← Back to context

Comment by jsheard

2 days ago

It's a cost thing, ultrawide has always been expensive relative to how much extra area you get, and pushing the resolution up compounds that. 5120x2160 (extended 4K) panels do exist but they cost a fortune.

10 comments

jsheard

Reply
Kon5ole  2 days ago

But why is it a cost thing? I got a 55 inch 8k tv for less than 1000 usd years ago, including sales tax and overhead from a physical store. It’s the best monitor I’ve used.

Today, many years later, monitors are still way worse and more expensive! Also you can basically not buy the tv’s anymore either.

The panel factories existed, and the panels were cheap, years ago. They’re just not used anymore (or so it seems).

rabf  2 days ago

Dell UltraSharp 40 Curved Thunderbolt™ Hub Monitor - U4025QW

Worth every penny.

  • adamcharnock  2 days ago

    I’m in the market for new monitors (or maybe only one in this case!)

    A question if you don’t mind - Do you find 4K resolution to be sufficient on a 40” screen?

    Also just eager to hear any others reasons why you like it

    • bpye  2 days ago

      I have the same monitor and think the resolution is fine. I run at 125% scaling, which is close to 2560x1440 at 27”, 100% which is the density I moved from.

  • lloeki  2 days ago

    I have one as well. Indeed worth every penny, although to be fair that's quite a lot of pennies.

skhameneh  2 days ago

And not in OLED, only in VA panels, unfortunately.

I can't justify going high end on a monitor without it being OLED.

  • jsheard  2 days ago

    LG has a 5120x2160 OLED already, but it's 45" so the pixel density isn't great. It's also stupid expensive, about double the cost of a regular 4K OLED for 30% more width. They have 39" and 34" variants on their roadmap though.

    • skhameneh  2 days ago

      True, that is an option I forgot about. I generally don't see it any better than a standard 16:9 OLED given the price and limited (in comparison to 32:9) width though.

      > the pixel density isn't great.

      I got one of the 49" 32:9 OLED and it has 1140 vertical. I'm making due with it and had to tweak settings like crazy to make it tolerable... I'd love a proper 2160 option for the ratio. I came from a 28" 4K TN panel, so it's been a major change of tradeoffs.

      It's hard to justify the higher price on the smaller 45", it makes it a hard sell over a standard 16:9 ratio 4K OLED (although I wonder if that would have been the better choice over what I got).