** TRUE 4K IS HERE & LOW LOW PRE-ORDER ONLY PRICE!

Associate
Joined
5 Sep 2009
Posts
1,225
I think this would be fab for work though. However other forums suggest this is a 17:9 ratio monitor and not as good for gaming due to black bars.
This has been confirmed. Reading around on the webz.. no game actually supports 17:9 aspect ratios and the panel doesn’t have a stretch mode ( that would ruin the image anyway ) so you have black bars on most games.

seems a bit pointless to buy for gaming when you can only use 3840x2160 of the image and the bars make the panel look like it has huge bezels.

im sure some games might work though?
 
Associate
Joined
11 Aug 2004
Posts
1,891
Location
Southampton
This has been confirmed. Reading around on the webz.. no game actually supports 17:9 aspect ratios and the panel doesn’t have a stretch mode ( that would ruin the image anyway ) so you have black bars on most games.

seems a bit pointless to buy for gaming when you can only use 3840x2160 of the image and the bars make the panel look like it has huge bezels.

im sure some games might work though?


This is taken from another forum from an owner

"it's a pretty nice program, better than Windows Borderless Gaming App. It fixed Witcher 2 and Mass Effect 3. Well not really, cutscenes, menus, and other overlays are still 16:9 and you get blacks or borked cinematics, but otherwise regular gameplay is 17:9. Some games still had no fix but those are the ones fixed to render internally at 16:9 so everybody gets black bars unless you have a 16:9 monitor.

It's a nice monitor I think I'll keep and it return the Samsung UD970 actually...the thread here about dead pixels made me realize I didn't want to spend $2200 on a flawed display and after going through 3 different panels its pretty obvious Samsung's 4K PLS production process is not as mature as LG's IPS process, or they think its okay to charge $2k and not bother binning the best panels. Either way it's kinda lame.

Downside is I can't play games at launch anymore and have to wait until modders release widescreen patches. Meh"
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
9,638
Location
Ireland
They're seriously pushing a new aspect ratio with "true" 4K?! :rolleyes:

It's hardly new. It's 4K DCI, which is what 4K cameras record in for work. Such as RED, Black Magic and Sony's equipment.

It's the main reason the consumer variant is actually UltraHD, and not 4K until TV marketing teams decided to start calling it 4K.

It's the same way 2560x1440 is called 2K, when 2K in videography and editing are these.
i7XKu84Nc8eVQ.png
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Posts
3,698
Location
London
Got mine this morning - thanks OCUK!

First impressions of 4096x2160 are phenomenal, it's basically a 31" retina display, haven't calibrated it yet - but it's a seriously nice bit of kit,

Also I tried a few games with it at lunch (BF4, Elite dangerous beta, Farcry 3 and Borderlads pre-sequel) and everything so far seems to support 4096x2160 - no black bars or other stuff, a few cutscenes and menus you get black bars, but so far so good..

also rofl @ the amount of heat my 980s are throwing out running at full res, but it looks really great! yet to try photo editing on here
 
Soldato
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Posts
3,737
I'd probably need to see it myself to decide. Every time I've run windows at anything other than native res the experience has been awful so, unless windows 10 changes things dramatically, I don't really want to buy a monitor unless it's usable in windows at native res with font scaling set to 100%.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Nov 2014
Posts
58
I can see this as good for productivity, although arguably 5K, as in Apple's new iMac is better. But even for 4K movies I doubt this will be a good idea. I would expect any "4K" Bluray or streamed format to, in fact be 3840x2160 (http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=14923) for TV compatibility and because it is an exact multiple of 1080p.

As an aside, the term "UHD" is intended to illustrate that it covers more aspects of "HD" than just resolution - in particular the expanded colourspace (Rec. 2020).
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Feb 2008
Posts
5,483
Got mine this morning - thanks OCUK!

First impressions of 4096x2160 are phenomenal, it's basically a 31" retina display, haven't calibrated it yet - but it's a seriously nice bit of kit,

Also I tried a few games with it at lunch (BF4, Elite dangerous beta, Farcry 3 and Borderlads pre-sequel) and everything so far seems to support 4096x2160 - no black bars or other stuff, a few cutscenes and menus you get black bars, but so far so good..

also rofl @ the amount of heat my 980s are throwing out running at full res, but it looks really great! yet to try photo editing on here

So what's the deal with this in terms of effective resolution? I imagine you can't run Photoshop for example at 1:1? Or can you?
 
Associate
Joined
30 Jan 2003
Posts
1,514
Location
Cardiff
17:9 shouldn't be a problem for games. WoW can run at any aspect I throw at it. But you might have to wait a while until 4k is more widely adopted.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
15,861
Location
NW London
not all IPS are good, and not all TN are bad. Given that a good AH-IPS is £350 at 2560x1440, this is overpriced.

I'm glad someone else is thinking this.
If it was OLED I could understand, but an LCD for £1k is outrageous.
I think it is more down to the fact that the size of the screen is irregular - not many people will buy this item, so the costs to produce each monitor is high.

When looking at pricing, I have to consider what will £1k buy me, as an alternative.

A year ago, you could buy a Panasonic Plasma TV screen (GT60) - the best set of mass produced TV screens ever produced by man, for under £1k.
Today, you can buy 2-3 1440p screens for around £1k.
A (16:9) 4k screen can be had from OCUK, for around £360.

For £1k, I want to know that I am getting unquestionably a class leading monitor which has no faults (for example the Panasonic plasma TVs which were being produced a year ago or the Sony Trinintron CRT monitors which were being made around 15 years ago).

Whichever way you look at it, this monitor represents terrible value for money.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Nov 2014
Posts
3
Hi,
I just wanted to say I received my 31MU97 yesterday and got it set up and running last night. Good fast delivery Overclockers, thanks! This is a very nice display and clearly looks better than the Dell 2410 I was using before. I play simple games like LoL and Supreme Commander and they both run fine on my AMD 7950. However I use Windows 7 and the scaling is terrible! It's like it randomly picks parts of the UI to increase the font size but leaves other parts alone. I will have a try with the Windows 10 Beta and Ubuntu when I get some free time.

I am using the supplied mini to full size DP cable and every couple of minutes I get a flicker which is annoying. The screen doesn't go black but it feels like it is changing mode or something. I will try a different cable tonight and also try using my laptop to feed the display in case my gfx card is causing the flicker.

So I have a few hours tonight to play some more, if I can help in answering any questions about it I would be more than happy. Just let me know what you want me to test!
 
Associate
Joined
20 May 2014
Posts
177
In case people were wondering about reviews, there are 2 up on the amazon german site for this monitor 1 4 stars and 1 5 stars. check them out if your interested, i dont think im allowed to link the site so i wont, easy to find tho
 
Back
Top Bottom