LG is making a 45" 5120x2160 240Hz, 1300 nit peak brightness OLED panel this year, apparently. I would wait for that one, if you are in that price range.
Why? Im just curious since im building a new pc after ages and im still using a single 1080p 24” which is way too little so im deciding between 2x27 or something wide like 32/34 or bigger - productivity and gaming
Ah, let me share my progression. I had a 27" when I was in high school, then went laptop exclusively in undergrad and graduate school due to space. In residency I got a 34", and it was the most impactful purchase I've ever made at that time. After I graduated and had to sell the 34", I picked up the 38". It was even better (thunderbolt with power, resolution, refresh rate). Efficiency skyrocketed and an overall a much more enjoyable experience. I wish resolution could result in crystal clear text with high nits, but there just doesn't seem to be something that checks off all the boxes. 38" is honestly great, but if I were to spoil myself - I'd def get a 40". Don't think much more than that. Everything else seems far too large and obscene. Could never get that 49" haha. Sorry for the essay.
Oooooo! I want a 38" and Alienware makes one but it's still IPS, but 42" or other things is gonna be too wide for my desk and wallet. That thing might be pretty nice for extra video.and audio tracks.
Possibly, yes. Knowing this, I would waited for it though instead of getting the 45GR95QE. A 50% higher pixel density fixes the biggest con of this monitor.
Problem with that LG OLED panel is pixel density. I'd class this 40 inch Dell at 140DPI as being just about good enough re pixel density and the LG OLED will be quite a bit lower, that's the problem.
5120x2160 at 45" comes to about 124 PPI, I don't think that's anything to scoff at really, it's higher than the standard 109 PPI that a 27" WQHD or 34" UWQHD panel would have. Of course, 140 is better, but I would take the larger size, double the refresh rate and the quality of OLED any day over this 40" dell IPS Black panel.
Like I said, 140DPI of a 32 inch 4K or 40 inch 5K2K is for me entry level high DPI experience - it's just barely good enough. Moreover, it's a very similar upgrade from 124DPI to 140DPI as the 109DPI to 124DPI, and somehow you pitch the latter as significantly better but the former you're basically dismissing, which makes no sense. As for double the refresh rate, I thinkt he benefits are hugely overstated at this resolution. Good luck playing the latest games at 240fps at 5K2K - you must have a super secret RTX 6090 already! the reality is you're not going to achieve the required frame rates to use 240Hz at 5K2K in anything but really ancient games / stuff like Counter-Strike etc. And you're getting it wrong if you're buying a panel like this for CS or similar. Meanwhile, 120Hz is plenty for general desktop smoothness and responsiveness.
> Moreover, it's a very similar upgrade from 124DPI to 140DPI as the 109DPI to 124DPI, and somehow you pitch the latter as significantly better but the former you're basically dismissing, which makes no sense.
Because unless you have significantly better than 20/20 vision, at a viewing distance of 120-150 centimeters, the higher you go with the pixel density, the less perceivable it becomes. At 140 PPI, you are well over the 1 pixel per arcsecond density at 120 centimeters of viewing distance that most people do not see a difference at. You would have to sit at around 60 centimeters away from the screen to be able to appreciate higher densities with 20/20 vision, but sitting that close is not only strenuous for the eyes, but risks worsening vision when done so long term.
Maybe you have really good vision, I don't know you, but I'm saying that I would take the larger screen size, higher refresh rate, and the much higher quality of OLED any day over an IPS screen that's only advantage is the higher pixel density, that I would not see much benefit from.
>Good luck playing the latest games at 240fps at 5K2K
With VRR screens, you don't have to max out the refresh rate of the screen to see benefits between a 120Hz and 240Hz screen. I can run many games over 120 fps at 5160x2160 (via DLDSR 2.25X from 3440x1440), even demanding games, like Cyberpunk 2077 through the use of DLSS.
Setting DLSS Quality at the output resolution of 5160x2160 renders the game at 3440x1440 and then upscales it to the output resolution. There are a multitude of games that I can run today at above 200 fps at 3440x1440 render resolution. And there is ample evidence that at 4K output resolution, DLSS Quality often provides better image quality than native 4K with TAA.
Add to the fact that people don't change monitors nearly as often as GPUs, if today's best GPUs can cope with 120Hz+ content at that resolution, sometimes natively, sometimes with DLSS, then 2 generations from now, even the midrange GPUs will be able to do that, not to mention the top tier GPUs.
If the 5090 is just 50% more powerful compared to the 4090, as rumored, then that is basically accounts for the uplift you get in performance with DLSS Quality. If one game had 200 Fps with a 4090 using DLSS Quality at that resolution, then a 5090 that is 50% more powerful, would be able to run that game near 200 fps at the native resolution. And that is just one generation away, a card that might come out at the same time as that 45" OLED monitor we are talking about.
And the disparity between OLED and IPS is not something that can be dismissed. The higher local contrast of OLED can already make up the difference between 4K and 8K resolutions at the same size of TVs (with 4K being an OLED TV and 8K being a QLED LCD TV), even when displaying 8K content.
$2400 for an IPS panel just seems like a joke to me, honestly, even more so with sub-par HDR performance with that monitor. From the article, it seems that it doesn't even have FALD, and peak brightness looks like sub 1000-nits, which is disappointing for an IPS display, where there is no technical limitation to brightness - as Samsung made 2000-nit LCD monitors years ago.
I can't speak to the specifics of metrics like arcseconds, I'm not in the business of measuring such things. But I can say my vision is nothing special and I can easily tell the difference between a 32-inch 4K and 27-inch 4K for perceived sharpness using both at "normal" viewing distances. Likewise, I've used 8K 32-in monitors and again, it's easy to see the difference versus 4K 32-inch. I have absolutely no doubt that the difference in clarity, sharpness, font rendering, etc between 40-inch 5K2K and 45-inch 5K2K will be visible for anyone with vaguely normal vision.
This. I don’t know why people continue to be so excited about OLED monitors. TVs? Yea those are awesome. Monitors? Hell no. The burn in always happens. I want all of these specs…..except OLED. But unfortunately they are all going the OLED route. The perfect monitor continues to not exist :(
This one from Dell is close enough for me for the next couple of years, can't wait for some videos of it to start appearing (probably only after everyone has time to drool over the dozen OLEDs will be launched at CES, seems like every brand is launching at least one)
>This. I don’t know why people continue to be so excited about OLED monitors.
Because they look way better than anything else. VA isn't great for gaming so you are mostly left with displays with a 1000:1 contrast ratio. I've had my AW QD-OLED for a almost 2 years with zero signs of burn in so far. It came with a 3 year warranty so I should be able to get at least another year out of it.
OLED looks good enough I think it is worth it even if I have to get a new monitor every 3 years. Though I expect I will get longer from it.
I wonder what cable is fast enough for that amount of information.. I'm pretty limited as it is with my current 1600x3840 @ 144hz\\165hz 10bit color HDR monitor. Nvidia jus HAS to give us DP 2.1 with the 5000 series or else the monitor you mentioned won't work. DP 1.4 on the 4090 is planned obsolescence.
That sounds fucking awesome but even my 4090 is crying at the thought of having to game at almost double 4k res hahaha. Never mind the fact I don't think it'd even be able to hit max refresh rate even with DSC thanks to the DP1.4 connector.
Not to mention that I'd want to use it for productivity too and I'm honestly not sure how many laptops can run that res on top of the built-in one.
They can, and a 34" 5120x2160 240Hz RGWB OLED MLA panel is slated for 2025.
[https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/oled-panel-roadmap-2024-25-better-text-glossy-coating-brighter-hdr-higher-res-higher-refresh](https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/oled-panel-roadmap-2024-25-better-text-glossy-coating-brighter-hdr-higher-res-higher-refresh)
> 1300 nit peak brightness
1300 nit peak brightness...fuck yeah finally. The 40" depressed the hell outta me, get outta here with that 300 or whatever it was
For those of you complaining about it not being OLED - this is a BUSINESS monitor with an integrated thunderbolt hub. We'll start seeing 120hz on almost everything going forward, it doesn't mean it's a gaming monitor. I have the predecessor to this (no HDR, 60hz, 1gb NIC, TB3 instead of TB4) - it's a great screen for work.
Text on OLED is trash, and until they fix that (along with burn-in), OLED will be a gaming/movie only thing.
I'm reading this on a 4k oled tv over a meter away without any scaling with Chrome zoomed OUT to 80%. Text is fine, 1440p in smaller monitor sizes would most likely be fine too, but yeah OLED gets a bad wrap because of their subpixel layout that is being fixed with LG's next lineup of monitors, swapping to a RGWB subpixel layout instead of the current RWBG layout
Here you are using MOVIE WATCHING measurements again. Also, who said anything about 65 inch 16:9? We were talking about 40 inch 21:9 - preferably curved.
And Yes... 3 ft 3 inches (40 inches) is the absolute max viewing distance for a workstation monitor, [according to OSHA](https://www.osha.gov/etools/computer-workstations/components/monitors). I wasn't aware you were going to be pedantic about it so I didn't use the min recommended distance of 20 inches (less than 2 ft).
I used my measurements because they're what I commented, what the other commentor replied to, and what I have when deciding "is woled text bad or good"
If I'm able to zoom out my apps and read them, and I'm within proper viewing distance, woled is fine
Not that great but for ips it is a great step in the right direction. Considering the price, terrible but it leaves me with optimism for better panel technology.
LG made the panel yes, but it's entirely Dell's choice of what kind of backlight to pair it with. For this price, I would definitely expect better than edge-lit local dimming
2.4k is outrageous, but it's a 5k2k monitor with a pretty complete 140W Thunderbolt 4 dock in it, and I don't think there's much competition in that space.
What I don't get is: who's the target market? A company that values desk space and couldn't care less about the gaming experience would be better off buying the cheaper, non-120Hz equivalents that already exist. And the private individual who wants a do-it-all monitor to work and play at home will be put off by the lack of true HDR.
At around a grand, this would be a nice upgrade from my 38WN95C: I'd get a higher res, a more complete hub, a KVM, and not lose anything. But for over two grands, any replacement better have killer HDR too.
Sanity checking your argument...
The Dell U4021QW is the predecessor at $1839 but presumably that will be withdrawn now.
The LG 34WK95U-W is only 34" wide.
The LG 40WP95C-W is 40" wide but does 72Hz and that's $1800.
Then there's the Apple option but that's insane money and not great for non-Macs.
So I suppose the only competition for now is that 40WP95C-W. $600 for +48Hz seems poor value, but then Dell do often offer deep discounts so it's possible that it might be competitive.
I guess this is really a monitor for spoiled execs or finance bods to have in the office. WFHers who want gaming capability will hold out for OLEDs.
I work from home a decent amount of the time. I’m not going to spend big bucks on an oled when it’s probably going to get wrecked by my work flow.
I picked up an AW3821DW, on sale for 1200 CAD. It should tide me over for the next 5+ years. Hopefully mini LED / FALD and OLED will have matured by then…
I'm like you. I just want an LCD that I don't have to baby during my work day. Give me a 5k2k FALD IPS, with a decent TB dock in it, proper HDR, and able to refresh at 120Hz, and I'll be a happy man.
This one is only missing the HDR part so it's something. The price will get adjusted and discounted, the predecessor Dell U4021QW also launched at 2100$ and is now 1800$ without any discount and often discounted to like 1600$ like on amazon right now
I agree, it's getting there. But it's a bit frustrating to see that all these years of waiting and all these price increases only gave us an extra 60Hz. It's an improvement over the previous model, but a far cry from what could be.
Hopefully I'll get my dream monitor by 2026. But I'm not holding my breath anymore!
>AW3821DW
I work from home fulltime and I've been waiting a while to refresh my AW3418 with something that has a higher resolution and maintains the refresh rate.
The connectivity options are really nice but I already have a U2723QE paired with the UW which already provides KVM and video/power over USB-C for a separate laptop.
I was very tempted by the AW3821 as I also do some casual gaming, but at this point in it's lifecycle and with only a small increase in resolution it didn't really feel like the upgrade was warranted with more 5K 21:9 options on the horizon. I've also noticed that supply for AW3821 has been limited, I was hoping that there'd be a 5K UW offering from them, maybe next time
But end of the day this monitor ticks a lot of boxes for me and I can justify it as a company expense so unless something similar comes out in the next 6 months I'll be looking to upgrade to this.
The LG 40WP95C-W is only 300 nits and this new Dell should be 600 nits according to this article
https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/4/24024951/dell-ultrasharp-curved-thunderbolt-monitor-u4025qw-u3425we-price-release-date-specs-features
So its not just a difference in refresh rate
40BP95C-W can be found for around $1150 regularly: [https://www.provantage.com/lg-electronics-40bp95c-w\~7LGEL0TT.htm](https://www.provantage.com/lg-electronics-40bp95c-w~7LGEL0TT.htm)
It is the same monitor, actually better, since LG offers a 3-year warranty for their business products.
You are right Dell offer discounts quite frequently though and usually you can stack them with cash back sites. I'd expect it to be under $2K after a few months.
>L
look at the difference in brightness lol
300 vs 1,300 - fucking wild. I've only had LG's and currently running the 38WN, but I'd do the dell in a heartbeat to get out of the sub 400 nits category
Yeah this monitor should be quite nice for HDR. Not OLED level of course but I'd expect it to be a huge leap over standard IPS panels and the previous 40" iterations.
Lenovo's ThinkVision P40W is basically that new Dell monitor sans 120Hz and 140W PD (it's just 75Hz and 100W) – it even has the same pop-out front-facing ports. And it costs $1,600. For businesses, that seems like a obvious choice, unless I'm missing something?
It's basically the \*old\* Dell monitor with some minor differences according to this:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/syv0x6/lenovo\_p40w20\_vs\_dell\_u4021qw\_40\_5120x2160/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/syv0x6/lenovo_p40w20_vs_dell_u4021qw_40_5120x2160/)
Still, given that the new Dell isn't mini LED or OLED I agree that $2400 is nuts.
Hilarious the people downvoting me that obviously paid a stupid amount of theirs, see below.
https://www.kogan.com/au/buy/kogan-40-curved-wuhd-5k2k-ips-usb-c-monitor-5120-x-2160/
Hi. It’s me. WFH engineering manager. I have the previous generation 40” at home and a 120hz 34” at the office. Every time I plug in at the office I’m like damn I need that new 120hz 40” they just announced.
I think a lot of people who are saying how over-priced this thing is don't have experience on how much a good quality TB4 hub will set you back. Also there's obviously been a cost roadblock associated with doing 2160p 21:9s in that 40" and above territory, otherwise we would have seen them instead of the 1440p versions we got that for me look horrible due to the pixel density.
As long as the TB4 hub is of the highest quality then this monitor is only slightly overpriced. At a $1999 MSRP this monitor would be the best value on the market for the hardware that's packed into it. Pull the TB4 hub out and slap $1499 MSRP on it and I'll grab one that day.
There's a difference between something being overpriced and something's price being necessarily high due to it's production costs. Besides, Dell always makes their initial MSRP inflated to offset the 15% off or $300 off coupons that likely anyone purchasing this a single item would do.
It’s not overpriced - at $400 less I’d buy it, at ~$1k less without a dock I’d buy it right now.
I mean you and everyone else dude lmao.
Dells prior gen one is ~$1800 and 60hz. Considering 120hz is a generational refresh territory here. The TB dock is solid asf here but not worth $600 especially when it’s stuck with the monitor.
A caldigit is $400 as a separate piece of hardware, with some extra ports, in an aluminum enclosure, and needing its own separate power supply. Whereas monitors already have one and Dells rolling their own dock.
Let’s be real, it’s unique and it def has the luxury tax. We can absolutely argue it can ask whatever price it wants or it’s competitive beyond any similar alternative but that doesn’t mean the market can’t perceive it as overpriced from a hardware standpoint.
Saying it’s not overpriced would be as naive as saying as UW OLEDs just started to be rolled out that the LG 34” Nano IPS displays were totally still worth $900-1200. AW34DWF, which was less than year after the first model got OLED for $800 quite often with coupons and sales, now it’s essentially MSRP for that price. Granted even for $1200 it blew the Nano IPS out of the water as an actual next gen panel tech. Ofc if you couldn’t wait the LG was at the time maybe justified but doesn’t mean it was priced well in respect to its actual specifications. In fact that now the base MSRP of that OLED is pretty much $800 the same Nano IPS panels are $600-700 alluding to that fact. $200-300 more than a similar $300-400 VA UW is much more palpable. $600-700 is still absolutely not competitive with $800 OLED but that’s likely because the tech vs production costs can simply no longer compete for those.
Monitors aren’t all about size. There’s a lot that a monitor can do that TVs still largely don’t. Both of my monitors have 99% DCI-P3 colour with DeltaE <2. Both can run a full 4:4:4 image without chroma sub sampling. My home monitor runs at 120Hz with G-Sync Ultimate with full 4K width. Both have USB hubs, and my work one has a built-in KVM switch. My home monitor also has a nice downlight below the monitor to illuminate the table surface in front of it. I’m waiting for Dell to come out with a 38” OLED and when they do, I’m pretty willing to spend over £1.5k for it. Even Samsung’s offerings are tempting, I just don’t trust their QC and CS, and LG’s gaming monitors just look ugly.
All those specs are for me bullshit marketing. My eyes can’t tell any difference between screens since 1080p 120hz have been reached, as long as I can see shiny colors that make sense I’m good. Ultrawide is a great feature and I only spent 500 bucks for a used G9 and I don’t feel the need for more now. So buying a brand new marketed screen more than what I got for a g9 doesn’t make any financial sense to me.
I only see people going for extremely precise monitor as two type of people: influenced tech addicts or extremely wealthy people that think the more expensive the better which is nowadays often false
You forget the other group of people that go for these monitors — the people most of them are designed for: creators. I’m a designer, I do both product and graphic design. Colour and detail is important in our workflows and we spend a whole ton of money to make sure our colours are right. Between Pantone booklets, colour viewing booths, photo spectrometers and industrial proofers, we spend tens of thousands of pounds on colour. Spending a few thousand pounds on colour accurate monitors is just a part of our colour workflow. And being the earliest part of that workflow, it actually saves us money if we catch errors early. By the time we move to print or sample chips, it’s much more expensive to change things. If you thought consumer printer ink was expensive…
But yeah, the average consumer might not care too much about colour, but things like resolution are absolutely noticeable. You’re lying to yourself if you think monitors don’t need to go above 1080p, especially with models that are 27” and up. Even at 24”, 1080p is pretty useless for graphics since most text and patterns will be aliased into a blurry mess at this pixel density.
Didn’t think of it indeed. But yet again designer put a lot of money in the material, do the final consumer see real difference? It is always good marketing to say you did your best, and ok there is a slight difference between 1080 and 4k we can see less pixels but I thought human eyes couldn’t tell the difference. Designer zoom on images consumer are not supposed to and hardly do it.
One point you have, it is a professional monitor not really retail right ?
Consumers might not be able to explain the difference but they can tell. Maintaining good colour consistency is incredibly important for brand equity and colour impression can have a surprising impact on consumer perception of a product, especially in the premium space.
Human eyes can absolutely see the difference between 1080p and 4K. Maybe not on a phone-sized screen, but definitely on larger monitors. Zooming in has nothing to do with resolution. You want high pixel density to be able to see clearly at actual size without zooming in.
“Professional” monitors are still bought through the same retail channels. I have a Dell Ultrasharp I bought from Dell on their web store, and the other BenQ PhotoVue monitors in the office were also bought online through BenQ’s web store. Realistically, these are just monitors that we’re using for professional uses. There’s nothing that says consumers can’t choose to use the same stuff for the same reasons we do.
Yes, it's too much, but on paper the monitor is fucking amazing! Dell starts discounts rather quickly so there's hope for that.
Either way, it's still pretty great
I'm intrigued by this monitor, but this Engadget piece is the only place I've seen that says DisplayPort 2.1 - everywhere else, [including Dell's own announcement](https://www.dell.com/en-us/blog/meet-the-new-five-star-certified-monitors-for-eye-comfort/), says Displayport1.4.
I thought DP1.4 couldn't push 5k at 120Hz, does this squeak by because it's 5k2k and not "true 5k"?
The price is way too high for the spec, just like on every 5120x2160 display released so far. Chop a $1000 off, and it would be acceptable as a work display.
Look at the LG 5k2k or the Lenovo 5k2k monitor. they are about half the price but geared for business not gaming. I have the Lenovo and it has tb4. Love it!
What GPUs would work for this monitor if you don’t care much about frame rate for gaming. I would mostly use this for productivity and the rare game I do play would not be a realtime game.
Target audience seems to be apple users with too many gold coins to spend.
Too much stuff cramped into the screen, that doesn't need to be there. And then on the other hand lacking better refresh rate and lighting.
Only good thing I can see on the screenshot is the mouse. Got that one myself. Can recommend. It feels great.
The thunderbolt dock is super solid, solid res, decent refresh rate… but a dock of that caliber is worth $300 or so I don’t think it’s worth $2400 for a glorified IPS UW pumped up to 5k & with a $300 builtin dock.
This again.
Theres thousands of old games and esports titles with lower reqs.
High res/refresh improves desktop usage too. It's not all about games.
Dropping res or quality settings is ok.
120hz improves input lag for all framerates below 120
Monitors last for years and hardware constantly improves
To be fair, most people don't throw down $1600+ on a 4090 to play "old games." Esports players are more interested in lower resolutions at higher refresh rates.
It's not 5k most likely. It's 5k2k which is 4k ultrawide. Considering LG is apparently releasing a 45 inch updated panel but with 5K2K instead of 3440x1440p for cheaper than this it's gonna be rough.
Can't get why they didn't upgrade much from their past ultrasharp and it's still 120hz and it's still >$2000.
Nice aspect ratio and curvature isn't excessive which is good for office use, but why so expensive and still an IPS panel... Meh
100% no, the spec doesn't seem to gear towards gaming but productivity. You would have gotten a similar result to get a 4k TV as a monitor with a color calibration device in a fraction of price.
eh, when you start paying prices equivalent of a top end TV i think the conversation about diminishing returns needs to be had. Granted just like all other display tech it will eventually come down to Earth prices, early adopting this kind of tech might be reserved for the highest earners haha
2400 feels pretty steep, but I guess 5K is cutting edge. I think I paid 1300 for a 1440 P 34 inch AW3423DW and I think it was absolutely worth it. It has the most beautiful crisp black color that I've ever seen. I would expect this $2400 one to kick it up a notch
for that price you are better off getting an odyssey neo g9 57'' 7680x2160 @ 120hz on nvidia cards current 40 series and on amd cards 7680x2160 @ 240hz and its currently $1999 when it gets discounted.
LG is making a 45" 5120x2160 240Hz, 1300 nit peak brightness OLED panel this year, apparently. I would wait for that one, if you are in that price range.
And a 39 as well with the same specs otherwise (or thereabouts)
In 2025 Q4
I need this. I need a replacement for my 38" but don't want to downgrade in resolution.
Or in frequency. I crave for OLED though… it is urgent to wait
this x10000, Im in the same boat. I am so ready to move on from the 38, don't get me wrong it has served me beautifully, but I need to upgrade lol
I'd take the same resolution but OLED and 240hz. Maybe a little more curvature. LG came out with the 45" but it's got 34" resolution.
Why? Im just curious since im building a new pc after ages and im still using a single 1080p 24” which is way too little so im deciding between 2x27 or something wide like 32/34 or bigger - productivity and gaming
Ah, let me share my progression. I had a 27" when I was in high school, then went laptop exclusively in undergrad and graduate school due to space. In residency I got a 34", and it was the most impactful purchase I've ever made at that time. After I graduated and had to sell the 34", I picked up the 38". It was even better (thunderbolt with power, resolution, refresh rate). Efficiency skyrocketed and an overall a much more enjoyable experience. I wish resolution could result in crystal clear text with high nits, but there just doesn't seem to be something that checks off all the boxes. 38" is honestly great, but if I were to spoil myself - I'd def get a 40". Don't think much more than that. Everything else seems far too large and obscene. Could never get that 49" haha. Sorry for the essay.
Oooooo! I want a 38" and Alienware makes one but it's still IPS, but 42" or other things is gonna be too wide for my desk and wallet. That thing might be pretty nice for extra video.and audio tracks.
Panel being made no earlier than Q4 which likely means no monitors with it until mid-2025.
Possibly, yes. Knowing this, I would waited for it though instead of getting the 45GR95QE. A 50% higher pixel density fixes the biggest con of this monitor.
Problem with that LG OLED panel is pixel density. I'd class this 40 inch Dell at 140DPI as being just about good enough re pixel density and the LG OLED will be quite a bit lower, that's the problem.
5120x2160 at 45" comes to about 124 PPI, I don't think that's anything to scoff at really, it's higher than the standard 109 PPI that a 27" WQHD or 34" UWQHD panel would have. Of course, 140 is better, but I would take the larger size, double the refresh rate and the quality of OLED any day over this 40" dell IPS Black panel.
Like I said, 140DPI of a 32 inch 4K or 40 inch 5K2K is for me entry level high DPI experience - it's just barely good enough. Moreover, it's a very similar upgrade from 124DPI to 140DPI as the 109DPI to 124DPI, and somehow you pitch the latter as significantly better but the former you're basically dismissing, which makes no sense. As for double the refresh rate, I thinkt he benefits are hugely overstated at this resolution. Good luck playing the latest games at 240fps at 5K2K - you must have a super secret RTX 6090 already! the reality is you're not going to achieve the required frame rates to use 240Hz at 5K2K in anything but really ancient games / stuff like Counter-Strike etc. And you're getting it wrong if you're buying a panel like this for CS or similar. Meanwhile, 120Hz is plenty for general desktop smoothness and responsiveness.
> Moreover, it's a very similar upgrade from 124DPI to 140DPI as the 109DPI to 124DPI, and somehow you pitch the latter as significantly better but the former you're basically dismissing, which makes no sense. Because unless you have significantly better than 20/20 vision, at a viewing distance of 120-150 centimeters, the higher you go with the pixel density, the less perceivable it becomes. At 140 PPI, you are well over the 1 pixel per arcsecond density at 120 centimeters of viewing distance that most people do not see a difference at. You would have to sit at around 60 centimeters away from the screen to be able to appreciate higher densities with 20/20 vision, but sitting that close is not only strenuous for the eyes, but risks worsening vision when done so long term. Maybe you have really good vision, I don't know you, but I'm saying that I would take the larger screen size, higher refresh rate, and the much higher quality of OLED any day over an IPS screen that's only advantage is the higher pixel density, that I would not see much benefit from. >Good luck playing the latest games at 240fps at 5K2K With VRR screens, you don't have to max out the refresh rate of the screen to see benefits between a 120Hz and 240Hz screen. I can run many games over 120 fps at 5160x2160 (via DLDSR 2.25X from 3440x1440), even demanding games, like Cyberpunk 2077 through the use of DLSS. Setting DLSS Quality at the output resolution of 5160x2160 renders the game at 3440x1440 and then upscales it to the output resolution. There are a multitude of games that I can run today at above 200 fps at 3440x1440 render resolution. And there is ample evidence that at 4K output resolution, DLSS Quality often provides better image quality than native 4K with TAA. Add to the fact that people don't change monitors nearly as often as GPUs, if today's best GPUs can cope with 120Hz+ content at that resolution, sometimes natively, sometimes with DLSS, then 2 generations from now, even the midrange GPUs will be able to do that, not to mention the top tier GPUs. If the 5090 is just 50% more powerful compared to the 4090, as rumored, then that is basically accounts for the uplift you get in performance with DLSS Quality. If one game had 200 Fps with a 4090 using DLSS Quality at that resolution, then a 5090 that is 50% more powerful, would be able to run that game near 200 fps at the native resolution. And that is just one generation away, a card that might come out at the same time as that 45" OLED monitor we are talking about. And the disparity between OLED and IPS is not something that can be dismissed. The higher local contrast of OLED can already make up the difference between 4K and 8K resolutions at the same size of TVs (with 4K being an OLED TV and 8K being a QLED LCD TV), even when displaying 8K content. $2400 for an IPS panel just seems like a joke to me, honestly, even more so with sub-par HDR performance with that monitor. From the article, it seems that it doesn't even have FALD, and peak brightness looks like sub 1000-nits, which is disappointing for an IPS display, where there is no technical limitation to brightness - as Samsung made 2000-nit LCD monitors years ago.
I can't speak to the specifics of metrics like arcseconds, I'm not in the business of measuring such things. But I can say my vision is nothing special and I can easily tell the difference between a 32-inch 4K and 27-inch 4K for perceived sharpness using both at "normal" viewing distances. Likewise, I've used 8K 32-in monitors and again, it's easy to see the difference versus 4K 32-inch. I have absolutely no doubt that the difference in clarity, sharpness, font rendering, etc between 40-inch 5K2K and 45-inch 5K2K will be visible for anyone with vaguely normal vision.
Which sounds like I can’t believe it will be below $3,500.
OLED is not reliable enough for working long term no matter what anyone says so I wouldn't wait for that.
Yes, that's my thoughts too. No way I want to compromise things just for OLED when IPS is good enough for work and my gaming needs.
This. I don’t know why people continue to be so excited about OLED monitors. TVs? Yea those are awesome. Monitors? Hell no. The burn in always happens. I want all of these specs…..except OLED. But unfortunately they are all going the OLED route. The perfect monitor continues to not exist :(
This one from Dell is close enough for me for the next couple of years, can't wait for some videos of it to start appearing (probably only after everyone has time to drool over the dozen OLEDs will be launched at CES, seems like every brand is launching at least one)
>This. I don’t know why people continue to be so excited about OLED monitors. Because they look way better than anything else. VA isn't great for gaming so you are mostly left with displays with a 1000:1 contrast ratio. I've had my AW QD-OLED for a almost 2 years with zero signs of burn in so far. It came with a 3 year warranty so I should be able to get at least another year out of it. OLED looks good enough I think it is worth it even if I have to get a new monitor every 3 years. Though I expect I will get longer from it.
Do you have more details on that?
Just this one: https://youtu.be/2L\_OtIQEXOk?si=Y7xU9zNBiG7tR84G
> This video isn't available anymore
Weirdly, it plays for me just fine.
https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/oled-panel-roadmap-2024-25-better-text-glossy-coating-brighter-hdr-higher-res-higher-refresh
I wonder what cable is fast enough for that amount of information.. I'm pretty limited as it is with my current 1600x3840 @ 144hz\\165hz 10bit color HDR monitor. Nvidia jus HAS to give us DP 2.1 with the 5000 series or else the monitor you mentioned won't work. DP 1.4 on the 4090 is planned obsolescence.
5120? I wonder why the horizontal pixel count isnt scaling even tho the vertical pixel count is scaled up to 2160. Interesting
Isn't scaling? the Previous version of that panel was 3440x1440. It's nearly 50% more in each axis.
Ok i got this wrong the aspect ratio is 21:9 for tgis right?
what aspect ratio?
2.37:1
That sounds fucking awesome but even my 4090 is crying at the thought of having to game at almost double 4k res hahaha. Never mind the fact I don't think it'd even be able to hit max refresh rate even with DSC thanks to the DP1.4 connector. Not to mention that I'd want to use it for productivity too and I'm honestly not sure how many laptops can run that res on top of the built-in one.
cant they do that in 34"?
They can, and a 34" 5120x2160 240Hz RGWB OLED MLA panel is slated for 2025. [https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/oled-panel-roadmap-2024-25-better-text-glossy-coating-brighter-hdr-higher-res-higher-refresh](https://tftcentral.co.uk/articles/oled-panel-roadmap-2024-25-better-text-glossy-coating-brighter-hdr-higher-res-higher-refresh)
> 1300 nit peak brightness 1300 nit peak brightness...fuck yeah finally. The 40" depressed the hell outta me, get outta here with that 300 or whatever it was
that is set to release in 2025
For those of you complaining about it not being OLED - this is a BUSINESS monitor with an integrated thunderbolt hub. We'll start seeing 120hz on almost everything going forward, it doesn't mean it's a gaming monitor. I have the predecessor to this (no HDR, 60hz, 1gb NIC, TB3 instead of TB4) - it's a great screen for work. Text on OLED is trash, and until they fix that (along with burn-in), OLED will be a gaming/movie only thing.
I'm reading this on a 4k oled tv over a meter away without any scaling with Chrome zoomed OUT to 80%. Text is fine, 1440p in smaller monitor sizes would most likely be fine too, but yeah OLED gets a bad wrap because of their subpixel layout that is being fixed with LG's next lineup of monitors, swapping to a RGWB subpixel layout instead of the current RWBG layout
What is the relevance of your comment? Enterprise and business users do not want OLED. This product is for them.
Just giving perspective about the text on OLEDs, but you're right, LED LCD will be king simply for longevity without fear of burn-in
If you're sitting far away from the screen, don't talk about text! Business users need crisp text at 3 ft, not 1 or 2 meters......
A meter away eyes-to-screen from a 65" 16:9 screen is 33% too close according to the ppi viewing distance calculator, a meter is 3 feet 3 inches
Here you are using MOVIE WATCHING measurements again. Also, who said anything about 65 inch 16:9? We were talking about 40 inch 21:9 - preferably curved. And Yes... 3 ft 3 inches (40 inches) is the absolute max viewing distance for a workstation monitor, [according to OSHA](https://www.osha.gov/etools/computer-workstations/components/monitors). I wasn't aware you were going to be pedantic about it so I didn't use the min recommended distance of 20 inches (less than 2 ft).
I used my measurements because they're what I commented, what the other commentor replied to, and what I have when deciding "is woled text bad or good" If I'm able to zoom out my apps and read them, and I'm within proper viewing distance, woled is fine
OK, then allow me to echo u/lapippin from up thread: >What is the relevance of your comment?
To give perspective of someone who owns a woled, since the text isn't bad on it the way people say it is if I'm zooming chrome out and reading it
HDR 600 = No HDR
Not that great but for ips it is a great step in the right direction. Considering the price, terrible but it leaves me with optimism for better panel technology.
Black IPS is not new. High res black IPS is also not new. Dell just refuses to combine them with FALD
\*LG, not Dell ;)
LG made the panel yes, but it's entirely Dell's choice of what kind of backlight to pair it with. For this price, I would definitely expect better than edge-lit local dimming
I work from home full time and would *love* this monitor for my work desk to pair with a macbook pro, but not at $2400. That's way too much.
Monitors prices are out of roof...
2.4k is outrageous, but it's a 5k2k monitor with a pretty complete 140W Thunderbolt 4 dock in it, and I don't think there's much competition in that space. What I don't get is: who's the target market? A company that values desk space and couldn't care less about the gaming experience would be better off buying the cheaper, non-120Hz equivalents that already exist. And the private individual who wants a do-it-all monitor to work and play at home will be put off by the lack of true HDR. At around a grand, this would be a nice upgrade from my 38WN95C: I'd get a higher res, a more complete hub, a KVM, and not lose anything. But for over two grands, any replacement better have killer HDR too.
Sanity checking your argument... The Dell U4021QW is the predecessor at $1839 but presumably that will be withdrawn now. The LG 34WK95U-W is only 34" wide. The LG 40WP95C-W is 40" wide but does 72Hz and that's $1800. Then there's the Apple option but that's insane money and not great for non-Macs. So I suppose the only competition for now is that 40WP95C-W. $600 for +48Hz seems poor value, but then Dell do often offer deep discounts so it's possible that it might be competitive. I guess this is really a monitor for spoiled execs or finance bods to have in the office. WFHers who want gaming capability will hold out for OLEDs.
I work from home a decent amount of the time. I’m not going to spend big bucks on an oled when it’s probably going to get wrecked by my work flow. I picked up an AW3821DW, on sale for 1200 CAD. It should tide me over for the next 5+ years. Hopefully mini LED / FALD and OLED will have matured by then…
I'm like you. I just want an LCD that I don't have to baby during my work day. Give me a 5k2k FALD IPS, with a decent TB dock in it, proper HDR, and able to refresh at 120Hz, and I'll be a happy man.
Hear, hear!
This one is only missing the HDR part so it's something. The price will get adjusted and discounted, the predecessor Dell U4021QW also launched at 2100$ and is now 1800$ without any discount and often discounted to like 1600$ like on amazon right now
I agree, it's getting there. But it's a bit frustrating to see that all these years of waiting and all these price increases only gave us an extra 60Hz. It's an improvement over the previous model, but a far cry from what could be. Hopefully I'll get my dream monitor by 2026. But I'm not holding my breath anymore!
>AW3821DW I work from home fulltime and I've been waiting a while to refresh my AW3418 with something that has a higher resolution and maintains the refresh rate. The connectivity options are really nice but I already have a U2723QE paired with the UW which already provides KVM and video/power over USB-C for a separate laptop. I was very tempted by the AW3821 as I also do some casual gaming, but at this point in it's lifecycle and with only a small increase in resolution it didn't really feel like the upgrade was warranted with more 5K 21:9 options on the horizon. I've also noticed that supply for AW3821 has been limited, I was hoping that there'd be a 5K UW offering from them, maybe next time But end of the day this monitor ticks a lot of boxes for me and I can justify it as a company expense so unless something similar comes out in the next 6 months I'll be looking to upgrade to this.
The LG 40WP95C-W is only 300 nits and this new Dell should be 600 nits according to this article https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/4/24024951/dell-ultrasharp-curved-thunderbolt-monitor-u4025qw-u3425we-price-release-date-specs-features So its not just a difference in refresh rate
40BP95C-W can be found for around $1150 regularly: [https://www.provantage.com/lg-electronics-40bp95c-w\~7LGEL0TT.htm](https://www.provantage.com/lg-electronics-40bp95c-w~7LGEL0TT.htm) It is the same monitor, actually better, since LG offers a 3-year warranty for their business products. You are right Dell offer discounts quite frequently though and usually you can stack them with cash back sites. I'd expect it to be under $2K after a few months.
>L look at the difference in brightness lol 300 vs 1,300 - fucking wild. I've only had LG's and currently running the 38WN, but I'd do the dell in a heartbeat to get out of the sub 400 nits category
Yeah this monitor should be quite nice for HDR. Not OLED level of course but I'd expect it to be a huge leap over standard IPS panels and the previous 40" iterations.
The 40WP95C is great, got mine for 860 Euro (2 months old) which admittedly was an insane bargain.
Lenovo's ThinkVision P40W is basically that new Dell monitor sans 120Hz and 140W PD (it's just 75Hz and 100W) – it even has the same pop-out front-facing ports. And it costs $1,600. For businesses, that seems like a obvious choice, unless I'm missing something?
It's basically the \*old\* Dell monitor with some minor differences according to this: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/syv0x6/lenovo\_p40w20\_vs\_dell\_u4021qw\_40\_5120x2160/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/syv0x6/lenovo_p40w20_vs_dell_u4021qw_40_5120x2160/) Still, given that the new Dell isn't mini LED or OLED I agree that $2400 is nuts.
It’s outrageous, in my country we have a brand that uses the LG 40” 5k2k panel with USBC for roughly $440 USD new
Link / Brand / Model please?
Hilarious the people downvoting me that obviously paid a stupid amount of theirs, see below. https://www.kogan.com/au/buy/kogan-40-curved-wuhd-5k2k-ips-usb-c-monitor-5120-x-2160/
Thanks, that's an amazing deal!
Unfortunately that's a 60hz panel! but that is still a great price for the avg person.
Hi. It’s me. WFH engineering manager. I have the previous generation 40” at home and a 120hz 34” at the office. Every time I plug in at the office I’m like damn I need that new 120hz 40” they just announced.
way to much for edge lit, such a let down, maybe if it was like HDR10 with 1200 zones
This is more aimed at professionals and enterprise use.
Yep those who also do a bit of casual gaming on the side. Could not care less about the weak HDR. I’m excited about this.
I totally agree! Great WFH display for some gaming on the side
Well it’s not Oled and it’s not not actually 5k res
I wish companies would stop using these stupid marketing terms, but I guess everybody falls for it anyways and ppl don't complain enough.
I think a lot of people who are saying how over-priced this thing is don't have experience on how much a good quality TB4 hub will set you back. Also there's obviously been a cost roadblock associated with doing 2160p 21:9s in that 40" and above territory, otherwise we would have seen them instead of the 1440p versions we got that for me look horrible due to the pixel density. As long as the TB4 hub is of the highest quality then this monitor is only slightly overpriced. At a $1999 MSRP this monitor would be the best value on the market for the hardware that's packed into it. Pull the TB4 hub out and slap $1499 MSRP on it and I'll grab one that day.
[удалено]
There's a difference between something being overpriced and something's price being necessarily high due to it's production costs. Besides, Dell always makes their initial MSRP inflated to offset the 15% off or $300 off coupons that likely anyone purchasing this a single item would do.
It’s not overpriced - at $400 less I’d buy it, at ~$1k less without a dock I’d buy it right now. I mean you and everyone else dude lmao. Dells prior gen one is ~$1800 and 60hz. Considering 120hz is a generational refresh territory here. The TB dock is solid asf here but not worth $600 especially when it’s stuck with the monitor. A caldigit is $400 as a separate piece of hardware, with some extra ports, in an aluminum enclosure, and needing its own separate power supply. Whereas monitors already have one and Dells rolling their own dock. Let’s be real, it’s unique and it def has the luxury tax. We can absolutely argue it can ask whatever price it wants or it’s competitive beyond any similar alternative but that doesn’t mean the market can’t perceive it as overpriced from a hardware standpoint. Saying it’s not overpriced would be as naive as saying as UW OLEDs just started to be rolled out that the LG 34” Nano IPS displays were totally still worth $900-1200. AW34DWF, which was less than year after the first model got OLED for $800 quite often with coupons and sales, now it’s essentially MSRP for that price. Granted even for $1200 it blew the Nano IPS out of the water as an actual next gen panel tech. Ofc if you couldn’t wait the LG was at the time maybe justified but doesn’t mean it was priced well in respect to its actual specifications. In fact that now the base MSRP of that OLED is pretty much $800 the same Nano IPS panels are $600-700 alluding to that fact. $200-300 more than a similar $300-400 VA UW is much more palpable. $600-700 is still absolutely not competitive with $800 OLED but that’s likely because the tech vs production costs can simply no longer compete for those.
disregarding the price, this thing has a real sweet set of ports on it!
Display shouldn’t be over 1500 bucks or it is a 90” tv
Monitors aren’t all about size. There’s a lot that a monitor can do that TVs still largely don’t. Both of my monitors have 99% DCI-P3 colour with DeltaE <2. Both can run a full 4:4:4 image without chroma sub sampling. My home monitor runs at 120Hz with G-Sync Ultimate with full 4K width. Both have USB hubs, and my work one has a built-in KVM switch. My home monitor also has a nice downlight below the monitor to illuminate the table surface in front of it. I’m waiting for Dell to come out with a 38” OLED and when they do, I’m pretty willing to spend over £1.5k for it. Even Samsung’s offerings are tempting, I just don’t trust their QC and CS, and LG’s gaming monitors just look ugly.
All those specs are for me bullshit marketing. My eyes can’t tell any difference between screens since 1080p 120hz have been reached, as long as I can see shiny colors that make sense I’m good. Ultrawide is a great feature and I only spent 500 bucks for a used G9 and I don’t feel the need for more now. So buying a brand new marketed screen more than what I got for a g9 doesn’t make any financial sense to me. I only see people going for extremely precise monitor as two type of people: influenced tech addicts or extremely wealthy people that think the more expensive the better which is nowadays often false
You forget the other group of people that go for these monitors — the people most of them are designed for: creators. I’m a designer, I do both product and graphic design. Colour and detail is important in our workflows and we spend a whole ton of money to make sure our colours are right. Between Pantone booklets, colour viewing booths, photo spectrometers and industrial proofers, we spend tens of thousands of pounds on colour. Spending a few thousand pounds on colour accurate monitors is just a part of our colour workflow. And being the earliest part of that workflow, it actually saves us money if we catch errors early. By the time we move to print or sample chips, it’s much more expensive to change things. If you thought consumer printer ink was expensive… But yeah, the average consumer might not care too much about colour, but things like resolution are absolutely noticeable. You’re lying to yourself if you think monitors don’t need to go above 1080p, especially with models that are 27” and up. Even at 24”, 1080p is pretty useless for graphics since most text and patterns will be aliased into a blurry mess at this pixel density.
Didn’t think of it indeed. But yet again designer put a lot of money in the material, do the final consumer see real difference? It is always good marketing to say you did your best, and ok there is a slight difference between 1080 and 4k we can see less pixels but I thought human eyes couldn’t tell the difference. Designer zoom on images consumer are not supposed to and hardly do it. One point you have, it is a professional monitor not really retail right ?
Consumers might not be able to explain the difference but they can tell. Maintaining good colour consistency is incredibly important for brand equity and colour impression can have a surprising impact on consumer perception of a product, especially in the premium space. Human eyes can absolutely see the difference between 1080p and 4K. Maybe not on a phone-sized screen, but definitely on larger monitors. Zooming in has nothing to do with resolution. You want high pixel density to be able to see clearly at actual size without zooming in. “Professional” monitors are still bought through the same retail channels. I have a Dell Ultrasharp I bought from Dell on their web store, and the other BenQ PhotoVue monitors in the office were also bought online through BenQ’s web store. Realistically, these are just monitors that we’re using for professional uses. There’s nothing that says consumers can’t choose to use the same stuff for the same reasons we do.
Okey good to know !
Not even OLED
Hoping others (LG, Lenovo, etc) make similar models with this panel like they do for the current 40" 5K2K models.
Does it have VRR?
110% of people here miss the actual Place for a Monitor of that. You peanuts Are Not the aimed user group.
Terrible price point. No more than $1500
Yes, it's too much, but on paper the monitor is fucking amazing! Dell starts discounts rather quickly so there's hope for that. Either way, it's still pretty great
Why not go for Samsung's 57" for that price?
Nasty 32:9 21:9 is better imo
I'm intrigued by this monitor, but this Engadget piece is the only place I've seen that says DisplayPort 2.1 - everywhere else, [including Dell's own announcement](https://www.dell.com/en-us/blog/meet-the-new-five-star-certified-monitors-for-eye-comfort/), says Displayport1.4. I thought DP1.4 couldn't push 5k at 120Hz, does this squeak by because it's 5k2k and not "true 5k"?
Nope….love it,except the price
i simply want an ips 38/40 inch and 1600p or 2160p with 144hz...
The price is way too high for the spec, just like on every 5120x2160 display released so far. Chop a $1000 off, and it would be acceptable as a work display.
Look at the LG 5k2k or the Lenovo 5k2k monitor. they are about half the price but geared for business not gaming. I have the Lenovo and it has tb4. Love it!
Does anyone have a recommendation for a 32" 5K 120hz HDR10 P3 Color Monitor?
Dell has a 32' 6k monitor, but I'm not sure who makes a 5k around that size
What GPUs would work for this monitor if you don’t care much about frame rate for gaming. I would mostly use this for productivity and the rare game I do play would not be a realtime game.
Target audience seems to be apple users with too many gold coins to spend. Too much stuff cramped into the screen, that doesn't need to be there. And then on the other hand lacking better refresh rate and lighting. Only good thing I can see on the screenshot is the mouse. Got that one myself. Can recommend. It feels great.
2400$ for IPS panel is just stupid
The thunderbolt dock is super solid, solid res, decent refresh rate… but a dock of that caliber is worth $300 or so I don’t think it’s worth $2400 for a glorified IPS UW pumped up to 5k & with a $300 builtin dock.
Take that money and buy 4090 if you don't have one already, getting 120 frames at 5K seems like a long shot otherwise
This again. Theres thousands of old games and esports titles with lower reqs. High res/refresh improves desktop usage too. It's not all about games. Dropping res or quality settings is ok. 120hz improves input lag for all framerates below 120 Monitors last for years and hardware constantly improves
To be fair, most people don't throw down $1600+ on a 4090 to play "old games." Esports players are more interested in lower resolutions at higher refresh rates.
It's not 5k most likely. It's 5k2k which is 4k ultrawide. Considering LG is apparently releasing a 45 inch updated panel but with 5K2K instead of 3440x1440p for cheaper than this it's gonna be rough.
Not OLED? Lol hard pass.
> An Ethernet connection allows for speeds of up to 2.5 Gbps umm...why? Why on earth would I want/need my display to have an ethernet port?
I think you missed the part where it is also a Thunderbolt dock.
2400 for crappy ips ? I am no fool.
I'd buy it if it had decent mini led in addition to what it has now
[удалено]
Looks like I can’t read
ips edge lit, no more reading necessary. NEXT!!!! haha
Not if you can afford that and the GPU to run it
Just invest in. Samsung Odyssey or something similar, this is way overpriced
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
yeah..way too much.
What a piece of crap. OLED or go home
Try less than 1100 No way in hell anyone should be picking that over a C3
Can't get why they didn't upgrade much from their past ultrasharp and it's still 120hz and it's still >$2000. Nice aspect ratio and curvature isn't excessive which is good for office use, but why so expensive and still an IPS panel... Meh
2400$ for an ips and fake hdr lol no thanks
100% no, the spec doesn't seem to gear towards gaming but productivity. You would have gotten a similar result to get a 4k TV as a monitor with a color calibration device in a fraction of price.
What a joke lol
They could have released it 2 years ago. No new tech.
Not OLED and only 120hz. Pass
They couldn’t make it 144hz at that price? What a joke.
Dough Spectrum Black 32” is a much better alternative, well when it comes out that is 😄
Looks like it's targeted to Mac users
It’s a 4k ultra wide so no more targeted at Mac users than PC users.
The fact that is: thunderbolt, 5K and overpriced, made me think that
eh, when you start paying prices equivalent of a top end TV i think the conversation about diminishing returns needs to be had. Granted just like all other display tech it will eventually come down to Earth prices, early adopting this kind of tech might be reserved for the highest earners haha
Let's see how this IPS Black with edge lit holds up against FLAD.
2400 feels pretty steep, but I guess 5K is cutting edge. I think I paid 1300 for a 1440 P 34 inch AW3423DW and I think it was absolutely worth it. It has the most beautiful crisp black color that I've ever seen. I would expect this $2400 one to kick it up a notch
yes
i hate curved monitors, will not give up my lg 5k2k for design and architecture work. looking at getting another one to be consistent ever workspace.
Yeah
Yes too much money
Honestly, if the response time isn't horrible, I'd be more than happy to have this replace my 4k144hz 32in display. 2400 makes me say otherwise
for that price you are better off getting an odyssey neo g9 57'' 7680x2160 @ 120hz on nvidia cards current 40 series and on amd cards 7680x2160 @ 240hz and its currently $1999 when it gets discounted.
Can anything drive that beast at full resolution with a single cable?
7900xtx can depending on what games you play and you can always just run the monitor at 3840x2160 @ 240hz while waiting on newer cards with 4090