Are ultra wide monitors worth it for audio/video workstation

>>60843599
Ultrawide is a meme. A bad one. 16:10, 5:4, 4:3 master race.

>>60843599
>1440p in 2017
Is this a meme?

File: 1484669614894.jpg (97KB, 1500x844px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1500x844px

>>60843634
>>60843874
I only have a 970 but thinking of getting one of these (Dell U3415W)

>>60843599
27's not really worth it; you get the vertical space of a regular 22". If you're gonna go ultrawide, go 34" (= 27" equivalent by height) or better.

As for whether it's worth it, that's up to you. Dual 16:9 is better if you like having two full-size windows side-by-side, but then you only get a game on half. A single, larger 16:9 could have more screen space overall, but not at that width (it would basically be a TV then). Ultrawide is the most efficient for a single, large display, which makes it arguably best for gaming where you only get one monitor anyway.

no get a proper aspect ratio like 16:10 or 3:2

File: 34UM88_1_supersize.jpg (64KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 700x700px

UW is really more like one wide screen + a tiny portrait mode screen in one

File: 1495868696771.jpg (22KB, 349x305px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 349x305px

I'm torn between 2x 27" 1440p and either an ultra-wide 1440p or a 40" 4k.

TORN

>>60846622
>>60846662
This right here. My current struggle, trying to decide if I want two full size monitors or one and an awkward half but which I can play skyrim on fullscreen...

Almost makes me want that samsung 32:9 monitor.

>>60846662
>40" 4k
You're basically playing on a tv then at that point though

>>60847050
Size doesn't turn a monitor into a TV.