Question about 16:9 on an Ultrawide monitor?

[AlexTheTechFreak]

I know that a lot of content doesn't support the 21:9 aspect ratio and was wondering how much the screen shrinks when switching to 16:9. Specifically on a 34 inch monitor. Would it be the equivalent of a 27 inch 16:9 picture? Or is it even smaller than that? I'd hate to go from a 27 inch monitor to an ultrawide just to be stuck with an even smaller screen size than I began with whenever 21:9 isn't supported.

 

[raisonjohn]

Yes. A 34" ultrawide would have black bars at the sides when viewing 16:9 content, unstretched. The actual size of the image/video is exactly that of a 27" 16:9 monitor.

Similarly, I have a 29" ultrawide. As above, when viewing 16:9 content (or during cut-scenes in games), the image/video becomes similar to a 23" 16:9 monitor (black bars at sides).

 

[AlexTheTechFreak]

Yes. A 34" ultrawide would have black bars at the sides when viewing 16:9 content, unstretched. The actual size of the image/video is exactly that of a 27" 16:9 monitor.

Similarly, I have a 29" ultrawide. As above, when viewing 16:9 content (or during cut-scenes in games), the image/video becomes similar to a 23" 16:9 monitor (black bars at sides).

Thanks a ton. I have one more question before I make a decision but this is more of a matter of opinion. For ultrawide gaming would you suggest 3440x1440 @60hz or 2560x1080 @144hz? I WAS looking at the 3440x1440 @100hz panels but uh...don't think my pockets are quite deep enough.

 

[raisonjohn]

The high refresh rate monitors would work best if they are G-Sync or FreeSync enabled (eliminating screen tearing for a smoother gameplay by adjust the monitor's display rate to what the GPU graphics rate can provide). I am assuming with those 2 monitor options, you have at least a GTX 1070 GPU?

For the 1440p ultrawide (assuming 34"), the pixel density is greater per inch of screen and view will be more "zoomed out" but drawback is texts/icons will appear smaller. For the 1080p ultrawide (assuming 34" too), the pixel density is lesser, often resulting in "pixelation", view would be slightly "zoomed in" but texts/icons will be larger. Hence, one major factor to consider between these two monitors (assuming both are 34"), is the distance of the monitor from your vantage point (as well as your desk space).

The 1440p would have to be placed a bit closer to your eyes (about less than 24") for visual acuity; the 1080p (again assuming 34") can be placed a bit farther from you (more than 24") and would have the same visual acuity as the former.

Another factor to consider is the graphics power needed to render a 3440 x 1440 (i.e., 4.95M pixels) versus the 2560 x 1080 (i.e., 2.76M pixels). The GPU will "work twice as hard" on the 1440p than in the 1080p. So, you would expect lower framerates gaming on the 1440p compared with gaming on the 1080p using the same GPU.

If you watch movies from a distance from your monitor, I highly suggest the 34" ultrawide (rather than the 29" ultrawide, if that's the size you are considering for the 2560 x 1080). The 29" ultrawide, as I mentioned previously, is just a 23" screen with extended sides. Movie looks small when viewed afar than in my 27" screen.

 

[AlexTheTechFreak]

Yes, I'm looking to use this with a GTX 1070 or perhaps even a stock 1080 since they're so cheap now (I use that term loosely) and it would allow me to pretty much max all of the settings while still maintaining frame rate close to the refresh rate. All the ones I'm looking at do support Free-sync but with an Nvidia GPU I can't utilize it so I figured my best bet was to make sure I absolutely had enough graphical power to hold a steady 100+ FPS.

If I were to get the 3440x1440 display I wouldn't really have to worry about going above 60 FPS but in some titles I wouldn't even be able to achieve that consistently, especially at extremely grassy/textured areas. I am set on upgrading to 34 inches. So 2560x1080 should be fine for gaming? By "pixelation" I assume you mean that 'grainy' looking picture. How much of a problem do you think that'd be?

 

[photonboy]

I would recommend a 16:9, 27" 2560x1440 monitor based on what you've said so far.

I've investigated the 21:9 issue quite a bit. Here's some gaming issues:

1) no support for some games (so black bars ideally so no stretched but that now gives a 1920x1080 experience if you have 1080 lines in the monitor).

2) "support" in games can often mean the right and left are too WARPED (sort of "fisheye") even if you try to compensate with config settings

3) avoid only 1080 lines as the density of HORIZONTAL is more important than the VERTICAL lines that affect wideness (i.e. a web browser on a 21:9 monitor might only use 1/3 to 1/2 of the screen in width but fully height so you want more horizontal lines)

4) GSYNC/Freesync can work well but it's expensive.

5) Loss of content if 16:9?
Easy, it's 21/16 = 31% of the screen (over 15% for each side) so a 34" is probably closer to a 27" 16:9 for viewable content

6) BUDGET necessary for best recommendation, but again 2560x1080 is not a choice I recommend. but... if it's primary about say fast SHOOTERS and you think the ultra-wide is important, AND you need the high refresh rate for reduced latency then that's arguably your best choice. Everybody is different.

7) Filter/search monitors here (adjust for country. it's USA): http://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/

 

[raisonjohn]

From my experience (I have a 27" 16:9 1080p monitor too), an ultrawide 34" 1080p (which is equivalent to the monitor I have but with extended sides), I can see the actual pixels when the monitor is about 20" away from me. This is during desktop/office use. But when I play games with that 27" 1080p, the pixelation "sort of" becomes unnoticeable, in time.

Now, I have my 27" mounted at the top and a few more inches away from my view (about 30"). Pixels are now unnoticeable, whether in gaming (which I rarely do as it is on top) or in desktop use, as compared when the monitor was closer. So, with a 34" 2560 x 1080, I would position that monitor a good 30" away from me as well. As my 27" 1080p, it'll be fine for gaming (in fact, it'll be smoother as the GPU would only have to render half the number of pixels than the 1440p and that monitor you are considering can go as high as 144Hz.).

 

[photonboy]

#1 - $540USD
FREESYNC (AMD), 16:9, 2560x1440, 27", IPS, 144Hz

http://pcpartpicker.com/product/c298TW/asus-monitor-mg279q

#2 - GSYNC similar to above
http://pcpartpicker.com/product/XvfmP6/asus-monitor-pg279q

#3 - "TN" variants are cheaper (IPS has better color and viewing angles though some TN are fairly good now)

#4 - $250USD
25", 2560x1440, IPS, 60Hz:
http://pcpartpicker.com/product/D7hj4D/acer-monitor-umkg7aa002

(I got the Dell U2515H as I think the quality and warranty is better but there's a larger price difference now)

#5 $200USD:
2560x1080, 75Hz (none listed where higher than 75Hz though they may exist)
http://pcpartpicker.com/product/MRvZxr/lg-monitor-29um58p

I don't recommend this. If you can find a higher refresh okay, but I'd rather have a 2560x1440 60Hz than this.

 

[AlexTheTechFreak]

Alright, I definitely have a better idea now. Thanks for the help & suggestions! Perhaps I won't go ultrawide after all. I'll have to think some more. But I'm happy to have had this clarified.