another monitor which has the same horizontal resolution as your 21:9 and would gain the vertical pixels by that. The monitors would just get bigger and bigger, and in the end thats where the additional real estate comes from. I'm totally not against them, as long as i still can buy my 16:9 ratio :)

 

On 22.7.2018 at 1:15 AM, jones177 said:

FOV is more like changing the focal length on a camera lens. The wider you go the more distorted the image will be at the edges. 

Yes, i know, and i think that it depends on the game how it is scaled (croped). Did you see any differences there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Big_Devil said:

The monitors would just get bigger and bigger, and in the end thats where the additional real estate comes from.

It doesn't though, that's the point. A 2560×1440 display won't let you see anything more than a 1920×1080 display for most standard games. It will be the same view, only sharper because it is rendered with more pixels. If you take a 1920×1080 monitor and change it for a 2560×1080, you will get a wider field of view because the vertical view will stay fixed and the horizontal view will be larger relative to the vertical field. If you take your 2560×1080 display and change it for a 2560×1440, your field of view will shrink back to the same as it was at 1920×1080. Test it out.

 

Games may have a FOV slider which changes what the fixed vertical FOV is, but the horizontal FOV is still determined by the aspect ratio, wider aspect ratio means the horizontal FOV will be wider relative to the vertical FOV.

 

There are of course exceptions like Civilization which simply expands based on resolution, but the vast majority of games scale by horizontal ratio (called "HOR+ scaling").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so if i would crank up the vertical FOV slider to the max, i would still have the additional horizontal FOV at 21:9 compared to 16:9. Learned something new :)

 

Was just not sure about that, because i've seen some reviews about 21:9 screens where the vertical FOV had to be adjusted in first place to really get the additional sight. But maybe that have been games which are the exceptions you were writing about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×