Ok, so LG has a really nice 3440x1440 ultra wide?

I'm no pro when it comes to this sort of thing, why would this be much different than a 4k display when it comes to how hard it is for a machine to display it?

does it have to do more with texturing, or is this thing a little much for most gamers to truely handle?

its easier to run than a 4k

and some games dont support that aspect ratio

figured i'd get black bars with a quite a bit of content ^^

but just multiplied the pixel count and i didn't quite understand if it would be easier or not... i hear the games that do run it are beautiful on wide screen

I've been looking into buying a new monitor and discovered this exact monitor earlier today and my interest is piqued.

It has 40% more pixels than WQHD (standard 1440p). 4k has 120% more pixels. I think these monitors are sometimes referred to as 2K/QHD.

It is possible to run it decently well off of one GTX 980 I think. Though they're all almost 60 Hz, you'll probably never actually push more than 60 fps off one GTX 980 in most games and could possibly avoid egregious screen tearing.

This post was edited by Interesting on Jan 20 2015 10:52pm

i guess from what i've seen the point of getting a single 980 outside of power consumption. if i got this guy, i would feel obligated to go the 2x 970 route... in fact, i'd go the 2x 970 + curved before i'd do the 2x 980 with this setup personally.

although, idk what good curved is outside of sex apeal on a monitor.

It comes down to what you want. You do have to keep in mind that this monitor is 60 Hz and its refresh/response time won't make very many gamers happy.

Personally, this monitor, the LG 34UM95, (Tom's Hardware review here -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lg-34um95-ultra-wide-monitor,3835.html ) has shot up to #1 on my list right now above the ASUS ROG Swift. Within the next year or two, I expect to see numerous adding of G-Sync to IPS monitors with increasingly lower and lower response/refresh time and higher resolutions. I expect the prices of those monitors to drop significantly, too. This monitor, however, will retain a lot of value for its QHD and form factor. Additionally, it even supports Thunderbolt 2.0 so Mac people would love this monitor for the workspace. It's a monitor I could see keeping and, when the time comes to buy a G-Sync monitor, I could see still using this monitor somewhere else in the house. 21:9 is the native aspect ratio movies are filmed in. Hell, take the stand off, mount it to a wall in the den, and have a nice little QHD TV to watch blu-rays on in a few years, or use it strictly as a work monitor.

agreed, its a beauty

The deal with ultra wide is the pixel pitch...on quality ultra wides they keep a low pixel pitch like .26 or lower...on cheap ultra wides they stretch the pixel pitch to up around .33 or so, which just degrades the images on the screen.

Yeah. LG made other 21:9 models but they weren't QHD and had a pixel pitch of .315 and were poorly received. This QHD beast has a pixel pitch of .232 though.

I'm definitely considering it. While its response time is 14ms, it has a pretty respectable 5ms GtG response time which is much better than I anticipated.

Yep, yep