LG 38GL950G G-Sync and 49WL95C mega-wide displays go big

Chances are that with the recent release of Nvidia's RTX pixel-pushers and the associated shifting in graphics card prices, you might be looking at acquiring a new monitor. LG seems to definitely think that bigger is better, as it's just pulled back the curtain on the 38GL950G and 49WL95C.

First, let's check out the gaming-grade 38GL950G. Its 38-inch, 21:9 curved panel has a resolution of 3840×1600 (works out to 109 PPI) and a 144-Hz refresh rate. That's already nice enough, but this particular display cocktail includes Nvidia G-Sync support and 98% coverage of the DCI-P3 color space.

The 38GL950G's average brightness is 450 cd/m², meaning the combined specs could make this an honest-to-goodness HDR display, though LG stops short of saying so in its press release. A USB hub and a tilt- and height-adjustable stand complete the specs table. All told, we figure the 38GL950G ticks all the right boxes for owners of high-end Nvidia cards, and we bet more than a few gerbils are interested already.

The 38GL950G is bred to be a gaming machine, but if all you need is a big workhorse, check out the 49WL95C. Much like its model number indicates, this is a humongous 49" curved monitor with a 32:9 aspect ratio. The resolution is 5120×1440, which works out to 108 PPI and also means the 49WL95C is equivalent to two 16:9 27" monitors side by side.

LG says the display's color gamut should cover 99% of the sRGB space, but oddly enough notes that it supports HDR10. The typical brightness is pinned at 350 cd/m², making for a healthy value but casting further doubt on the monitor's HDR-ness.

Unsurprisingly for a pixel slab this large, the 49WL95C supports picture-by-picture mode and also lets users control multiple attached devices with a single keyboard-and-mouse set. There's a four-port USB hub along with a USB Type-C connector that can provide 85 W to charge an attached device. A pair of 10-W speakers and a height-, tilt-, and swivel-adjustable stand round out the specs. LG mentions nothing about prices in its press release, but we wager that we'll know more on that front during CES 2019.

Comments closed
    • Usacomp2k3
    • 10 months ago

    Tasty! I wonder what the sticker price will be.

    • leor
    • 10 months ago

    Wow, finally a gsync monitor with 1600 vertical pixels, it must be 2019 already!

    • BiffStroganoffsky
    • 10 months ago

    I’m in if that stand supports portrait mode.

    • UberGerbil
    • 10 months ago

    Wait. The pixel dimensions of the 38GL950G are [i<]not[/i<] 21:9 -- 3840x1600 works out to 24:10 (or 12:5 if you prefer). I suppose it's possible the physical screen aspect ratio is 21:9, but that would result in weird non-square pixels. The 109 ppi number seems to be correct, at least.

      • Wirko
      • 10 months ago

      something:9 = for movies
      something:10 = for excel

      • jihadjoe
      • 10 months ago

      3840×1600 is 2.4:1, which is even wider than most 21:9 displays which are typically 2.35-2.37:1.

      [s<]You might have been thinking of a 1600 vertical applied to the more common 3440x1440 resolution used for 34" ultrawides, but the horizontal on the LG is 400 pixels wider.[/s<] Edit: just realized we were basically saying the same thing.

    • cynan
    • 10 months ago

    If it’s anything like the high refresh G-SYNC 35″ widescreens by Acer, Asus and AOC that debuted at CES 2017, we’ll still be waiting to be able to actually buy the 38GL950G in 2020.

    • Srsly_Bro
    • 10 months ago

    All these wide screens remind me of this family guy clip.

    Lawrence of Arabia in Ultra-wide Cinemascope Scene

    [url<]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EYho_s24VHk[/url<]

      • UberGerbil
      • 10 months ago

      This is why I’ve twice paid to see Lawrence of Arabia at [url=https://cinerama.com/Technology.aspx<]the Cinerama[/url<].

        • Srsly_Bro
        • 10 months ago

        I work in Seattle but live in the east side. I should check it out.

    • Kretschmer
    • 10 months ago

    Wow the 38GL950G is IPS not VA. If it has strobing, I’d be sorely tempted.

      • Johnny Rotten
      • 10 months ago

      The 38 is basically my dream monitor atm. I guess it would be nice if it had true HDR, but frankly widespread, true HDR is still years away. The resolution is fantastic, easier to drive than a true 4K but still a nice bump from 3440×1440. I feel it really is the sweet spot resolution.

        • cynan
        • 10 months ago

        Agreed. I’m frankly shocked that LG [s<]released[/s<] [i<][b<]is purported to someday be releasing[/b<][/i<] a G-SYNC version (after having a freesync 3840x1600 screen on the market for a couple of years now). I think this would be THE monitor to get for anyone with a 1080Ti, 2080, 2080 Ti. [i<]Edit in bold italics[/i<]

    • Chrispy_
    • 10 months ago

    Ultrawides (21:9) are slowly gaining support from developers, but after some experimental purchases in 2017, I’ve gone back to 16:9 because as nice as 21:9 may be when it works, it quite often didn’t work properly, which is arguable worse than having massive black bars down the side.

    32:9 support is the same problem, but worse. I’d use this for productivity but game developers are a long way off making ultrawides a smooth or trouble-free experience.

    As for LG’s history with 144Hz panels, all the in-depth reviews have historically recommended steering well clear of them (prad.de and tftcentral.co.uk) because of response issues and uniformity issues (even more likely with a curved IPS panel). These are new panel sizes though so I’ll reserve judgement until these get properly tested for input lag, pixel response and – [b<]if LG's track record is relevant(!)[/b<] - whether the not-user-flashable firmware is full of bugs or not.

      • Voldenuit
      • 10 months ago

      Yeah, ultrawide support in games is pretty disappointing, even in 2018. It’s amazing when it works (or can be hacked in), though.

      Also, more TV shows are increasingly being made in 18:9/2:1 ratio (although Netflix still wants to stream its shows with black bars on the top and bottom), and of course movies in 2.35:1 or wider look amazing.

      Going back from 21:9 to 16:9 would feel like a downgrade to me.

        • Chrispy_
        • 10 months ago

        When I went back from 21:9 to 16:9 I avoided it being a downgrade by adding inches and vertical pixels, rather than removing inches and horizontal pixels.

        2:1 is still the golden ratio but sadly the industry is dominated by broadcast ratios and camera ratios. Chicken-and-egg; Cameras are made to meet an existing format 2.35:1 (really close to 21:9) or the DCI 4K aspect (slightly taller than 16:9) which fit consumer 21:9 or 16:9 devices really well. Anyone sticking their neck above the parapet and deviating from that needs to be able to shoulder the burden of leaving the standardised ecosystem and surviving/investing enough to carve out a profitable market for themselves.

          • rudimentary_lathe
          • 10 months ago

          Sounds like you’d suggest going 4K then?

          I’m still on the fence for my next monitor upgrade – thinking 4K or 3440x1440p. Somewhat concerned I’ll get neck strain from a large 4K monitor with looking up and down so much. I wouldn’t think side to side would be as bad.

            • Chrispy_
            • 10 months ago

            Depends what you already have. The two ultrawides I tried were gaming displays so 2560×1080 and I replaced them with WQHD instead. There weren’t any decent 3440×1440 displays for gaming back in 2017. The two categories were ‘very expensive/okay for gaming’ and ‘very expensive/rubbish for gaming’

            The vertical height of a large physical screen shouldn’t cause neck issues because unless your eye sockets are damaged, you’ll naturally look up and down without moving your head more than a fraction. Most people (I don’t yet have this issue) will be more concerned about the change in focal distance from the center of the screen to the corners, and ultrawides are far worse for this than large-format 16:9s

            Don’t forget, if you buy a big old panel and want to run something as an ultrawide, just letterbox it, or run the bottom half of the display as one virtual (fullscreen) monitor and have the top one blank, if you want the image to be lower. FWIW, I don’t use a giant TV as a desktop, but I have set one up to replace a 2×2 video wall in several locations. The more agressive the curvature of the TV, the easier it is to use as a monitor at close range, but most TV’s don’t have anywhere near the radius to make much of a difference.

    • Krogoth
    • 10 months ago

    In before your momma jokes……

      • enixenigma
      • 10 months ago

      “Yo momma so wide, you got to adjust her to max height just to fit anything else on your desk!”

      I’ll see myself out…

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 10 months ago

      I don’t understand lol

      • morphine
      • 10 months ago

      Yo momma so wide that a plane couldn’t make it to the other side, had to go by boat.

      • Redocbew
      • 10 months ago

      Yo momma so wide she’s got to wear letterboxes because nothing else fits.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This