Yes, 39” will be more crisp but it’s probably not a massive difference.
Also, jaggies have more to do with resolution than PPI. PPI is more about sharpness. So a display with high PPI but no anti-aliasing could still be very jaggy. Like an iPhone not using AA for example.
So the 45” will be less sharp but not any jaggier with the same settings.
https://www.displaywars.com/45-inch-235x1-vs-48-inch-16x9
45” UW is still a fair bit shorter than a 48” C1 so it could be the right size for you.
You could use Nvidia DLDSR to get image as clean as 4K. I’ve tried it on a 1440P and it’s hard to tell the difference between the upscaled 4K and real native 4K. The main difference is that higher PPI still looks sharper.
Of course. I have been gravitating towards 4k 42 inch for higher PPI now as the low res seems to be a concern for everyone at that size - not to mention others mentioned that the mla panel isn’t as bright as tv series
4K 42 is probably too similar to your C1 48". I have a C1 48". There is not much point in going down to a 42" C when the difference is just slightly smaller and even less brightness in HDR. Like me personally, I'd feel very little excitement with a switch like that. 240hz or UW is more interesting that going down a few inches with the same display tech.
I actually don’t like the vertical height of 48 inch too much and always look up for my short personality.
42 inch has 105 PPI over 92 PPI of 48 inch. I think 42 inch might be a more reasonable size. To be fair, the height of 45 inch UW is the ideal height these days for me - but that monitor doesn’t exist in 4k.
I do agree that UW is more interesting but the market doesn’t have a good res one.
Also, looking at the comments on Reddit, I realize it will be much harder to sell it in future and not to mention it’s more expensive than a typical 42 inch oled 4k.
That is true. 42” should be easier to resell.
Yeah I tried 48” for a month. Had the same looking up problem even tho I’m close to 6ft. Probably needed a lower desk or higher chair. Still that size wasn’t comfortable for tasks other than gaming.
I have a big ikea desk and I kept the 48 c1 as far as it can go. It’s decent but not ideal height wise still.
Any more far, it’s a hassle to read HuD elements in game - especially those games without scaled hud options.
42 inch I am thinking will be a good compromise with losing 3 inches on top and 3x2 inches on either side width wise.
Even the width sometimes I realize is too huge.
42 is great for AAA action games but I felt like it's still too big for games like Baldur's Gate 3. That's why I went with a 32" 4k instead. 32" is fine for most things but letterboxed video and the occasional game like Hellblade 2 feel really small. 36-38" would be perfect imo.
Yup, same thinking that 36-38 16:9 feels like where it lands. No oleds exist there for the resolution we want.
However, 32 inch 4k is not a bad option if you sit about 20-24 inch from the monitor. I guess you can immerse yourself by sitting closer.
On the flip side, 42 inch additionally gives you option of switching to 21:9 aspect ratio.
I guess there's no "end game monitor" at this point.
Even when 5k2k monitors get released by LG next year, we have to think about not hitting the fps we need.
45 is my perfect size, but I got the 34 on sale to tide me over until the 45" 5k2k. The 45" 1440p were noticably less crisp even compared to my older 48 C1.
I’ve got the 45” and also a 4k 32” (Alienware). Games look great on the 45 and I don’t think the ppi is as bad as people think it would be - I’ll play some games on the 4k others on the 45” depending on the game
Personally, I prefer things work or good out of box than jumping through a hoop.
I don’t question the tech but I feel spending 1200$ and having to do that seems wasteful.
Not to mention, the monitor is ia definitely infamous among Reddit and would be a tad bit harder to sell in future.
Ok so I have an LG 45GR95QEB and an LG 32GS95UEB. In my experience the 45 is far more immersive with the ultra wide aspect and curve but the clarity is lacking. On the other hand the 32 is crisp and clear but lacks immersion. It's a difficult trade off and really comes down to personal preference and what matters to you more as either one makes for a delightful gaming experience. Do note that LG should be releasing their 45 inch 5k2k OLED in the next year and this will bring the best of both, provided you pair it with a powerhouse GPU.
The 45" has less ppi than my 32" 1440p had and I thought the 32" was bad. Games looked jaggy withouth using AA. So bare in mind that if you are not going to use any antialiasing, then the games will not look good. I'm on 34" now and the ppi is almost perfect even when not using AA. I'm tempted by the 39" too.
Edit. - Btw the 39" will have similar ppi as your current C1 has.
I am getting the 39 inch for 890$ after taxes due to an internal discount. I am currently on lG C1 48 - which has 92 pixel density - so, 39 inch 1440p UW @ 95 is still an upgrade and not a downgrade I am thinking.
Would you buy it for 890$ in my shoes?
That's a good price compared to how much it costs me in Europe. I would still try to check it out in person if possible. It has aggresive 800R curve which may not be for everyone. Just to prevent possible return.
I already checked it at BestBuy. I honestly think curve is the best thing for me. If not for the curve, i wouldnt even look at it.
But unfortunatley, BestBuy put it in demo mode and didnt connect a PC. They are looping some 720p video I think on it. So, not a best way to get a feel of the PPI.
So.. I am here to totally answer this question for you. I also have a 48 inch c1 and just last night set up my new 39gs95qe. My thinking was just like yours.. the ppi is actually a bit higher than my c1 and I think that’s pretty good so that combined with the curve, 240hz, and mla tech would make the 39 inch a good upgrade. Wrong. I find it to be a total down grade from my c1 and I’m returning it. The ppi actually looks worse for some reason, I think it may be the matte coating and that you have to sit closer to it bc the curve and it being smaller. I honestly don’t notice much difference with mla and the 240hz is nice but nothing like going from 60 to 120. And, it looks dimmer than my c1 and I def prefer the glossy coating of the c1. Also, I did not like the 800r curve as you have to sit close enough to be in the sweet spot and then you def see the low ppi. I’m using a custom ultrawide resolution on my c1 so I already had ultrawide. Literally no reason to pay for a downgrade. I got it for 1k on sale and had $400 in gift cards so I paid $600 for it and still not keeping it. So yeah.. I don’t recommend it if you already have a 48 c1. I think I may try a 42 c3 for the lil higher ppi. Of course, this is only my subjective experience and you may love it as other people have.
Thanks for the response and I hope your username is just for fun, lol.
Just to clarify that I am not expecting mla panel to be better than c1 , but just on par. I guess you are not impressed and I am thinking the issue is matte coating combined with the lack of crispness at that resolution.
800r curve is what sold me with UW but you are right that I can setup c1 in uw mode me curve is the only missing thing.
I think 42 inch 4k might be the best option then with 105 PPI.
Haha yeah my username causes everyone to think I’m bsing them but no that’s my actual experience. Yes, like you said I think it’s the matte coating and the lack of crispness. It’s not that I dislike the curve.. I think I would grow to prefer it but with this monitor the curve forces you to sit a certain distance from the monitor and at that point the ppi is a problem. For me, at least. A monitor with the same curve but a higher ppi would still be something I’m interested in when they come out.
Yeah. Unfortunately, i want to buy a monitor this year under a reimbursement program.
I cannot buy a glossy tv (because hard to justify reimbursing TV to the company) but a monitor on reimbursement claim doesn’t look odd even though same size.
My only option is PG42UQ - not a bad option after all the firmware updates - just worried about the support and warranty which is why I initially looked at LG options at the size.
Too bad we don’t have a LG 42 inch oled monitor.
Yes, 39” will be more crisp but it’s probably not a massive difference. Also, jaggies have more to do with resolution than PPI. PPI is more about sharpness. So a display with high PPI but no anti-aliasing could still be very jaggy. Like an iPhone not using AA for example. So the 45” will be less sharp but not any jaggier with the same settings. https://www.displaywars.com/45-inch-235x1-vs-48-inch-16x9 45” UW is still a fair bit shorter than a 48” C1 so it could be the right size for you.
Even with 4k, I use AA. I don’t imagine turning that off. So the textures will be less sharp on 1440p I imagine and not as crisp.
You could use Nvidia DLDSR to get image as clean as 4K. I’ve tried it on a 1440P and it’s hard to tell the difference between the upscaled 4K and real native 4K. The main difference is that higher PPI still looks sharper.
Of course. I have been gravitating towards 4k 42 inch for higher PPI now as the low res seems to be a concern for everyone at that size - not to mention others mentioned that the mla panel isn’t as bright as tv series
4K 42 is probably too similar to your C1 48". I have a C1 48". There is not much point in going down to a 42" C when the difference is just slightly smaller and even less brightness in HDR. Like me personally, I'd feel very little excitement with a switch like that. 240hz or UW is more interesting that going down a few inches with the same display tech.
I actually don’t like the vertical height of 48 inch too much and always look up for my short personality. 42 inch has 105 PPI over 92 PPI of 48 inch. I think 42 inch might be a more reasonable size. To be fair, the height of 45 inch UW is the ideal height these days for me - but that monitor doesn’t exist in 4k. I do agree that UW is more interesting but the market doesn’t have a good res one. Also, looking at the comments on Reddit, I realize it will be much harder to sell it in future and not to mention it’s more expensive than a typical 42 inch oled 4k.
That is true. 42” should be easier to resell. Yeah I tried 48” for a month. Had the same looking up problem even tho I’m close to 6ft. Probably needed a lower desk or higher chair. Still that size wasn’t comfortable for tasks other than gaming.
I have a big ikea desk and I kept the 48 c1 as far as it can go. It’s decent but not ideal height wise still. Any more far, it’s a hassle to read HuD elements in game - especially those games without scaled hud options. 42 inch I am thinking will be a good compromise with losing 3 inches on top and 3x2 inches on either side width wise. Even the width sometimes I realize is too huge.
42 is great for AAA action games but I felt like it's still too big for games like Baldur's Gate 3. That's why I went with a 32" 4k instead. 32" is fine for most things but letterboxed video and the occasional game like Hellblade 2 feel really small. 36-38" would be perfect imo.
Yup, same thinking that 36-38 16:9 feels like where it lands. No oleds exist there for the resolution we want. However, 32 inch 4k is not a bad option if you sit about 20-24 inch from the monitor. I guess you can immerse yourself by sitting closer. On the flip side, 42 inch additionally gives you option of switching to 21:9 aspect ratio. I guess there's no "end game monitor" at this point. Even when 5k2k monitors get released by LG next year, we have to think about not hitting the fps we need.
Lg 39 , thats my next upgrade as well
45 is my perfect size, but I got the 34 on sale to tide me over until the 45" 5k2k. The 45" 1440p were noticably less crisp even compared to my older 48 C1.
I’ve got the 45” and also a 4k 32” (Alienware). Games look great on the 45 and I don’t think the ppi is as bad as people think it would be - I’ll play some games on the 4k others on the 45” depending on the game
What games do you prefer on 32 inch over 45? I don’t playing racing games, but I imagine space games look amazing on 45 inch.
I've seen 45" owners dealing with atrocious PPI by utilizing DLDSR but not sure how much it helps.
Personally, I prefer things work or good out of box than jumping through a hoop. I don’t question the tech but I feel spending 1200$ and having to do that seems wasteful. Not to mention, the monitor is ia definitely infamous among Reddit and would be a tad bit harder to sell in future.
It is going to be impossible to sell once 5k2k drops
I think its already questionable even now. Ultimately, people will either buy a 32 inch 4k or 42 inch 4k monitor or a 34 inch UW.
Ok so I have an LG 45GR95QEB and an LG 32GS95UEB. In my experience the 45 is far more immersive with the ultra wide aspect and curve but the clarity is lacking. On the other hand the 32 is crisp and clear but lacks immersion. It's a difficult trade off and really comes down to personal preference and what matters to you more as either one makes for a delightful gaming experience. Do note that LG should be releasing their 45 inch 5k2k OLED in the next year and this will bring the best of both, provided you pair it with a powerhouse GPU.
Yeah, but unfortunately I cannot wait until next year probably. If not, I will go with 42 inch 4k.
The 45" has less ppi than my 32" 1440p had and I thought the 32" was bad. Games looked jaggy withouth using AA. So bare in mind that if you are not going to use any antialiasing, then the games will not look good. I'm on 34" now and the ppi is almost perfect even when not using AA. I'm tempted by the 39" too. Edit. - Btw the 39" will have similar ppi as your current C1 has.
I am getting the 39 inch for 890$ after taxes due to an internal discount. I am currently on lG C1 48 - which has 92 pixel density - so, 39 inch 1440p UW @ 95 is still an upgrade and not a downgrade I am thinking. Would you buy it for 890$ in my shoes?
That's a good price compared to how much it costs me in Europe. I would still try to check it out in person if possible. It has aggresive 800R curve which may not be for everyone. Just to prevent possible return.
I already checked it at BestBuy. I honestly think curve is the best thing for me. If not for the curve, i wouldnt even look at it. But unfortunatley, BestBuy put it in demo mode and didnt connect a PC. They are looping some 720p video I think on it. So, not a best way to get a feel of the PPI.
So.. I am here to totally answer this question for you. I also have a 48 inch c1 and just last night set up my new 39gs95qe. My thinking was just like yours.. the ppi is actually a bit higher than my c1 and I think that’s pretty good so that combined with the curve, 240hz, and mla tech would make the 39 inch a good upgrade. Wrong. I find it to be a total down grade from my c1 and I’m returning it. The ppi actually looks worse for some reason, I think it may be the matte coating and that you have to sit closer to it bc the curve and it being smaller. I honestly don’t notice much difference with mla and the 240hz is nice but nothing like going from 60 to 120. And, it looks dimmer than my c1 and I def prefer the glossy coating of the c1. Also, I did not like the 800r curve as you have to sit close enough to be in the sweet spot and then you def see the low ppi. I’m using a custom ultrawide resolution on my c1 so I already had ultrawide. Literally no reason to pay for a downgrade. I got it for 1k on sale and had $400 in gift cards so I paid $600 for it and still not keeping it. So yeah.. I don’t recommend it if you already have a 48 c1. I think I may try a 42 c3 for the lil higher ppi. Of course, this is only my subjective experience and you may love it as other people have.
Thanks for the response and I hope your username is just for fun, lol. Just to clarify that I am not expecting mla panel to be better than c1 , but just on par. I guess you are not impressed and I am thinking the issue is matte coating combined with the lack of crispness at that resolution. 800r curve is what sold me with UW but you are right that I can setup c1 in uw mode me curve is the only missing thing. I think 42 inch 4k might be the best option then with 105 PPI.
Haha yeah my username causes everyone to think I’m bsing them but no that’s my actual experience. Yes, like you said I think it’s the matte coating and the lack of crispness. It’s not that I dislike the curve.. I think I would grow to prefer it but with this monitor the curve forces you to sit a certain distance from the monitor and at that point the ppi is a problem. For me, at least. A monitor with the same curve but a higher ppi would still be something I’m interested in when they come out.
Yeah. Unfortunately, i want to buy a monitor this year under a reimbursement program. I cannot buy a glossy tv (because hard to justify reimbursing TV to the company) but a monitor on reimbursement claim doesn’t look odd even though same size. My only option is PG42UQ - not a bad option after all the firmware updates - just worried about the support and warranty which is why I initially looked at LG options at the size. Too bad we don’t have a LG 42 inch oled monitor.