theoneofgod:

Funniest thing ive read all year

I missed that. Jeezus... 😛

NCC1701D:

Anyone have a 49" monitor that can comment on the experience? I feel like my 34" UW is a pretty good size. Do you have to physically turn your head to see the whole thing? How is the game support for 32:9?

I have the G9. I came from dual 27" monitors so I knew what to expect size wise. Normal windows tasks, it's pretty much the same experience, with a few quirks. Gaming, it feels pretty natural. I wish it was 32:10 though, could do with a bit more vertical real estate.

hallgi:

Former Samsung Odyssey G9 owner here. If you try a 49" monitor once, you will see, how superior 32:9 ratio is to 16:9 or even ultrawide. Becuse you have gamespace also in your peripherial vision, it kinda sucks you into the space, its much much more immerse. Modern games support this ratio in hud elements also, so you don't have to turn your head constantly. On top of that the 1000R curvature is also a nice upgrade from 1800R. I've had the opportunity to try them both. I aggree, that OLED screen quality is far superior, but the super ultrawide ratio makes completely up for that in my opinion. If the reviews will be good, this monitor will be my next purchase without a doubt.

I'll have to agree. I have a 55" OLED TV and it's stunning. I was thinking about going with the 48" LG CX for my monitor but I went with the G9 instead. The 48" would be way too high for normal use, having to constantly look up. That being said, by the time I'm done with the G9 in a few years, I'll probably be going OLED for my main monitor, but they'll have to be smaller, 40" or so, that would work.

Agonist:

16:9 blows. I'd rather game on a 25 inch 21:9 1080p instead of the best 16:9 OLED 4k.

Im also in favor of ultrawides for gaming but that is just ridiculous.

Undying:

Im also in favor of ultrawides for gaming but that is just ridiculous.

Have your annual like from me brother, this doesn't mean we're friends lol, but for once I agree with you disagreeing with that comment. @NCC1701D about the game support, it's better than I expected. Most games will work in 32:9 right out the box. Some won't though. Cities Skylines comes to mind. But that will run just fine at 3440x1440 if you create that custom resolution in Nvidia Control Panel. I bought the G9 for sim racing. I also have a Quest 2 for sim racing, but for example ACC is much better on the G9. I'll use the G9 in 32:9 for many games that are not super demanding, games like Diablo 2 Resurrected, Grim Dawn, many other games. Hell, even Cyberpunk runs fine at 5120x1440 on my pony PC. The times I want to have something else on the side, like a Netflix show or YouTube, I can just game at 3440x1440 (21:9) or 2560x1440 (16:9).

metagamer:

Have your annual like from me brother, this doesn't mean we're friends lol, but for once I agree with you disagreeing with that comment. @NCC1701D about the game support, it's better than I expected. Most games will work in 32:9 right out the box. Some won't though. Cities Skylines comes to mind. But that will run just fine at 3440x1440 if you create that custom resolution in Nvidia Control Panel. I bought the G9 for sim racing. I also have a Quest 2 for sim racing, but for example ACC is much better on the G9. I'll use the G9 in 32:9 for many games that are not super demanding, games like Diablo 2 Resurrected, Grim Dawn, many other games. Hell, even Cyberpunk runs fine at 5120x1440 on my pony PC. The times I want to have something else on the side, like a Netflix show or YouTube, I can just game at 3440x1440 (21:9) or 2560x1440 (16:9).

Haha, ok we're not friends you pointed it out few times but heres a like for your G9 not you. 😉

Undying:

Haha, ok we're not friends you pointed it out few times but heres a like for your G9 not you. 😉

Hey listen, you cut out some of your AMD fanboyism and I'll rate you pretty high. No hard feelings, you're growing on me you random person.

Agonist:

16:9 blows. I'd rather game on a 25 inch 21:9 1080p instead of the best 16:9 OLED 4k.

What's so appealing about it? Maybe I sat too close but any time I saw one in person all it did was fill the periphery which is a whole lot of resources spent for very little gain. If I sit further then it's just a whole lot of empty vertical space. Even for more normal ultra-wides it's a ton more GPU power and cost for that horizontal length. 3440x1440 is almost 34.4% more pixels than 2560x1440. Considering the volume that even those sell at, I'm surprised that companies keep making them, and that any games at all support them, which wasn't many last I saw.

asturur:

I have no idea how people can still fight over LCD vs OLED. It seems clear to me that a good OLED TV is superior to any LCD TV ( of any kind ) for movies and color accuracy, and that monitors are superior in gaming, especially those one. Cheaper or not cheaper is not on the equation, because that means, that is best for you compared to what you decided is a sane amount of money to spend on one of your many hobbies. Certified or not, this monitor is probably superior in gaming than any generic tv

Not for the last year or so at least. As a previous owner of 2 x LG OLEDs that upgraded to the Samsung Q950TS last year, the highest end QLEDs simply blow OLEDs away for HDR viewing, not to mention having a proper antireflection coating, and they don't get burn in or fade over time and can display proper HDR brightness levels so you don't need tone remapping. As per the reviews the best "normal" size TVs that money can buy so far this year and last year were QLEDs: Samsung's Neo QLED TV rated 'Best TV of All Time' by German AV magazine - SamMobile Samsung Q950TS review: an 8K masterpiece, and the new best TV on the planet | T3