LG's UltraGear 32-inch 165Hz QHD Nano IPS gaming monitor is back to its lowest-ever price of $279

I picked up a screen with around the same specs today. 34 inch, 21:9, and HDR400 though. Had to think for bit, whether I want to go wide. Like i.e. for city builder and similar tycoon games, 16:9 would perhaps look a tad cooler (due to more height) - and the one on offer has 8 bit+FRC apparently. And a lot of multimedia content seems to be tailored for 16:9, such as many videos on YT, where Full-screen gives two blank areas on the left and right sides.

But 21:9 gives more pixels (which the GPU here should be able to handle) - and I also play other games, such as likely the upcoming Kingdom Come Deliverance II (part one, complete edition, quite cheap on Steam right now, btw), and free bird camera in city builders offers panoramic view - and more space on Win desktop, to put stuff side by side. Also, due to having the same height as my somewhat older 27'' also curved monitor, it looks neat, having both next to each other, forming a curved mild corner.

In any case, visually, it is better than my older screen (already in SDR). And screens with better specs (like HDR1000), they are sort of next class, also price-wise. So, nice to see that there are sort of budget options for "1440p, big size, high refresh rate"-screens around.
 
I'm a solid meh on refresh rate. I had a 144hz 1440p Asus 27" as my main monitor for a long time - I can't remember the model, but it was very highly regarded at the time by this here website.

I swapped to 2x 75hz Viewsonic 32" 1440p (VX3276-2K-MHD-2) panels and I love them. Admittedly I'm no twitcher, the fastest PC game I play is probably Dying Light or TF2, but these eyes can't see no difference frm about 70hz and up - though I f'sure prefer 75hz to 60. I'm much more interested in colour balance and image quality than super-high refresh rates which I can't appreciate and cost in purchase and power usage.