Yes, but how many light zones? Its for sure backlit LCD otherwise GTG response wouldnt be mentioned. Theres no other clue of this displays lighting type. It must be mini LED backlit because microLED would be a direct light source with no LCD panel. My current LED backlit G9 has 6 zones I think, lol. This had better be more!

This particular model, Odyssey Neo G9 S57CG952NN, was announced back at CES 2023, so the specs have been known for quite some time. It's dual 4K 7680x2160 px, QLED (i.e. LCD with VA panel type and quantum dot color filters) with mini-LED backlight (2392 zones), 240 Hz refresh, 1 ms GTG response time, HDMI 2.1 (FRL6) and DisplayPort 2.1 (UHBR20). https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/news/1865a5b https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/57-odyssey-neo-g9-dual-4k-uhd-quantum-mini-led-240hz-1ms-hdr-1000-curved-gaming-monitor-ls57cg952nnxza

DmitryKo:

This particualr model, Odyssey Neo G9 S57CG952NN, was announced back at CES 2023, so the specs have been known for quite some time. It's dual 4K 7680x2160, QLED (i.e. LCD with VA panel type and quantum dot color filters) with mini-LED backlight (2392 zones), 240 Hz refresh, 1 ms GTG response time, HDMI 2.1 (FRL6) and DisplayPort 2.1 (UHBR20). https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/news/1865a5b https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/57-odyssey-neo-g9-dual-4k-uhd-quantum-mini-led-240hz-1ms-hdr-1000-curved-gaming-monitor-ls57cg952nnxza

Such a shame it only has 1 Displayport, 2 is specifically what I hoped for! My current G9 has 2x DP but I killed one port treading on a cheap cable (shorted internally). I could have sent the monitor back but the refurbs sent in return had horror stories all over the web at that time. Am currently limited to 60Hz over HDMI from one PC that might be too far away for HDMI 2.1. HDMI 2.1 cables suck unless optical (I have 5x 3m certified wired cables here that are all rubbish at even 100Hz UHD).

I wonder what kind of GPU power is required for gaming in dual-4K (or half-8K if you will) resolution at 240 Hz frame rate - unless you run RTX Remix mods for 1990s era games like Quake 2, Unreal, Half-Life, Duke Nukem 3D etc., you'd probably need a top-end GPU from 2028 to run today's games in 8K, and likely 2034 for 8K 240 Hz. Unfortunately, time machine is not mentioned in the specs 🙂

@Mufflore using this plus splitter (to switch inputs for non/gaming) without trouble, tried different port? https://www.amazon.es/gp/product/B0994F7RXZ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 @DmitryKo screen has nothing to do with game res. i can easily play in 2K on a 4k screen, and it will still look better than running game in 2K on a 2K (same sized) screen. and for most of my games its NOT because of perf, but that i cant read most interface stuff in games (siege) running at 4K. man do i miss playing on 85" at previous job 😀

fry178:

@Mufflore using this plus splitter (to switch inputs for non/gaming) without trouble, tried different port? https://www.amazon.es/gp/product/B0994F7RXZ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Thats a wired HDMI 2.1 cable, not my favourite piece of equipment 🙂 Yeah, there are 2x DP ports on the monitor, 1 is dead, the other is in use. Tested to the extreme with 2 PCs + different DP ports and repeated on later days in case it self resurrected, but nope, has gone the way of the fairies. Its not a biggie, 60Hz is ok for my browsing machine. It would be nice to have a smoother mouse, I'm used to it though 🙂

@Mufflore well, at least it can do 120Hz at 3m and with splitter in between. whats you polling rate on the mouse? some work better with 500 (@4k/60).

This will be my replacement for my current G9 5120x1440@240Herz. I can also use my Series X and put the HDMI input on AV and then run 4k@60.

fry178:

@Mufflore well, at least it can do 120Hz at 3m and with splitter in between. whats you polling rate on the mouse? some work better with 500 (@4k/60).

This monitor can only do 60Hz over HDMI 2.0. 120Hz is over DP 1.4. Its the 49CRG9 UUW (2x 1440p display area). The 5x 3m HDMI 2.1 ""certified"" cables I have cant even do 100Hz UHD reliably on my new Samsung TV. I had to go optical to that but I dont want an optical wire on the floor to the other PC where I walk. Thats why I wanted DP @ 120Hz, it worked. Doesnt matter, theres always some sacrifice. Mouse is a G502 @ up to 1000Hz, it is set to 500Hz 🙂 Its as good as its going to be.

fry178:

i can easily play in 2K on a 4k screen, and it will still look better than running game in 2K on a 2K (same sized) screen.

It won't look any better without temporal/AI upscaling like DLSS / FSR.

for most of my games its NOT because of perf, but that i cant read most interface stuff

FPS gamers look for maximum possible fps at their preferred rendering quality, so they would rather set it to 1080p @240 Hz, and rarely to full-resolution half-8K 240Hz. High-resolution user interface would be a thing in RTS, TBS, or RTT games, as well as productivity desktop applications, but they don't really neef 240 Hz refresh when 60Hz would be fine. I guess Samsung could make a clearer message by introducing a special high-fps gaming mode - like the 1080p 480Hz mode of the ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UDCP, announced at CES 2024. https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/asus-teases-dual-mode-4k-240-hz-and-1080p-480-hz-oled-gaming-monitor.450606/

[QUOTE="FPS gamers look for maximum possible fps at their preferred rendering quality, There may be a few that care but I havent seen a FPS gamer care about maximum fps when gaming on a superwide. You speak for everyone about that? Its far more about the experience of gaming on a massive screen and resolution then max fps. It already takes a ton of GPU power to run 5120x1440 let alone 7680x2160.

@DmitryKo depends, to me having 20in more screen IS better 😉 has to do with the player/games, not forced by screen size. i play FPS and dont care about +120Hz, never did. and the ones that i know (family/friends), still do 4K at 120Hz, rather than lower res and higher refresh, as long as the game doesnt give an advantage on lower graphic settings, because of stuff not being rendered, say the grass/crops in a field.

Agonist:

I havent seen a FPS gamer care about maximum fps when gaming on a superwide. You speak for everyone about that? Its far more about the experience of gaming on a massive screen and resolution then max fps.

I don't understand your point. The competitive standard is 1080p 144+Hz, and recently there were a lot of announcements for 240 Hz and even 480 and 540 Hz monitors, so I assume the demand for high fps gaming remains strong. This monitor has 8x the pixels (exactly 16.59M) comparing to the standard 1080p resolution (2.07M), and 2x the pixels of the standard 4K resolution (8.29M):

1,920×1,080 px =  2.07 Mpx (16:9)
2,560×1,080 px =  2.76 Mpx (21.37:9 = 64:27)
3,840×1,080 px =  4.15 Mpx (32:9 = 2×16:9)

2,560×1,440 px =  3.69 Mpx (16:9)
3,440×1,440 px =  4.96 Mpx (21.5:9 ~ 64:27)
5,120×1,440 px =  7.37 Mpx (32:9 = 2×16:9)

3,840×2,160 px =  8.29 Mpx (16:9)
5,120×2,160 px = 11.06 Mpx (21:9)
7,680×2,160 px = 16.59 Mpx (32:9 = 2×16:9)

You still need to render all these pixels in native resolution, even with postprocessing "reconstruciton" filters like DLSS/FSR, which won't really give you crisper UI, as they are mostly for motion-compensated upscaling of dynamic scenes. This panel makes as much sense for gaming today as a (totaly fictional) super expensive ultrawide 15,360×4,320 px = 66.36 Mpx gaming monitor would be - though you could at least run it in 5120×1440 px or 3840×1080 px, which is exactly 1/3rd and 1/4th of its native resolution, with no downscaling artifacts.

fry178:

has to do with the player/games, not forced by screen size. i play FPS and dont care about +120Hz, never did. and the ones that i know (family/friends), still do 4K at 120Hz, rather than lower res and higher refresh,

Considering that modern games would hardly even reach 60 fps in 4K, save for that dual-4K 7680x2160 native resolution, to me this $2300 240 Hz "Dual-4K"gaming monitor" doesn't make much sense today, unless you can wait to buy an US$2000 NVidia RTX 5090 in 2025 - or your intended use is mostly office desktop or content production. If you really need that 32:9 form factor and massive diagonal solely for gaming purposes, there are similar 49" 3840x1080 monitors like ASUS ROG Swift PG32UQXR which come at 1/3rd the cost, or more recent 49" 5120x1440p monitors like Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 S49AG952, Odyssey G9 S49CG954, Odyssey G9 C49RG90S, LG 49WQ95C, AOC Agon AG493UCX2, etc. which come at half the cost.

DmitryKo:

Considering that modern games would hardly even reach 60 fps in 4K, save for that dual-4K 7680x2160 native resolution, to me this $2300 240 Hz "Dual-4K"gaming monitor" doesn't make much sense today, unless you can wait to buy an US$2000 NVidia RTX 5090 in 2025 - or your intended use is mostly office desktop or content production. If you really need that 32:9 form factor and massive diagonal solely for gaming purposes, there are similar 49" 3840x1080 monitors like ASUS ROG Swift PG32UQXR which come at 1/3rd the cost, or more recent 49" 5120x1440p monitors like Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 S49AG952, Odyssey G9 S49CG954, Odyssey G9 C49RG90S, LG 49WQ95C, AOC Agon AG493UCX2, etc. which come at half the cost.

What you say makes sense but it need not be used so rigidly. I already have the CRG9 and its a great display for desktop and gaming. I wouldnt mind a bit more desktop space for 3 reasons::: So the real estate is there when I want to open a lot of windows/apps. For future gaming. I intend on getting a 5090 / 5080ti (or equivalent). Someone I know would really benefit from my CRG9, I want them to have it and I like new toys also 🙂 Plus its not OLED and is UUW. I dont yet want an OLED for my desktop machine thats on 16hrs per day. I have OLEDs for other uses. My initial plan for gaming if I were to get this soon would be to run it at less than native when needed. I'm pleasantly surprised how good 3840x1080 looks on my 5120x1440 res screen and expect the Neo G9 to be a bit better pro rata when running 5120x1440.

Well, you seem to agree that it's far more practical to use a lower resolution like 3840x1080 px or 5120x1440 px for today's gaming, while the native dual-4K 7680x2160 px resolution is best suited for desktop productivity apps - and also serves as a future-proof investment in a top-end display in anticipation of next-gen or next-next-gen top-end GPU performance. I still think Samsung could have made a better more nuanced message, rather than advertise this dual-4K 240 Hz model as a straight gaming monitor. Also the actual width of this ultrawide 57" panel would be 55" or 140 cm, which is obviously twice that of a regular 32" panel, and the same as a 65" HDTV panel (55" : 0.8716, if you consider the relation between width, height and diagonal in various aspect ratios according to the Pythagorean theorem):

 w:h  d  w       h
16:9  1  0.8716  0.4903
21:9  1  0.9191  0.3939
32:9  1  0.9627  0.2707

Imagine sitting a feet away from your 65" TV and trying to keep your eyes on the entire picture - that would be quite an exercise for your neck...

Samsung Odyssey Neo G9/G95NC S57CG95 Review https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/samsung/odyssey-neo-g9-g95nc-s57cg95 To sum it up, excellent average brigthness (800 cd/m2), good contrast ratio with local dimming (1:13500), good color error (Avg. dE 2.2). Native contrast ratio (1:2800) and HDR color gamut coverage (83% DCI-P3, 66% Rec.2020.xy) are typical for a VA panel though - in comparison, QD-OLED panels have better HDR color gamut coverage (100% DCI-P3 and ~80% Rec.2020.xy), much higher (infinite) contrast ratio, lower color error (Avg. dE 0.5-1.5), but worse average brigthness (400 cd/m2).

DmitryKo:

Samsung Odyssey Neo G9/G95NC S57CG95 Review https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/samsung/odyssey-neo-g9-g95nc-s57cg95 To sum it up, excellent average brigthness (800 cd/m2), good contrast ratio with local dimming (1:13500), good color error (Avg. dE 2.2). Native contrast ratio (1:2800) and HDR color gamut coverage (83% DCI-P3, 66% Rec.2020) are typical for a VA panel though - in comparison, QD-OLED panels have better HDR color gamut coverage (100% DCI-P3 and ~80% Rec.2020), much higher (infinite) contrast ratio, lower color error (Avg. dE 0.5-1.5), but worse average brigthness (400 cd/m2).

The gamut % gives me pause. My 2018 QLED tv has Rec 2020 72.0%, I expected better not worse.

That 72% figure was probably for Rec.2020.uv, which is only tested on TVs - this would translate to 66% Rec2020.xy, as for example my 2021 Samsung Q70A shows in their testing. The highest possible HDR gamut is currently achieved by top-end Samsung S95C QD-OLED TV, which is 85% Rec.2020.xy and 90% Rec2020.uv.

DmitryKo:

That 72% figure was probably for Rec.2020.uv, which is only tested on TVs - this would translate to 66% Rec2020.xy, as for example my 2021 Samsung Q70A shows in their testing. The highest possible HDR gamut is currently achieved by top-end Samsung S95C QD-OLED TV, which is 85% Rec.2020.xy and 90% Rec2020.uv.

The S95C is my other display, I would like the performance to be closer. I'm not in need of a Neo G9 so will wait.