Samsung CJ791 monitor combines single-cable convenience and quantum dots

Our testing demonstrates that Thunderbolt 3 isn't the panacea for laptop gaming that some expected, but the interface does make it convenient to attach a compatible notebook to a larger display. Samsung's CJ791 curved 34" QLED monitor makes it easy for mobile users to use a single cable to connect to a big, high-res display that doubles as a power source.

The CJ791's panel has a resolution of 3440×1440 and an ultrawide 21:9 aspect ratio. The screen has an extra-immersive 1500R curvature, which is tighter than the more commonplace 1800R curvature. Samsung's CJ791 can provide up to 85 W of power to the attached computer over the TB3 interface. The company also claims its quantum-dot-infused backlight can display 125% of the sRGB spectrum, and the unspecified panel also boasts 178° viewing angles.

We don't yet know the panel type or the maximum refresh rate of the CJ791 or whether the monitor has additional display inputs. We do know the panel has a 4-ms response time and does not support either of the big two variable-refresh-rate technologies.

Samsung didn't provide any pricing or availability information for this display, but the company did say the monitor will be on display in its CES booth later this month. Stay tuned as we cover the best the show has to offer in the coming week.

Comments closed
    • djayjp
    • 2 years ago

    That myth about VA is about 5 years out of date:

    [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/samsung_c32hg70.htm#gaming_comparisons[/url<]

      • Kretschmer
      • 2 years ago

      If you look at that chart, VA tech is still much, much worse than even older slow IPS panels like those in the X34 or PG348Q. The 16:9 monitor you’re linking to is (on average) about half the speed of an old 21:9 IPS, and roughly a third the speed of a 16:9 gaming IPS like the PG279Q.

      The tech is just a bad fit to gaming.

    • Kretschmer
    • 2 years ago

    Too bad that VA panels have a few awful G2G pixel transitions that make them anweak choice for gaming. Until that it’s fixed, anyone looking to avoid ghosting should buy IPS.

      • Chrispy_
      • 2 years ago

      I generally don’t think you can generalise IPS vs VA anymore in terms of response time.

      [url=http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/philips_349x7fjew/response_8.png<]This is Samsung's mid-2017 100Hz VA panel[/url<] (Philips 349X7FJEW) [url=http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/lg_34uc79g/response_24.png<]This is LG.Philips' late 2016 144Hz IPS panel[/url<] (LG 34UC79G) I'd take the VA panel's response times over the IPS panel's response times, because the slow responses for that IPS panel are right in the midtone transitions where you'd most notice it. The VA panel is only slow for pure-black to dark transitions. Even a reasonably dark grey (0-100 is a fast transition on that VA panel, so you're unlikely to notice such a low contrast blur as 0-50 in the same way you'd notice say 200-50 being slow like the IPS. There are both good and bad IPS and VA panels for response times but to me, the biggest differences between VA and IPS are not response times, but the more obvious differences: IPS will always have a slight viewing angle advantage, VA will always have a huge contrast and black-depth advantage. IPS also often has corner glow, whilst VA doesn't.

        • Kretschmer
        • 2 years ago

        You’re cherry-picking to the point of dishonesty. That LG was called out in the article for having poor response times, while the Philips is a representative VA sample.

        Here’s the X34 from 2015: [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/acer_predator_x34/response_5.png[/url<] Here's the Alienware from 2017: [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/dell_alienware_aw3418dw/response_9.png[/url<] Now let's look at the comparison chart: [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/dell_alienware_aw3418dw/comparison_6.jpg[/url<] Most IPS screens are decent (even the ultrawides), but every VA has problematic transitions. Even my 60Hz widescreen office IPS from 2015 (34UM95) is faster than today's "gaming" UWS VA panels.

          • Chrispy_
          • 2 years ago

          I picked the LG because it is a native 144Hz native IPS panel, rather than an overclocked panel, and although I haven’t checked, I think that every other IPS gaming screen is using a slower native panel, either 75 or 100Hz.

          Sure, the three you link have slightly better responses than the Philips VA I picked from the top of the review list, but they all still have a single slow transitioning marring the good results just like that Philips. They are [i<]different[/i<], not [i<]better[/i<] - and as mentioned earlier, the slower transitions of those IPS panels is right in the most noticeable part of the response graph, rather than in the subtle dark colours where it affects VA. If you're talking about gaming, VA panels can be driven at higher refreshes than IPS - surely that is the most important thing by far? Reduced input lag, reduced sync latency, blah blah blah. As I said, there are fast [i<]and slow[/i<] panels in both the IPS and VA camps, but unless it has ULMB the sample-and-hold pixel response is effectively going to add 2-3x more blur than the pixel response anyway, and nobody has yet worked out how to do ULMB and VRR simultaneously.

            • Kretschmer
            • 2 years ago

            Thank you for elaborating. It’s always great to banter with another monitor geek!

            Personally, I hate motion blur and find ULMB to be a game changer. This causes me to regret going with an X34 instead of something like a PG279Q. I actually ordered both monitors and ran them side-by-side for a while. Sadly, that PG279Q suffered from atrocious backlight bleed, and I was too busy with work to play the RMA or return roulette to find a decent panel. I’m definitely looking forward to trading in my X34 for a ULMB option from the next generation of HDR gaming panels!

            I disagree that refresh rate is the most important element of a gaming panel. We’ve seen a lot of displays whose refresh rates greatly outstrip the panel’s pixel transitions, creating awful ghosting and blur (e.g. the Predator Z35). If I was recommending a display for pure gaming, ULMB and response times would come first.

            I’d only recommend ULMB with the best response times available, as ghosting/persistence becomes very apparent and very jarring with the feature engaged. TFT Central even references this in the C32HG70 review:

            [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/samsung_c32hg70/pursuit.jpg[/url<] "One thing you will notice in particular on the dark background images is that there is some noticeable dark smearing behind the moving UFO. This is a result of those particularly slow pixel response times when changing from dark > light shades that we talked about earlier. This is a problem in all settings and is not eliminated sadly by the strobed backlight. It's a fairly common issue on VA panels to be honest. Maybe Samsung can improve the response times with a future firmware update if we are lucky." Given that we haven't seen a VA panel with good response times yet*, my recommendation still stands: IPS or TN for high refresh rate gaming. *To the best of my knowledge, see: [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/samsung_c32hg70/response_6.png[/url<]

    • tay
    • 2 years ago

    1500R should be an automatic no-buy.

      • Neutronbeam
      • 2 years ago

      Why? I’ve got 1800R on my monitor with the same dimensions and resolution and 1500R is curved in just a bit more. What puts me off a bit is that it’s probably a VA panel instead of IPS.

        • djayjp
        • 2 years ago

        VA panels have at least double the static contrast ratio of IPS.

          • RAGEPRO
          • 2 years ago

          You’re right, and they’re great for desktop use. Without blur reduction they are pretty bad for gaming on, though.

            • Chrispy_
            • 2 years ago

            I am reasonably certain that IPS and TN are just as bad for gaming without blur reduction.

            As long as pixel responses times are roughly the same as frame durations, then the biggest contributor [b<]BY FAR[/b<] to perceived blur is sample-and-hold blur. It's either ULMB (strobing backlight) or not. Whether the panel is IPS, TN, or VA is a secondary concern.

            • Kretschmer
            • 2 years ago

            [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/dell_alienware_aw3418dw/comparison_6.jpg[/url<] IPS and TN do much better than VA across monitors released so far. And ULMB doesn't work well on VA monitors to date, because their pixel response times are so much slower.

            • Chrispy_
            • 2 years ago

            That graph is not related to my point.

            My point is this:

            Here is the pursuit camera result of the [url=http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/dell_alienware_aw3418dw/pursuit.jpg<]amazingly-fast panel, 13ms at most,[/url<] in that Alienware IPS display. Here is the pursuit camera result of a [url=http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/samsung_c32hg70/pursuit.jpg<]really slow panel, 13ms average, up to 38ms at most[/url<] in the Samsung C32HG70 [b<]that has ULMB[/b<]. Even though the IPS panel is much, [i<]much[/i<] faster than this particular VA panel, It's ULMB that matters more than raw pixel response; Anyone that argues otherwise likely hasn't used a decent ULMB implementation, and doesn't understand what sample-and-hold blur is. Obviously, there are much better VA panels than the one I picked (deliberately because it was so slow). The fact that one of the slowest VA panels in recent times can outperform one of the fastest IPS gaming flagships simply by having ULMB is the key point I'm trying to make.

            • Kretschmer
            • 2 years ago

            Thank you for elaborating. It’s always great to banter with another monitor geek!

            Personally, I hate motion blur and find ULMB to be a game changer. This causes me to regret going with an X34 instead of something like a PG279Q. I actually ordered both monitors and ran them side-by-side for a while. Sadly, that PG279Q suffered from atrocious backlight bleed, and I was too busy with work to play the RMA or return roulette to find a decent panel. I’m definitely looking forward to trading in my X34 for a ULMB option from the next generation of HDR gaming panels!

            I disagree that refresh rate is the most important element of a gaming panel. We’ve seen a lot of displays whose refresh rates greatly outstrip the panel’s pixel transitions, creating awful ghosting and blur (e.g. the Predator Z35). If I was recommending a display for pure gaming, ULMB and response times would come first.

            I’d only recommend ULMB with the best response times available, as ghosting/persistence becomes very apparent and very jarring with the feature engaged. TFT Central even references this in the C32HG70 review:

            [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/samsung_c32hg70/pursuit.jpg[/url<] "One thing you will notice in particular on the dark background images is that there is some noticeable dark smearing behind the moving UFO. This is a result of those particularly slow pixel response times when changing from dark > light shades that we talked about earlier. This is a problem in all settings and is not eliminated sadly by the strobed backlight. It's a fairly common issue on VA panels to be honest. Maybe Samsung can improve the response times with a future firmware update if we are lucky." Given that we haven't seen a VA panel with good response times yet*, my recommendation still stands: IPS or TN for high refresh rate gaming. *To the best of my knowledge, see: [url<]http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/samsung_c32hg70/response_6.png[/url<]

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This