ViewSonic VP3881 38" Curved HDR Monitor Review: Professional sRGB

[ceberle]

The ViewSonic VP3881 brings professional-grade sRGB with factory-certified color accuracy. Hardcore gamers may want to hold off.

ViewSonic VP3881 38" Curved HDR Monitor Review: Professional sRGB : Read more

 

[emeraldsmines1990]

To all Monitors makers , we demand more height wide screens ... stop focusing on gaming monitors and bring us please WIDE AND TALL Monitors.

For productivity , that is :

3840 x 2400 Resolution and not Curved.

 

[Rushnerd]

I have one of these except it's acer and way cheaper. It's taller than my old 27" and the resolution, while not true 4K, is still more than enough, especially trying to run games faster than 75hz.
Plus the curve on this thing is pretty subtle and with a panel this wide, it's pretty helpful.

 

[WINTERLORD]

i agree i really like the monitor reviews they have here at toms hardware. in paticuler the gaming and HDR and even budget HDR

 

[photonboy]

EMERALDSMINES1990,
Uh...what do you mean by "wide and tall" anyway?

Wide and Ultrawide are references to the Aspect Ratio being more wide than it is tall. You can't be both wider and taller at the same time in terms of Aspect.

Or maybe you just mean physically wider (i.e. 30"+) while having both high pixel density and 16:10 (less wide) aspect ratio?

Also, being CURVED is a necessity for most if the monitor is PHYSICALLY TOO WIDE regardless of Aspect Ratio... of course you can sit further BACK from the monitor so you don't keep turning your head off axis and distorting the text so much but that defeats the purpose too of getting a large monitor.

And is there really that much demand for 16:10 these days? If you had something like a 30", 3840x2160 (4K) monitor there's lots of pixels to work with. Does it really need to be TALLER than this?

I think the original point of 16:10 was that two 8:10 pages could be next to each other but then when 16:9 became standard games and video optimized for this ratio so the demand really dropped.

I guess I just don't see much demand for super large, 16:10 monitors.

 

[hotaru251]

assume they meant they want screens like in CRT days...

where you have a more square (ish) screen ratehr than a longer only screen.


I could udnerstand not wanting a screen that is 3x as long as it is tall.

 

[totaldarknessincar]

Dear Monitor makers and Tomshardware.

We don't want to read reviews of monitors with technology we have seen before. the LG 38UC99 came out 2 years ago. Then we had the ACER 38 inch ultrawide. Then we had the HP 38 inch ultrawide, followed by the Dell 38 inch ultrawide, there may have been another company, even LG updated the 38uc99 to make way for 38WK95C; and now viewsonic.

They are all base on LG's screen, they are all missing displayport 1.4 for some odd reason despite the 1000-1300 premium price rage and displayport 1.4 has been certified for years now. They are are barely able to get 75 refreshes, they all are freesync only, despite NVIDIA GPUs dominating the high end space, they are don't have wide, DCI P3 color gamuts, they are have crappy contrast ration that in practice is only like 800:1, they all aren't bright, peaking at about 300 nits, and they all are curved.


Please wake me up when we have
38 inch ultrawide or any 38 inch monitor
that is not curved
That can do 100hz minimum
That is truly 4K (i'm not paying 1300 for a monitor that i plan on having for 6+ years (I bought a dell u3011 in 2010 and I'm still using it now (8 years)). 4K will for sure be the standard in 6-8 years for most medium to high end monitors and to already not have it, is setting yourself up for failure.
-It needs to have at least 600 nits
-HDR
-Basically take that LG 5K monitor that is about to come out, that is 34 inches, and increase the size, increase the refresh, add HDR, add displayport 1.4 and we are set.

 

[emeraldsmines1990]

EMERALDSMINES1990,
Uh...what do you mean by "wide and tall" anyway?

Wide and Ultrawide are references to the Aspect Ratio being more wide than it is tall. You can't be both wider and taller at the same time in terms of Aspect.

Or maybe you just mean physically wider (i.e. 30"+) while having both high pixel density and 16:10 (less wide) aspect ratio?

Also, being CURVED is a necessity for most if the monitor is PHYSICALLY TOO WIDE regardless of Aspect Ratio... of course you can sit further BACK from the monitor so you don't keep turning your head off axis and distorting the text so much but that defeats the purpose too of getting a large monitor.

And is there really that much demand for 16:10 these days? If you had something like a 30", 3840x2160 (4K) monitor there's lots of pixels to work with. Does it really need to be TALLER than this?

I think the original point of 16:10 was that two 8:10 pages could be next to each other but then when 16:9 became standard games and video optimized for this ratio so the demand really dropped.

I guess I just don't see much demand for super large, 16:10 monitors.

For Productivity 4:3 is the best . and if you look at Famous Tablet makers they realized that 4:3 is the best and Apple IPAD is 4:3 the same as Samsung Tab S3 ...

it is the best for productivity, when they moved to wide screens 16:9/16:10 (FHD) people loved it for watching movies mostly nothing more.

4:3 is the best , and the Tablet makers figured it out very well.

Samsung Tab s3

9.7” QXGA (2048 x 1536)

4:3

and Ipad Pro

2224x1668

4:3 as well.

and I personally like to game on 4:3 because I want to see more vertical the same I want to see more horizontal.

Even the MS surface is 2256 x 1504 (3:2)

Edit : Let me explain more why 4:3 is better than wide screens for work ..

first of all if one application , you will have bigger space to work with all directions .

now for multi windows , in wide screen , people will split it left right and never up down because it is wide.

here each part on right and left , will need to scroll in all directions because the width is half and the height is lower than 4:3 ..

However , if you have 4:3 monitor and you split the screen up and down using two apps , Both will have full width and the only scrolling you will need is up and down , not all directions. Also , having the width maximized in the upper up and lower app , is much easier to work with and monitor.

and so on.

 

[therealduckofdeath]

Try an Ultrawide first, EMERALDSMINES1990. You'll realise that a huge 4:3 display is exceptionally bad for productivity. You'll ruin your neck in a few days as our heads and eyes move excellently from side to side while they don't enjoy up and down as much. If a 4:3 display would be as wide as this it would have to be placed on the floor to work ergonomically.

The Ultrawide makes sense, as you get more workspace without having to split your area over two displays. The curve also makes sense as it counters the warping effect you otherwise get with that much display so close to your face.

 

[Rushnerd]

emeraldsmines1990 "I personally like to game on 4:3 because I want to see more vertical the same I want to see more horizontal."

I can do 4:3 in considerable size on my 38" Acer display, but the "productivity" you mentioned? This monitor is equal to over 3 1080p monitors and the size gets around 4K scaling issues.

If you haven't tried ultrawide gaming yet, you really should. That said i've been playing some 4:3 games lately, and other 4:3 ones modded for ultrawide, it's great.

I also want to add that I thought a 38" 3840X1600 monitor was completely overkill and too much, but it's even better than the last acer 34" ultrawide I used. It's hard to put into words what it's like to be almost completely surrounded by a game in nearly 4K.

EDIT: I do youtube videos for my channel a lot and they have made 21:9 more or less the new standard for 16:9 screens along with the fact that editing videos at this res and size is a dream come true.

therealduckofdeath
"You'll realise that a huge 4:3 display is exceptionally bad for productivity. You'll ruin your neck in a few days as our heads and eyes move excellently from side to side while they don't enjoy up and down as much."

I bought a 40" Tv once years ago as a monitor, it's only 2" bigger than this one, but that tv was so tall and big that it was impossible to use and hurt!

 

[emeraldsmines1990]

Try an Ultrawide first, EMERALDSMINES1990. You'll realise that a huge 4:3 display is exceptionally bad for productivity. You'll ruin your neck in a few days as our heads and eyes move excellently from side to side while they don't enjoy up and down as much. If a 4:3 display would be as wide as this it would have to be placed on the floor to work ergonomically.

The Ultrawide makes sense, as you get more workspace without having to split your area over two displays. The curve also makes sense as it counters the warping effect you otherwise get with that much display so close to your face.

Ultra Wide is for gaming only . for productivity 4:3 is way better. a 30 inch 4:3 is good enough size and wont be that big.

keep in mind that many people when they used 3 monitors setup for gaming they put them in vertical mode (pivoted) so not all people really prefer ultra wide over 4:3

example

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJNkwlSqXUM

 

[therealduckofdeath]

Ultrawide isn't for gaming only, Ultrawide is for more desktop space for anyone smart enough to realise one very wide screen works better than two separate screens. One more reason why one wide display works better is you won't have shifting colour calibration issues between multiple displays.
Just because some put their screen vertically it doesn't mean it's a common behaviour. There are always oddballs out there doing things differently to be different.
Just a reference to that screenie of that oddball setup you posted, emeraldsmines1990. Notice how the person has curved the set up? I bet the person has wet dreams of a 38 inch curved ultrawide....

 

[emeraldsmines1990]

Ultrawide isn't for gaming only, Ultrawide is for more desktop space for anyone smart enough to realise one very wide screen works better than two separate screens. One more reason why one wide display works better is you won't have shifting colour calibration issues between multiple displays.
Just because some put their screen vertically it doesn't mean it's a common behaviour. There are always oddballs out there doing things differently to be different.
Just a reference to that screenie of that oddball setup you posted, emeraldsmines1990. Notice how the person has curved the set up? I bet the person has wet dreams of a 38 inch curved ultrawide....

I am talking about productivity, no one uses curved screen while designing .. and I did not say take multiple displays , I said 4:3 screen for productivity , the Multi Display was to show that actually 4:3 is better for gaming than ultra wide. you will see more Vertically , and enough Wide.

Most of the extra things that appear in the ultra wide screens in gaming by the way is useless for gampelpay and wont make any difference.

 

[therealduckofdeath]

Ultrawide isn't for gaming only, Ultrawide is for more desktop space for anyone smart enough to realise one very wide screen works better than two separate screens. One more reason why one wide display works better is you won't have shifting colour calibration issues between multiple displays.
Just because some put their screen vertically it doesn't mean it's a common behaviour. There are always oddballs out there doing things differently to be different.
Just a reference to that screenie of that oddball setup you posted, emeraldsmines1990. Notice how the person has curved the set up? I bet the person has wet dreams of a 38 inch curved ultrawide....

I am talking about productivity, no one uses curved screen while designing .. and I did not say take multiple displays , I said 4:3 screen for productivity , the Multi Display was to show that actually 4:3 is better for gaming than ultra wide. you will see more Vertically , and enough Wide.

Most of the extra things that appear in the ultra wide screens in gaming by the way is useless for gampelpay and wont make any difference.

So, because a fraction of 1% designs, everybody else should use the same set up? Please, stop it. This is a format you'll see spreading everywhere you're now seeing more than one display. Because it makes sense. Designers with a little sense would adopt it too as I suspect even a designer is capable of multitasking?

 

[emeraldsmines1990]

Ultrawide isn't for gaming only, Ultrawide is for more desktop space for anyone smart enough to realise one very wide screen works better than two separate screens. One more reason why one wide display works better is you won't have shifting colour calibration issues between multiple displays.
Just because some put their screen vertically it doesn't mean it's a common behaviour. There are always oddballs out there doing things differently to be different.
Just a reference to that screenie of that oddball setup you posted, emeraldsmines1990. Notice how the person has curved the set up? I bet the person has wet dreams of a 38 inch curved ultrawide....

I am talking about productivity, no one uses curved screen while designing .. and I did not say take multiple displays , I said 4:3 screen for productivity , the Multi Display was to show that actually 4:3 is better for gaming than ultra wide. you will see more Vertically , and enough Wide.

Most of the extra things that appear in the ultra wide screens in gaming by the way is useless for gampelpay and wont make any difference.

So, because a fraction of 1% designs, everybody else should use the same set up? Please, stop it. This is a format you'll see spreading everywhere you're now seeing more than one display. Because it makes sense. Designers with a little sense would adopt it too as I suspect even a designer is capable of multitasking?

Where did I say every one should use the same setup ? I am asking Monitors Manufacturer to make 4:3 screens again and I am not saying to them stop making other monitors.

further more , Designers dont like curved Monitors , because it makes lines appear not natural and this is not good for designers.

and for multitasking 4:3 is aloso better for designers , because as I explained above , if you have 4:3 you can open two windoes above each others instead of left and right , and at the same time have full width . which is impossible in Wide screen , which if split left and right will give you very short width .

Splitting the screen up and down is better than left and right because you will not need to scroll left and right much.

While in wide screens , left and right split will force you to scroll in all direction , you will never have full height and you will never have full width.

Please next time you reply , dont use that attitude of "stop it" . and dont push words in my mouth, I never said all must use 4:3 . I just asked Monitors makers to make 4:3 again.

and as I said earlier as well , People know 4:3 is better for productivity and thats why Apple and Samsung and many others are making Tablets 4:3 .

 

[therealduckofdeath]

I will stop using stop it when you stop using generalisations like capitalised "People" when you clearly state your own opinions.
Go do some ergonomics training and you'll understand why a 40+ inch 4:3 monitor makes absolutely zero sense. Get a better pair of prescription glasses if it's details you can't make out. Regarding accuracy of what you'd be working with, a 38" ultrawide is roughly 45 centimetres tall. A 4:3 display with the same width would be almost 70 cm tall! The effects of looking at a huge surface like that would make everything look like 40's television. Extreme fish eye.
No one (and here I'm actually speaking for the 99.999%) wants a enormous 4:3 display.

 

[emeraldsmines1990]

I will stop using stop it when you stop using generalisations like capitalised "People" when you clearly state your own opinions.
Go do some ergonomics training and you'll understand why a 40+ inch 4:3 monitor makes absolutely zero sense. Get a better pair of prescription glasses if it's details you can't make out. Regarding accuracy of what you'd be working with, a 38" ultrawide is roughly 45 centimetres tall. A 4:3 display with the same width would be almost 70 cm tall! The effects of looking at a huge surface like that would make everything look like 40's television. Extreme fish eye.
No one (and here I'm actually speaking for the 99.999%) wants a enormous 4:3 display.

you dont tell me what to do and what to train , do you really think I dont have Wide screens (forced to use them) on my desktop ?

I dont know how you use your brain. Ofc I have wide screens and I am forced to use them because 4:3 disappeared from the market.

so stop lecturing me ok ? I stll prefer 4:3 and I wish they come back. this conversation has ended.

 

[saunupe1911]

The lack of affordable 4k HDR monitors is insane. No one is spending $1200 for a monitor when you can get 65 inch 4k HDR to TV that processes it properly for the same prices. This is insane. What's the technology barrier? Monoprice has the best monitor smoking right now.