Monoprice announced a pair on monitors today at CES, beginning with their new ultra-wide 21:9 display.
The monitor features a 3440 x 1440 IPS panel with a 75 Hz refresh rate, but the big story with this monitor is going to be cost, as Monoprice will be selling this for $499 – the lowest we’ve seen for a 3440 x 1440 by far. (LG is currently the only supplier of these curved 34-inch 3440×1440 IPS panels, so this should be the same panel found in similar monitors on the market.)
Monoprice also announced a new 27-inch 4K display at CES, and this USB-C monitor uses an LG IPS panel with 99% Adobe RGB color support. Also $499, the monitor offers 100 watt USB-C power delivery for device charging for laptops and other devices, as well as USB 3.0 connectivity. (The display was not available to photograph.)
It was a point of emphasis that Monoprice is only using A+ panels for these new monitors (which means they are the same grade as the big name brands), and the company really seems to be working to establish itself in the display space. Both of these monitors will be available in Q1 2016.
PC Perspective's CES 2016 coverage is sponsored by Logitech.
Follow all of our coverage of the show at https://pcper.com/ces!
God help us all…
For 500$
God help us all…
For 500$ you wouldnt complain about 3440×1440 in ANY WAY. Its awesome that its 75hz.
I just REALLY WISH it has freesync too.
What are the chances that you
What are the chances that you guys will be receiving some review samples??
wow. so never. thx for
wow. so never. thx for response! 🙂
$500 is where 3440 x 1440
$500 is where 3440 x 1440 should have been from the start. Pricing it even higher than 4k monitors was ridiculous, since you get a lot less resolution and in some cases, less size as well. Although Monoprice has also made this $500 ultrawide irrelevant by releasing a 4k for the same price.
Is this ultrawide a TN panel?
Cant be a TN. Noone has ever
Cant be a TN. Noone has ever or will ever put TN trash on a 21:9. If this is the first then its priced 50x higher than is appropriate for TN.
Also, 21:9 always being more expensive than anything else is logical… cuz 21:9 is better. Than ANYTHING. In all ways. Even if the res is lower.
The markets chooses the price with demand. 21:9`s being expensive means everyone wants them. And 4k`s going for 400$ means noone really gives a fuck about 4k.
Economy 101
Actually, 21:9 yields are
Actually, 21:9 yields are lower than 4K, which is why they carry a higher cost of production. Demand affects price, but it’s not the only factor in this case.
There’s also nothing wrong with TN unless the viewing angles become too extreme. Many TN panels can beat out IPS when it comes to calibration and contrast. Pretty soon, they will all be crushed and left for dead by OLED.
By definition 21:9 monitors
By definition 21:9 monitors would have unusually extreme viewing angles, so a TN is very likely to cause a lot of discomfort at that aspect ratio.
Nah man. TN is true
Nah man. TN is true garbage… just such a low quality panel compared to IPS or VA.
And doesnt matter how much static screenshots you put on side-by-side with perfectly centered cameras. When actual people use TN day to day… its pure shit compared to IPS or VA, and colors is the least of the problem.
Obviously OLED makes all LCD tech look like garbage. But OLED monitors that normal working class people can afford are still 3-4 years away, optimistically.
“cuz 21:9 is better”
cuz it
“cuz 21:9 is better”
cuz it sucks. Why people want to have tiny 34″ low-res display, when they can have taller, wider, cheaper 40″ UHD?
You dont understand what
You dont understand what aspect ratio means.
Thats ok, most people have trouble with these simple concepts.
yep. i think its clear who is
yep. i think its clear who is having trouble with simple concepts in this thread. rofl. you can force aspect ratio btw, fwiw. *sigh*
This uses an IPS panel. I
This uses an IPS panel. I made a point of asking, and then forgot to add it to the post!
Wow, I definitely want one of
Wow, I definitely want one of these!
I think there are some errors
I think there are some errors in this article. It refers to the 21:9 as being 4k and 27″, which is most likely incorrect considering all 1440 ultrawides are 34″ and most often referred to as 3k.
I haven’t heard of 3440×1440
I haven’t heard of 3440×1440 34″ ultrawides referred to as 3k before. I don’t think that’s an often used term at all. You are correct that it very likely not a 4k panel.
3K is used because 1440
3K is used because 1440 ultrawides (3440×1440: ~5m pixels) are inbetween the pixel count of 2K (2560×1440: ~3.7m pixels) and 4K (3840×2160: ~8.3m pixels). It’s certainly not precise, but I’ve seen it used before.
Looking at the pixel count on a number line gives a quick idea how much more GPU hungry a 4K display is: http://i.imgur.com/ZxAG3gi.png
$500 is a much more
$500 is a much more reasonable price for a non-VRR 3440×1440 monitor. I still think a 2560×1440 VRR monitor is still clearly the best for gaming as software compatibility will be a complete non-issue unlike for ultrawides.
Anything thats NOT 21:9 is
Anything thats NOT 21:9 is worthless for gaming, regardless what specs it has. Period. Anyone who has ACTUALLY used a 21:9 will know what i mean.
21:9 isn’t very awesome.
21:9 isn’t very awesome. 16:10 is better, you gain more vertical height. 😛
A 16:10 display does give you
A 16:10 display does give you more vertical but it is only 1 unit increase of HView (10-9), where as a 21:9 display gives you 5 units increase (21-16) of horizontal view.
You dont understand how
You dont understand how aspect ratios work. Thats ok. Most people apparently have a real hard time grasping this simple concept.
3440×1440 monitor is actually 24:10 aspect ratio. So its all that 16:10 can offer only BETTER in every way above that.
If you want nostalgia get a CRT.
The size doesn’t make sense ?
The size doesn’t make sense ? This is not 4k. Also 27 inch would be extremely shallow in vertical height, and pixel density would be extremely high for 3440 x 1440. My guess this is either a 29 inch or 34 inch display.
I pasted a paragraph into the
I pasted a paragraph into the wrong place when adding the post the site. The 34-inch is 1440, and the 27 is 4K. There was also a 2560×1440 IPS display at their suite, but that wasn't a finished prototype so there isn't anything official there just yet.
It’s a 34″ curved ultrawide
It’s a 34″ curved ultrawide QHD. Not 4k, not 27″. I learned that by enlarging the photo accompanying your article…!
I bought an ultrawide monitor on black friday. I don’t think i can ever go back to 16:9/10
This article discusses two
This article discusses two different monitors, not one monitor as you seem to think it does.