MS Flight Simulator (2020): the 2021 PC graphics performance benchmark review
Radeon Series RX 6700 XT preview & analysis
Corsair MM700 & Corsair Katar Pro XT Review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - February 2021
ASUS GeForce RTX 3060 STRIX Gaming OC review
EVGA GeForce RTX 3060 XC Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming X TRIO review
PALIT GeForce RTX 3060 DUAL OC review
ZOTAC GeForce RTX 3060 AMP WHITE review
Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact chassis review
LG 34UM67 AMD FreeSync Monitor Review
Posted by: on: 04/09/2015 08:24 AM [
14 comment(s) ]
In this article slash review we will test out the 579 EURO costing FreeSync compatible LG 34UM67 Freesync (34-inch 2560x1080) screen. AMD tackled stutter and tearing while gaming using a different approach, if you create a setup with the right combination. The LG 34UM67 is a Lovely looking IPS monitor with great image quality, but the FreeSync range is difficult to reach.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3
Teawithgrief
Unregistered
Unregistered
Posted on: 04/10/2015 06:57 AM
I just had a brief conversation with someone in a game forum about this monitor, which is why I found the review here interesting...
The obvious purpose of these 21:9 2560x1080 monitors is business use, imo. As you demonstrate in the article picture, it's very handy for opening two (or more) reasonably sized screens/pages side-by-side. This monitor could easily fit the bill for someone looking for two 1080P monitors to use because he could avoid a lot of possible configuration problems by going with a single 21:9 monitor like this one. As you note, the dot pitch of this monitor is insufficient for gaming, imo, and most games that I know will not produce an aspect-correct 2560x1080 native display (you'd probably get something much closer to a pixel-multiplied, scaled-up 1280x720 resolution in-game, instead.) As well, I think that a 14ms response is far too slow for gaming...This monitor is clearly designed for business use--not really suited for gaming, and it lacks the resolution and dot pitch needed for a professional graphics display.
I think people should really get out of the habit of thinking that anything that says "IPS panel" is a "great monitor for color reproduction," etc. Just like with TN panels, there is a wide difference among IPS panel monitors--and dot pitch and resolution make huge differences among IPS panel monitors just as is the case with TN. I once had occasion to sit in front of a 27" HP 8-bit IPS-panel monitor for a week, side by side with a 27" 8-bit TN-panel monitor--had to roll my chair between the two systems working on a project. Sitting dead in front of the TN--I was surprised to see that I thought the TN the better of the two, and the TN had a slightly better resolution and dot pitch than the IPS (1920x1200 TN vs. 1920x1080 IPS.)
Let's face it...with desktop monitors used as RGB monitors and not as TV's, nobody is going to try and work four feet off to the right of the monitor, so *who cares* what it looks like from that position?...
I understand that viewing angle is important, of course, if you also use your monitor as a TV...yes. But if you use it strictly as a computer monitor and sit 18"-36" away from the screen and directly in front of it (which 99 out of 100 people do when using it as a monitor), TN can easily be superior to IPS--it very much depends on the IPS/TN-panel monitors you are comparing. Blanket statements either about TN or about IPS are simply untrue; TN is not always "worse," and IPS is certainly not always "better"... It very much depends on how you want to use them, and on the characteristics of the individual monitors you are looking at.
No, i disagree. I have tried a lot of games on this res and almost all have no problems running natively (without cropping or anything). And the few that dont - can be fixed with .cfg edits or FlawlessWidescreen.exe.
And, no TN is NOT superior to IPS. It was always a preference. 60hz and good color vs 120hz and barely being able to see the screen if you relax your neck and are not dead center anymore.
Nowadays however, there are 144hz IPSs so TN has truly become obsolete.
I just had a brief conversation with someone in a game forum about this monitor, which is why I found the review here interesting...
The obvious purpose of these 21:9 2560x1080 monitors is business use, imo. As you demonstrate in the article picture, it's very handy for opening two (or more) reasonably sized screens/pages side-by-side. This monitor could easily fit the bill for someone looking for two 1080P monitors to use because he could avoid a lot of possible configuration problems by going with a single 21:9 monitor like this one. As you note, the dot pitch of this monitor is insufficient for gaming, imo, and most games that I know will not produce an aspect-correct 2560x1080 native display (you'd probably get something much closer to a pixel-multiplied, scaled-up 1280x720 resolution in-game, instead.) As well, I think that a 14ms response is far too slow for gaming...This monitor is clearly designed for business use--not really suited for gaming, and it lacks the resolution and dot pitch needed for a professional graphics display.
I think people should really get out of the habit of thinking that anything that says "IPS panel" is a "great monitor for color reproduction," etc. Just like with TN panels, there is a wide difference among IPS panel monitors--and dot pitch and resolution make huge differences among IPS panel monitors just as is the case with TN. I once had occasion to sit in front of a 27" HP 8-bit IPS-panel monitor for a week, side by side with a 27" 8-bit TN-panel monitor--had to roll my chair between the two systems working on a project. Sitting dead in front of the TN--I was surprised to see that I thought the TN the better of the two, and the TN had a slightly better resolution and dot pitch than the IPS (1920x1200 TN vs. 1920x1080 IPS.)
Let's face it...with desktop monitors used as RGB monitors and not as TV's, nobody is going to try and work four feet off to the right of the monitor, so *who cares* what it looks like from that position?...
I understand that viewing angle is important, of course, if you also use your monitor as a TV...yes. But if you use it strictly as a computer monitor and sit 18"-36" away from the screen and directly in front of it (which 99 out of 100 people do when using it as a monitor), TN can easily be superior to IPS--it very much depends on the IPS/TN-panel monitors you are comparing. Blanket statements either about TN or about IPS are simply untrue; TN is not always "worse," and IPS is certainly not always "better"... It very much depends on how you want to use them, and on the characteristics of the individual monitors you are looking at.
No, i disagree. I have tried a lot of games on this res and almost all have no problems running natively (without cropping or anything). And the few that dont - can be fixed with .cfg edits or FlawlessWidescreen.exe.
And, no TN is NOT superior to IPS. It was always a preference. 60hz and good color vs 120hz and barely being able to see the screen if you relax your neck and are not dead center anymore.
Nowadays however, there are 144hz IPSs so TN has truly become obsolete.
WaroDaBeast
Senior Member
Posts: 1963
Senior Member
Posts: 1963
Posted on: 04/10/2015 07:58 AM
Well... I'm rather disappointed. I really wanted to buy this monitor because of FreeSync, but if it only works between 48 and 75 Hz, it's somewhat pointless. I think part of the games I play dip below 48 FPS at times...
Oh well, more money on my bank account, I suppose.
Well... I'm rather disappointed. I really wanted to buy this monitor because of FreeSync, but if it only works between 48 and 75 Hz, it's somewhat pointless. I think part of the games I play dip below 48 FPS at times...
Oh well, more money on my bank account, I suppose.
Relayer
Member
Posts: 48
Member
Posts: 48
Posted on: 04/13/2015 06:38 AM
I'm disappointed as well. They seem to be using the wide screen sizes to charge a premium. What about just a standard 1080/120Hz model for <$300?
I'm disappointed as well. They seem to be using the wide screen sizes to charge a premium. What about just a standard 1080/120Hz model for <$300?
pages 1 2 3
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1210
Think I know what you're talking about...I get the same thing every now and then when my Internet access pipe clogs up and bandwidth drops off like a rock...