Go UltraWide or go 4K?

[ElsayedAli]

I am in a real pickle, I can't seem to decide, what are the benefits and drawbacks of each? Ultra Wide seems more stylish I know, but I am afraid they are not compatible with old games.

 

[nOOky]

I can't stand ultrawide for general Windows use, especially viewing/editing pictures etc. so I prefer 16:9 4k. I guess if it's a larger display with vertical resolution above 1080 it might be okay... you can't currently run anything over 60hz in 4k either if you wish to run 120hz or higher, I believe.

 

[Chaotic42]

I like 21:9 for writing, coding, or anything involving multiple vertical windows. For single application focused workloads, I'd rather have 4K.

 

[CryHavoc]

I recently obtained an Acer XR382CQK 3840x1600 Ultra wide for everyday use and gaming for my main home pc.
For years, I used a sweet BenQ 27" 144hz 1080p monitor tied to a GTX 970 and it was perfectly fine for the games I play the most, those being BF4 and Battlefront1

This summer I built up a new rig and obtained that 38" Acer Ultra Wide. Its a freesync monitor but paired very nicely with an Asus gtx 1080, no tearing, etc
Now I run a Vega 64 so that Freesync via DP is in play.

Let me say this regarding an Ultra wide versus 16:9
Once you go Ultra Wide, you will wonder why you took so long to do so.
at 3840x1600 i can have two normal 1920x1080 screens side by side for work purposes, ie RDP'ing into systems at work where I need more screen space to monitor/work/fix systems, and the ultra wide screens I get for games is mind blowing to me. For FPS game, I love the fact I have a much wider native FOV.

I do not foresee a need, for me for now, to ever game in 4k.
Now that I have gone Ultra wide, I wouldn't ever go back to 16:9 just for 4k gaming.

Perhaps in a couple years, reasonably priced Ultra wide 75+ hz 4k monitors will be widely available and the top end video card's will be able to handle the resolution properly.

This is the monitor I have and I love it.
The curved ultra wide screen takes a few minutes to get used to, but once you do, going back to a 16:9 screen seems very narrow.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/acer-xr382cqk-curved-freesync-monitor,5067.html

 

[bigrash]

Love my 34" ultrawide monitor.

 

[EXCellR8]

I can't stand ultrawide for general Windows use, especially viewing/editing pictures etc. so I prefer 16:9 4k. I guess if it's a larger display with vertical resolution above 1080 it might be okay... you can't currently run anything over 60hz in 4k either if you wish to run 120hz or higher, I believe.

you don't need to run every single app fullscreen... with photoshop for example you can have the program and your albums open (bridge or regular explorer) side by side.

i will say that doing stuff like CAD work is much better on 16:9 than ultrawide because you can see more of the drawing vertically. for that reason alone, I stick with a pair of 2K monitors at work.

 

[ElFenix]

at 3840x1600 i can have two normal 1920x1080 screens side by side for work purposes, ie RDP'ing into systems at work where I need more screen space to monitor/work/fix systems,

i can do that at 4k. and as a bonus, i have an additional block of 3840x560 pixels (over 2 million pixels!) left over to put other stuff.

and the ultra wide screens I get for games is mind blowing to me. For FPS game, I love the fact I have a much wider native FOV.

thanks, lazy programmers!


<-- still finds it mind bottling that someone with just 6 million pixels sees more than someone with 8.

 

[Viper GTS]

Big 4K is the superior solution. The ultrawides all look tiny in stores compared to what I've been using on a daily basis for almost three years. More physical space + more pixels is always going to be better.

Yes the reality is that the most heavily used portion of my 4K displays is similar to what an ultrawide offers. But I use the top half as well, and I would miss it if it were gone.

As an added bonus if you ever want to watch 16:9 content you'll have a MUCH larger image area.

Viper GTS

 

[nOOky]

you don't need to run every single app fullscreen... with photoshop for example you can have the program and your albums open (bridge or regular explorer) side by side.

i will say that doing stuff like CAD work is much better on 16:9 than ultrawide because you can see more of the drawing vertically. for that reason alone, I stick with a pair of 2K monitors at work.

True, but I still love games at higher resolution better than the 21:9 format.

you don't need to run every single app fullscreen... with photoshop for example you can have the program and your albums open (bridge or regular explorer) side by side.

i will say that doing stuff like CAD work is much better on 16:9 than ultrawide because you can see more of the drawing vertically. for that reason alone, I stick with a pair of 2K monitors at work.

At home I typically only have one or two open windows at a time. I prefer more vertical pixel height, especially for viewing photos and most web pages. Most of the photos I take are at 16:9 etc. I have a 2560x1080 25" monitor on another computer right next to me and I do other tasks on that. I would probably be okay with a 3840 x 1600 38" if I saw one in person but I have not.

I've just started playing DOOM and it looks fantastic on a 4k monitor. I don't see any tearing or any of the issues that people claim only having 60hz causes, however I'm probably not dipping below 60 fps and I have Freesync on also.

 

[whm1974]

I also seconded going 4K and I'm thinking of doing that myself.

 

[EXCellR8]

I can see third person and RTS games being better suited for 16:9 displays but for racing and FPS I like the peripheral space of 21:9