ToxicTaZ:

OLED is horrible for gaming! Enjoy your burnins . .. I own a 2017 65" LG OLED TV I wouldn't dare play games on it!! Thus is why they have Nano IPS for....I bought the LG UltraGear 38GL950G-B monitor . .. It's fantastic.... The incredible 38" Curved 21:9 FOV @144Hz+ you never want to go back to Flat 16:9 120Hz locked TV ever again..

Actually I’m using a LG 55” SM9000 2019 Nanocell TV which is equipped with HDMI 2.1 sockets. It’s G-sync compatible and can do 4K 120hz (as soon as the next gen GPU’s come out with HDMI 2.1 sockets). For now I’m gaming at 1440p 120hz on 16:9. Works great for me. I prefer it to wide 21:9 wide coz to my eyes that ratio always looks slightly distorted.

ToxicTaZ:

OLED is horrible for gaming! Enjoy your burnins . .. I own a 2017 65" LG OLED TV I wouldn't dare play games on it!! Thus is why they have Nano IPS for....I bought the LG UltraGear 38GL950G-B monitor . .. It's fantastic.... The incredible 38" Curved 21:9 FOV @144Hz+ you never want to go back to Flat 16:9 120Hz locked TV ever again..

May want to look a kitty further into the burn in problem. It takes a lot to actually burn in on the LG OLED TV’s. Rtings has a really good write up on it. Essentially watching CNN or ESPN has a better chance of burnin that gaming.

What is it with monitor makers these days adding on horrendously large stands/feet to them that take up far too much space. I understand the monitors are bigger and need more support but some of them are ridiculous. Not everyone has a large desk area, sure you could get a new smaller vesa mount but you shouldnt have to. My Asus 32" 1440p curved monitor has insanely large feet that spread way too far out, getting a new vesa mount for a curved monitor is not so easy as with it being curved the vesa mounting points are offset slightly so and adaptor is needed. Whatever happened to the just as sturdy square/rectangle foot they all used to use? Otherwise these monitors themselves look very nice indeed.

fry178:

@JOHN30011887 lol, you like eye candy, yet are running mismatched resolutions that will introduce a more blurry image then if running native (1:1). e.g. 1440p on a 1440p screen will look "sharper" than running 1440p on a 1080p screen (not talking about pixel size here). i would rather get a 1440p screen and run all games natively. haven't seen anything i cant do maxed out at that res (on 2080), incl siege (incl TAA x4) which runs more on the crappy side (code wise).

You clearly miss read, how am i mismatching my res, when i still use a 1080p res on a 1080p monitor lol and siege aint demanding lol, try maxing out all settings in metro exodus, or assassins creed odyssey at 1440p and get a solid 60fps everywhere, you wont, iv seen plenty benchmarks even from guru3d themselves, a rtx2080 will struggle To add i was saying if i were to use a 1440p monitor and dumb it down to 1080p res for some games that it would be blurrier than just using native 1080p monitor (that would be a missmatch)

ToxicTaZ:

burnins . .. I own a 2017

Panels did improve the last two years in that regard.

well since most run it with vsync off/fast, try siege with vsync on, different story. then again to me solid fps means on every map in any conditions, lol. for the game itself yes, but you would still have a sharper screen thru higher ppi. im going to switch to a 43" soon, and even that i will run desktop/games in 1440p, the screen still has 102 ppi thus will look better than on the 32" with 92 ppi.

the 43@4K is 250$, and wouldnt want just a bit more than i already have, especially since UW will reduce height of screen.