4k, check; >30", check; 100hz, check; gsync, check; 16:9-

>>379368898
movies are better, some tv shows that support it are better, multi-tasking and content creation is way better.

games that support it are hit and miss and mostly down to personal preference, since even when it's supported you are trading noticeable performance for real estate that you don't really need.

>>379368898
After using a 16:10 display for years I decided to say "fuck it" and go with a standard aspect ratio for my next monitor. There's always some kind of problems especially with the console ports. Most of the games don't support it and output a 16:9 image with black bars. Even those that do declare a support often have some issues such as UI or game world having the wrong aspect ratio, or just generic game bug that occur only for non-standard aspect ratios. Devs don't even bother testing on non-16:9 screens, so it's literally a russian roulette, especially with smaller games

File: 20170405005306_1.jpg (193KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1920x1200px

>>379369534
>>After using a 16:10 display for years I decided to say "fuck it" and go with a standard aspect ratio for my next monitor. There's always some kind of problems especially with the console ports. Most of the games don't support it and output a 16:9 image with black bars. Even those that do declare a support often have some issues such as UI or game world having the wrong aspect ratio, or just generic game bug that occur only for non-standard aspect ratios. Devs don't even bother testing on non-16:9 screens, so it's literally a russian roulette, especially with smaller games

Are you talking about Automata?
I guess I'm so used to the upscale I didn't even notice before people mentioned it.

>>379369962
Yeah. Automata was the recent example of a game which used different scaling for UI and the world. At the end I just gave up and set the resolution to 1080p (on a 1920x1200 display)

>>379368898

There is literally no downsides to 21:9, none whatsoever. Go for it my man.

Anyone saying there is is a liar.

>>379368898
>4k, check; >30", check; 100hz, check; gsync, check; 16:9-
Don't forget to buy SLI 1080-TI and equal top cards every year to support this display.

>>379372731

it's not 4k though, its 1440p

>>379370846
for gaming there is, what the fuck are you on about. For one, most games either don't support it, or support it in such a shitty way that you're forced to use 16:9 and suffer black bars anyway. For the games it does work with, you take a significant framerate penalty (5-20 fps) for extra space that rarely actually helps you.

t. UW owner for 3 years

File: 1496183639288.jpg (12KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 184x184px

>>379368898
> a 100 measly hz

>>379373276

>if a game doesn't supports it you are forced to play in 16:9

So worst case scenario you get the experience you would have if you bought a 16:9. How is that a downside exactly ?

>For the games it does work with, you take a significant framerate penalty (5-20 fps) for extra space that rarely actually helps you.

On badly optimised games maybe, but unless you have a garbage PC ( wich I doubt if you bought a 1000$+ monitor ) this is a non issue.
The only game that gave me trouble specifically with 21:9 performances is nier automata and it was caused by the global illumination setting.
Once fixed, flawless experience.

And this ratio is becoming more and more common, so I don't fear for futur support in the least.

Like I said, literally no downsides to 21:9 compared to 16:9

File: speccy5.png (200KB, 1061x981px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1061x981px

>>379368898
Its pretty amazing. I do have a normal ratio display for games that don't play nice with it tho. If you've got the cash and a high end system that can handle that resolution+100fps go for it. It's also absolutely amazing to watch movies on, great for productivity etc.

>>379370561
It seemed fine for me?

>>379373276
>you take a significant framerate penalty
What kind of shit hardware are you running? That is not the case, at all

>>379374813
>It seemed fine for me
Maybe it's different for 21:9, but on my screen it was either the game itself or the UI that was stretched. I couldn't get both of them to scale identically

>>379368898
100hz is the real meme there, jesus, need at least 144hz for competitive vidya.

>>379375326
>Le competitive underage Esport wannaba kid 144hz csgo
Fuck off

>>379374484
>So worst case scenario you get the experience you would have if you bought a 16:9. How is that a downside exactly ?

You just dropped more than double the cash no zero gain.

>>379368898
4k is a meme still. 1440p is the way to go. You won't be able to run anything silky smooth yet at 4k unless it's some indie pixel game.

>>379368898
I love my 21:9 display. It does push more pixels than a standard 1440p display and does take a bit more horsepower because of it. If your spending $1000 on a monitor I figure you're building a pretty beefy pc.

I really enjoy it for games and there are some pretty good third party programs which help set it up in games where the aspect ratio isn't supported.

But I've had to use that now for fewer and fewer games, which has been a big plus.

The wider screen does make games, especially fps, feel more immersive.

The biggest upside, though, I'd say is to productivity. The amount of space I have on screen means I rarely have to switch a window from the background to the foreground. It's makes a lot of work much more efficient and less tedious.

>>379375503

Price is not the point.
That doesn't change the fact that these monitors are far too expensive, but that's not the point I was making.

Regardless of the price you'll get a usually better experience than on a 16:9 and at worst the same as a 16:9.

>>379376016
You're usually better off going up to a larger and higher resolution 16:9 display than you are a 21:9 display.

These 36" 21:9 3360x1440 displays just can't hold a candle to a proper 40" 3840x2160 display.

File: 1496652253738.jpg (75KB, 714x999px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 714x999px

>>379375701
Funny, I run everything at 4k max settings and Ive yet to run into anything that doesn't hold a solid 60 fps.

Tekken 7, Nier, DQ Heroes 2, Dying Light, Black Desert, Witcher 3, Total War Warhammer... Literally everything runs perfectly on 1080 Ti SLI @ 4k. Where do you come up with this shit friendo?

>>379376327


It depends, 4k sure is sharper than 1440p but the 21:9 ratio is far more immersive in pretty much all types of game.


Either way, it's only a matter of time before we get some proper 4k 21:9 monitors

i'm not buying a display till 4k HDR10 is standard.

>>379377497
> 21:9 ratio is far more immersive
Only if you compare it to a 16:9 display of the same height and vertical resolution.
If it helps think of a large format 16:9 display 21:12 instead.
It has absolutely no advantage when 16:9 displays are cheaper for a larger display with a higher resolution.

>>379368898
If it is a TN monitor then it's a meme.

>>379380218

I don't understand.

When displaying a game for example, ratio is the same regardless of height and resolution right ?
while a 21:9 will always display 33% more information on the sides ( unless it's deliberately "nerfed" by the devs like blizzard with overwatch )

>>379376327
But they do hold a candle to them, the resolution is almost the same, you get better movie viewing, better workflow, and more immersion.

When a game is stuck at 16:9 it's the same, just with slightly lower resolution and black bars on the sides.

21:9 is just better.

>>379375701
Almost any Japanese game can be played at 4k 60fps on moderate hardware.

File: NieRAutomata 2017-03-20 21-12-39-52.jpg (520KB, 3440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 3440x1440px

>>379369534
16:9 is disgusting though. Windowed mode works just fine.

>>379373276
>suffer from black bars
a game that doesn't support ultrawide just goes from 34 inches to 27 on an ultrawide anyways. alot more games support it than you think. I've had mine for over a year and the only games that come to mind are overwatch, tekken 7, and obviously 2d games

File: ds321.jpg (648KB, 3440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 3440x1440px

>>379381507

I don't understand how people don't think of this as the natural evolution of the 16:9

>>379376907
>1080ti sli
he's talking people that arent consumer goys

>4k
>30"
>ultrawide
into the trash it goes
the best monitor is 27'' 1440p 144hz(or that 165 hz one) ips and gsync

>>379381995

To be fair, while 1080Ti sli for 60fps on unimpressive or old games is nothing to boast about, high specs 21:9 monitors are more expensive than 16:9 4k displays.

>>379381897
Or that 16:9 wasn't a devolution of 16:10.

They're just goys.

>>379380313
IPS monitors are a meme

>>379382230
t. manchild who plays kids games

>>379382458
i bet u think skyrim and fallout arent kiddie games

>>379368898
>100hz
lmao might as well get a 60hz

144Hz has to be the biggest meme of them all because it's almost only usable in shitty looking "competitive games" designed to run on toasters


It's pretty much unattainable on single player games ( like the witcher 3 for example ) once you upgrade to a 1440p monitor.

>>379383554
so dont upgrade
get a gtx 1080 ti and 1080p 144hz monitor see what results u get

>>379383795
Lol

>>379383554
i have a 144hz 1440p. you're full of shit.

>>379383795


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAQQcIv8mUo

> unstable 110-130 fps never reaching 144 fps once.
> unsurprisingly doesn't reach 144fps on a 2 years old game with a top end 800€ card on an old resolution only poorfags use anymore.

WOAH! PC truly is the platform that doesn't compromise.

>>379384849

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhT-eri-Wbo

>100fps in interior down to 60 in the wild.

looks like you are full of shit.


Why do pc users need to lie about specs every fucking time ?

Oh and It's about the same with a 1080TI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxt94BMYJng


>it's not a meme refresh rate guys! I swear!