I'm thinking about the same, since its time to upgrade from my trusty Dell u2311!

I'm leaning towards 1440p.

21:9 is interesting, and lets you see more in most games (while not being as taxing as larger eyefinity resolutions). Plus, no bezels. But it seems to me 1440p will have more benefits, having in mind general computer use.

To summarize: is somewhat larger field of view worth less pixels and physically smaller monitor size (height-wise)?



EDIT: also, some games (especially older) might have problems in 21:9, in which case you're left with a 23inch 16:9 part of the monitor.

 

Having owned both, i'd say go with a 1440p purely because the pixel response times are better on these modern panels.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dcode

Having owned both, i'd say go with a 1440p purely because the pixel response times are better on these modern panels.

lol......

what?

 

I've played on both and prefer my 1440p panel.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by lukem5

lol......

what?

My bad I skipped over the thread and didn't read it properly lol.

I have not played with a 2560x1080 so I can't comment.

 

I say go with 1440P...

A lot of games are coming with FOV settings, which can accomplish a lot of what the 21:9 displays are trying to do with gaming.

 

1440p all the way. those 2560x1080 monitors are so expensive. I got all 3 of my 1440p all together for $150 more than a single 2560x1080 monitor.

 

1440p, it's a nice upgrade from 1920x1080 and still has decent usable height when not gaming. I think 1080p would annoy me when using PS or programming, even web browsing would end up odd on 2560x1080, you're going to have a little strip of a site down the middle of you ever go browser full screen

 

2560x1080 looks pretty cool. Its too bad that those monitors are so expensive.

 

2560X1080 is interesting, but probably would go for a 1440p monitor.

 

2560x1080 seems like a bit of a niche for the most part atm, I'd go for 1440p, got three myself (1xApple 2xCrossover), The extra vertical real estate of 1440p would be more helpful in the long run with just one monitor, though the 2560x1080 has my interest peaked just for the dramatic look a cinescope like ratio can provide.

 

There might be some scaling problems with 21:9.

You have less pixels with 21:9 as of now too as mentioned earlier. It does give you more peripheral vision though and no bezels.

I personally prefer more vertical estate. It's also a bit more comfortable to work with IMO since it doesn't feel like the height of any of your windows is constricted.

 

Look at it this way. People here rave about 1920 x 1200 over 1920 x 1080p which is a difference of only 120 pixels. 2560 x 1080p vs 1440p is a difference of 360p which is 3 times more. I would get 1440 all the way. I i had a chose i would have both

.

 

TFTCentral Dell U2913WM review

 

I would go with a 1440p monitor. I was deciding between the 29" dell and the u2713 and went with the U2713. They are about the same price, and you get more pixels with the 27". I thought the 29" looked like it would be fun to try, but the price is too high. If it was 400 dollars, I would be more interested.

 

They are nice monitors and all. I think the LG one is nice for the price of $600. Ill put the link below. I been looking at this one for sometime, but I am still thinking about it because there has been some problems with it when I been reading reviews on it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824005396

 

I've debated the same but the price is what is making me choose 1440. These monitors should be priced maybe $50 more than the regular 16:9 equivalent and until then, they will probably fail to have any sort of market for them.

 

Many websites aren't even optimized for 1920 x 1080 for some reason. On a regular 1080p monitor I always am annoyed by the middle 1/3 of my screen being the only usable portion on at least 6 out or 10 websites. Yes, 21:9 would make this worse, but so would 1440p, albeit by a much smaller degree.

Personally I'd want a 21:9 monitor for gaming and having a better FOV with no annoying bezels and without having to spend the extra $200 on a triple 1080p setup. (Prices have changed since the OP was posted and now 21:9 monitors are more reasonable than before). Plus, I am pretty sure if I wanted to do Eyefinity, I'd have to go crossfire on my R9 270X, so there's more cost.

 

Not a bad price

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824025112&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IGNEFL111516&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL111516-_-EMC-111516-Index-_-LCDLEDMonitors-_-24025112-S0B

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane2207

1440p, it's a nice upgrade from 1920x1080 and still has decent usable height when not gaming. I think 1080p would annoy me when using PS or programming, even web browsing would end up odd on 2560x1080, you're going to have a little strip of a site down the middle of you ever go browser full screen

WHAT little strip?
do you not know how to set up your browser?
not trying to be mean or anything, but that little strip comment strikes me as someone who doesn't know control/+ expands your screen.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerlChamco


WHAT little strip?
do you not know how to set up your browser?
not trying to be mean or anything, but that little strip comment strikes me as someone who doesn't know control/+ expands your screen.

You do realise that the most widely used resolution is/was considered to be 1024x768 don't you? So typically you'd optimise a website using a fixed width of 960 pixels. There's even a design pattern in CSS called 960Grid. Typically you'd break this down to 96x10px or 80x12px columns for your design.

So based on that, a 2560 screen viewing a website designed in this way at the native resolution would result in 800 pixels of white space either side of a centred site.

Using Ctrl+ isn't a magic cure all either. Yes, it'll zoom, but if you want a crisp image you either go native res or double the pixels (either 960px or 1920px). Even then, if a site has been designed around 960px and images are scaled to this, they'll look terrible by simply blowing up the screen.

There are various design mechanisms to get around this (using responsive, fluid designs etc) but no magic cure all.

Thanks for trying to call me out though 'as not knowing how to setup a browser' whilst at the same time showing exactly how ignorant you are to the fundamentals of how websites are designed.

 

Why not go for a 3440x1440 wide screen instead?
Samsung have recently release a quantum dot 100mhz 21:9 monitor. I'm picking one up next month because ive used the LG 34UC97 for ages and i cant go back to a normal 16:9 monitor now.
The only issue i have was with some ganes not supporting 21:9 properly, but as time has gone on this has become less of an issue really. There is always FlawlessWidescreen you can download that will repair most problems woth a lot of games anyway.

The Samsung i mentioned https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B01L98A326/ref=aw_wl_ov_dp_1_1?colid=23WO1MN96XRN6&coliid=I29VY5NZWC09RK

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerlChamco

I didn't call you out, you are assuming!( ass u me) because your kindergarten reading lvl and an obvious lack of reading comprehension.
you got asked a question, now you can take your ATTITUDE shove it where the sun does not shine.

Oh right 'what strip, do you not know how to setup a browser?' wasn't a thinly veiled attempt to call me out at all, neither is your attitude in the follow up comment.

Please do carry on though - amaze me with your knowledge of Ctrl+ whilst absolutely ignoring the points raised regarding web design metrology. You sure showed me - after all, what would I know, I've only been a full stack developer for 15 years.

You're the perfect illustration of why I haven't logged in here for a couple of years. This place is toxic.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerlChamco


WHAT little strip?
do you not know how to set up your browser?
not trying to be mean or anything, but that little strip comment strikes me as someone who doesn't know control/+ expands your screen.

You have just posted a forum picture. Forums are designed to be fully streched on screen. Afterall its all text. Now, try posting a front page of OCN

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerlChamco


WHAT little strip?
do you not know how to set up your browser?
not trying to be mean or anything, but that little strip comment strikes me as someone who doesn't know control/+ expands your screen.

there is one major problem i think you guys are confusing "social media applications" adapted for "web pages"
social media is and was not designed for PC use. the only one that was, was myspace, FB,twitter,kik are all designed for use on tablets, iPhone, iPad,smart phones. From the very beginning of FB they said this and those types of things are the only thing i can not eliminate the strip with out looking like garbage, and again they are not "web pages" they are adapted for browser use.
otherwise 99% of web pages i visit will fit full screen, which i am not sitting as close to the monitor at that point.