Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › 3840 x 1600 monitors are coming (2.4:1 aspect ratio)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

3840 x 1600 monitors are coming (2.4:1 aspect ratio)

post #1 of 53
Thread Starter 
Article here from guru3d. In short, LG's LM375UW1 panel will measure 37.5" diagonally and will display 3840 x 1600, an aspect ratio of 2.4:1. According to Sven's dpi calculator, these figures work out to:

4.62" × 14.42" = 499.26in² (87.92cm × 36.63cm = 3221.03cm²) at 110.93 PPI, 0.229mm dot pitch, 12306 PPI²

To put these numbers in perspective:

A 21:9 monitor of 34.2 inches would yield the same area.
A 21:9 3840x2160 monitor of 40 inches would yield the same pixel density.

In terms of pixel count, 3840 x 1600 delivers 6.14 million pixels. That works out to

24 percent more than 3440 x 1440
50 percent more than 2560 x 1600
67 percent more than 2560x1440
200 percent more than full HD (1920x1080).
post #2 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarylandUSA View Post

24 percent more than 3440 x 1440
50 percent more than 2560 x 1600
67 percent more than 2560x1440
200 percent more than full HD (1920x1080).

25% less than UHD aka 4K? Which is commodity now.

I bet due its "exclusivity" this ultrashort ugliness would be priced north of $1000. This development reminds me sad story of 2560x1600 which, due to exuberant pricing, never enjoyed wide adoption. BTW those monitors appeared first 11.5 years ago (June 28, 2004 Apple Cinema Display). Widescreen nuts must be proud that industry gifted them wholesome 50% more screen area on the sides just a decade later.

Here is size comparison of that 30" 2560x1600 with 37" "latest and greatest" ultrawide. You actually loose some height, so 50% more area claim is not entirely legitimate. Why in the world people want short displays?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarylandUSA View Post

A 21:9 3840x2160 monitor of 40 inches would yield the same pixel density...

40" UHD panels are dirt cheap, so they can just cut off top and bottom, and don't bother making a special panel. Or, they can even take panels which were rejected by QA due to dead pixels on top or bottom for free.
Edited by Tegiri Nenashi - 1/25/16 at 10:13am
post #3 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tegiri Nenashi View Post

25% less than UHD aka 4K? Which is commodity now.

I bet due its "exclusivity" this ultrashort ugliness would be priced north of $1000. This development reminds me sad story of 2560x1600 which, due to exuberant pricing, never enjoyed wide adoption. BTW those monitors appeared first 11.5 years ago (June 28, 2004 Apple Cinema Display). Widescreen nuts must be proud that industry gifted them wholesome 50% more screen area on the sides just a decade later.

Here is size comparison of that 30" 2560x1600 with 37" "latest and greatest" ultrawide. You actually loose some height, so 50% more area claim is not entirely legitimate. Why in the world people want short displays?
40" UHD panels are dirt cheap, so they can just cut off top and bottom, and don't bother making a special panel. Or, they can even take panels which were rejected by QA due to dead pixels on top or bottom for free.

Ultrawides are popular for gaming due to HOR+ scaling used in almost all games. Having a wider aspect ratio allows you to see a wider range in the game. The display has exactly 50% more area than a 2560x1600 monitor with the same pixel density. If you are going to compare against different pixel densities then you can do anything you want. 1024x768 has a much larger area than 3840x2160 if I compare a 17" monitor with a 4K phone display.

Of course, ultrawides are not for everyone, it depends on how you use your computer. That is why companies make more than just 1 monitor type. Choose what you like, and if something doesn't suit you, move on to the next.
Number Five
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7-3930K GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 
RAMRAMHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Green DDR3 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD Crucial MX100 SSD 
CoolingMonitorMonitorMonitor
Corsair Hydro Series H80i Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2415 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS ProArt PA248Q Corsair RM1000i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-2520M Intel HD Graphics 3000 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD 
Hard DriveMonitor
Samsung SSD 840 PRO 1600x900 TN Laptop Display 
  hide details  
Reply
Number Five
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7-3930K GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 
RAMRAMHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Green DDR3 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD Crucial MX100 SSD 
CoolingMonitorMonitorMonitor
Corsair Hydro Series H80i Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2415 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS ProArt PA248Q Corsair RM1000i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-2520M Intel HD Graphics 3000 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD 
Hard DriveMonitor
Samsung SSD 840 PRO 1600x900 TN Laptop Display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenwing View Post

... Having a wider aspect ratio allows you to see a wider range in the game....

Are you implying 34" ultrawide has more horizontal resolution and is wider than 40" UHD? That is patently false. Therefore, assuming the same pixel density, UHD provides wider field of view. And it costs less.

The discussion of this item and another with ridiculously wide ratio of 32:9 runs wild today on arstechnica. And widescreen apologists are saying the usual: "look it is like two 16:9 monitors together, but without bezel". Or, yeah, there is bezel above and below, aren't they blind not to see it?
Edited by Tegiri Nenashi - 1/26/16 at 9:20am
post #5 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tegiri Nenashi View Post

The discussion of this item and another with ridiculously wide ratio of 32:9 runs wild today on arstechnica.
Samsung's 32:9 panels will be produced in two sizes: 41 inches and 49 inches.

Both new aspect ratios (2.4:1 and 32:9) are discussed in Crazy ultrawide displays from Samsung and LG stretch to epic lengths.
post #6 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarylandUSA View Post

Samsung's 32:9 panels will be produced in two sizes: 41 inches and 49 inches.

So 41" 32:9 display is barely wider than 40" UHD. But it is half the height. And I have thought 21:9 is seriously crippled!

I suggest their prospective consumers join class action lawsuit against Samsung for not labeling their vomit with fat W*F? stickers.
post #7 of 53
Man I just want a "next gen" 16:10 monitor @ <38". None of this super-ultra-duper-wide-screen crap.
2560x1600 (bit of a sidegrade though)
2880 x 1800 would be perfect.

I really want a PPI a "step" above 110. and Diagonal screen size between 30-38".

After seeing a film in IMAX 70mm that is exactly what you will want too. Your eyes aren't widescreen, you have a near 180 degree field of view, you should try to match it as close as possible!
post #8 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tegiri Nenashi View Post

Are you implying 34" ultrawide has more horizontal resolution and is wider than 40" UHD? That is patently false. Therefore, assuming the same pixel density, UHD provides wider field of view. And it costs less.

The discussion of this item and another with ridiculously wide ratio of 32:9 runs wild today on arstechnica. And widescreen apologists are saying the usual: "look it is like two 16:9 monitors together, but without bezel". Or, yeah, there is bezel above and below, aren't they blind not to see it?

I am not implying that 34" ultrawide is wider in physical width or pixel count. I am explicitly stating that wider aspect ratios allow you to see a wider field of view in almost all games. The resolution is irrelevant. Almost all games use HOR+ scaling, which means that the vertical field of view is fixed and scaled to the vertical pixel count of the monitor, and the image is extended to both sides until you hit the edges of the screen. Having a higher resolution monitor with the same ratio does not mean you see more stuff to either side in the game, the image will just be the same thing scaled up. The ingame field of view only depends on how far the image extends to the sides after being scaled vertically, which only depends on how many horizontal pixels you have per vertical pixel (also known as aspect ratio). A 1920×1080 monitor will show the exact same ingame view as a 7680×4320 monitor, it will just be rendered with finer detail on the higher resolution screen. But your field of view in the game does not change.

On the other hand, a wider monitor such as 2560×1080 will have exactly the same vertical field of view (because again, with HOR+ scaling, the vertical field of view is exactly the same no matter what resolution or ratio your screen is), but since it has more horizontal pixels per vertical pixel than 16:9, the horizontal field of view is extended further before it reaches the edge of the monitor, providing a wider field of view and allowing you to see more of the game.

You may notice that this means any 21:9 display will have a wider field of view in HOR+ games than any 16:9 display, regardless of the resolutions involved. You would be able to see more ingame with a 1280×720 than with a 4096×3072 display, and likewise yes 2560×1080 and 3440×1440 displays will give you a wider field of view than a 3840×2160 display.
Edited by Glenwing - 1/26/16 at 8:09pm
Number Five
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7-3930K GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 
RAMRAMHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Green DDR3 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD Crucial MX100 SSD 
CoolingMonitorMonitorMonitor
Corsair Hydro Series H80i Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2415 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS ProArt PA248Q Corsair RM1000i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-2520M Intel HD Graphics 3000 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD 
Hard DriveMonitor
Samsung SSD 840 PRO 1600x900 TN Laptop Display 
  hide details  
Reply
Number Five
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7-3930K GIGABYTE GA-X79-UP4 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 
RAMRAMHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung Green DDR3 Corsair XMS3 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD Crucial MX100 SSD 
CoolingMonitorMonitorMonitor
Corsair Hydro Series H80i Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2414H Dell UltraSharp U2415 
MonitorPowerCase
ASUS ProArt PA248Q Corsair RM1000i Phanteks Enthoo Luxe 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-2520M Intel HD Graphics 3000 DDR3 Seagate 600 SSD 
Hard DriveMonitor
Samsung SSD 840 PRO 1600x900 TN Laptop Display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 53
When I see UW monitors I think of when I did triple screen. Sure, the extra width was nice, but, I wanted more height to go with it.
     
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
i7-7820x H115i TUF X299 Mark 1 GTX 1080 ti 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB @ 3600 Samsung 960 evo 500gb m.2 Samsung 850 evo 500GB 1Tb HDD 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 10 pro Acer Predator X34 (34" 21:9 Gsync) DAS Keyboard 4 Professional SeaSonic X Series X-850 (SS-850KM3 Active PFC F3)  
CaseMouseAudioAudio
Fractal Design Define R5 Blackout with Window Logitech G700s ONKYO TX-NR525 (Receiver) Polk Audio CS2 Series II (Center) 
AudioAudio
Polk Audio Monitor40 Series II (x4) Polk Audio PSW Series PSW505 (12" Sub) 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4790k MSI Z97A Gaming 6 EVGA 1050 Ti Corsair Vegence Pro 16gb (2400) 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Kingston V300 (OS) Seagate 1tb hybrid hdd Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
XB270HU (1440p/144Hz/Gsync) RM850 Rosewill R5 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
i7-7820x H115i TUF X299 Mark 1 GTX 1080 ti 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB @ 3600 Samsung 960 evo 500gb m.2 Samsung 850 evo 500GB 1Tb HDD 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 10 pro Acer Predator X34 (34" 21:9 Gsync) DAS Keyboard 4 Professional SeaSonic X Series X-850 (SS-850KM3 Active PFC F3)  
CaseMouseAudioAudio
Fractal Design Define R5 Blackout with Window Logitech G700s ONKYO TX-NR525 (Receiver) Polk Audio CS2 Series II (Center) 
AudioAudio
Polk Audio Monitor40 Series II (x4) Polk Audio PSW Series PSW505 (12" Sub) 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4790k MSI Z97A Gaming 6 EVGA 1050 Ti Corsair Vegence Pro 16gb (2400) 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Kingston V300 (OS) Seagate 1tb hybrid hdd Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
XB270HU (1440p/144Hz/Gsync) RM850 Rosewill R5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #10 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenwing View Post

...I am explicitly stating that wider aspect ratios allow you to see a wider field of view in almost all games. The resolution is irrelevant. Almost all games use HOR+ scaling, which means that the vertical field of view is fixed and scaled to the vertical pixel count of the monitor, and the image is extended to both sides until you hit the edges of the screen. Having a higher resolution monitor with the same ratio does not mean you see more stuff to either side in the game, the image will just be the same thing scaled up. The ingame field of view only depends on how far the image extends to the sides after being scaled vertically, which only depends on how many horizontal pixels you have per vertical pixel (also known as aspect ratio). A 1920×1080 monitor will show the exact same ingame view as a 7680×4320 monitor, it will just be rendered with finer detail on the higher resolution screen. But your field of view in the game does not change...

Let me be blunt: HOR+ scaling is bull*****. If it results in narrower FOV for 40" UHD compared to 34" ultrawide, it is a problem with HOR+ algorithm, and not with the monitor. Both 34" ultrawide and 40" UHD have the same pixel density. This implies that the optimal viewing distance is approximately the same. But then, bigger monitor should take bigger FOV, as simple as that.

P.S. For game engine FOV setting is just a trivial parameter that user can dial, if its automatic setting is incorrect. There has been a long thread about it.
Edited by Tegiri Nenashi - 1/26/16 at 9:11pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Monitors and Displays
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › 3840 x 1600 monitors are coming (2.4:1 aspect ratio)