LG - UltraGear 45GR95QE-B

Bonjour je possède le lg45gr95qe-b qui est en 3440x1440p. Vaut-il la peine de prendre le nouveau lg45gs950a ? Pour que du jeux y a t-il vraiment une différence entre du 3440x1440p et du 5120×2160p?

Bonjour est-ce que cet écran vaut vraiment le coup par rapport au lg45gr95qe-b qui est en 3440x1440p? C'est juste pour jouer.  Merci.

Currently running a 45GR95QE - it's almost perfect. Higher resolution would make it perfect!

Great review!! I have the 2023 version (LG UltraGear 45GR95QE-B ) paired with a 4090 AND I run everything upscale to 5k2k…. I absolutely love my monitor….Would you upgrade? I only use it for gaming… happy to do so if I will feel the difference, but worried to spend 2k and not really feel a difference…what do u think??

It’s great LG is doing this and you can see they have interest in their customers…. Never saw this done by the other brands… to be honest I had the 2023 45 ultragear and love it, I game 80% and 20 % media. I’m tempted to upgrade but I live in Spain so 2k is a lot of money. But will update eventually if I manage to find a buyer for 2023 version…. Thanks for doing this!!!

I’ve gone with the 45GR95QE on my racing sim rig only because it was 21:9 and provided a bit more vertical screen space compared to a 32:9. Monitor itself is great and love using it! I still rock two monitors (24” 1080p landscape primary and 24”1080p portrait secondary) for my current dev work. I’m a bit too hard stuck with using the primary monitor for what I actively want to focus on and the second monitor to store tabs or windows I’m not currently using. I tried using the LG for dev work before putting it in the rig and not having the clear separation threw me way off!

The OLED LG 45GR95QE-B. It’s slightly taller than the popular 49” G9’s. The extra height combined with the 800R curve, makes for a good immersive cockpit view imo

I've been using the LG45GX950 for a couple of weeks myself. I'm in the process of testing it to the best as my ability allows, but I have a few initial thoughts: There's a few things I don't like about this monitor - though ultimately I'm enjoying the upgrade to 5120x2160 at 165hz! The PPI, HDR, text, and overall display quality is a massive upgrade in comparison to the previous generation 45GR95QE with it's larger pixel density I think the curve should be slightly less aggressive, for starters. The bendable version of this display coming later this year won't have this problem. I think this resolution would be much better in a 39" or 40" size display My other prime annoyance might sound like a nothingburger to most users, but I found one feature that the 45GR95QE had to be very useful that the 45GX950A lacks - that is, the inclusion of a remote control. It's a lot easier to navigate the OSD with a remote, and you don't have to be right next to the screen to change those settings if you have a remote - and personally, I don't like using a screen this big at the distance you would use a normal monitor. One of the reasons I enjoy a larger screen is the ability to use it from a further distance. Also I'm one of those users who prefers to adjust brightness levels multiple times in the day, depending on what I'm doing. That's much easier with a remote control.

> I have booth 45GS and 45GX (5k2k) and please dont listen to people that say 1440p is bad. It’s not bad and not that much a difference from 5k2k. I adjusted to 1440p at 45" with the 45GR95QE, but now that I've experienced 5k2k I could never go back. Text on the 1440p models can be tolerated, but it actually looks good on the 5k2k model IMHO.

I have the LG Ultragear 45GR95 and been loving it! Best monitor I have used. I just wanna upgrade the resolution but I'm on a budget atm... Would love to stick with LG, and would be really awesome if I got gifted such an awesome monitor🔥

I currently have a LG 45gr95qe-b. Before this I was using Alienware 34" 1440p. I used to think 45" was too big for desktop but after using LG 45gr95qe-b. I realized 45 is infact the perfect spot for me. But 1440p resolution is too small. 800r also I thought it was too much curve but after using this one, It is infact the perfect curve. Unfortunately, you guys are not selling the new GX 5k2k in my country. So yeah, the sweetspot is infact, 45" 5k2k with 800r curve.

This was me until I saw and got 21:9 LG 45". Not its the perfect size for me.

If some of you are considering bendable version, note that bendable C2 and Xeneon are not mountable. This may follow suit if it uses similar mechanism. The stock stand on 45gs95qe is not bad though, it should work for most people.

I have the previous version and it's was on clearance from Best buy for $339.99 not long ago. Brand new. Know it's 1440p but still pretty quick reduction in price

Ahh a different sku. I bought the other version of it

https://imgur.com/a/yGH5H3V. See if you can see this screen shot.

That's it, am selling my 45GS95QE 🥲

I have the very first version of this monitor, the LG 45GR95QE, and yes ppi is the first thing you will notice. Zero issue on the gaming side, but if reading docs and websites or websurf.. It may not be the smartest choice.

Might I propose an alternative: LG 45GS95QE and similar. 45” 21:9 really is game changing in terms of immersion. It fills your vertical field of view so much better than any super Ultra Wide. Neither of them will be technically wide enough to help you see your side view mirrors for one monitor. And for people that say, vertical height doesn’t matter as much, it doesn’t as long as you can properly scale what you’re seeing on the screen. I guarantee you in an actual racing car you have more vertical height than what you would get from a 49 inch monitor. The 45 inch ultra wideis very close though.

The 45" is gonna feel better imo. 32:9 is neck straining compared to 21:9, and the 800r curve fits the size well.

the curve changes everything tbh, idr exactly what the samsung curve is, whether it be 1000r or 1200r, but it'll be significantly more looking left and right vs the 800r on the 45"

Yeah I just bought the 45GS95QE-B (45" 3440x1440 oled 240hz). I was considering maybe returning it and jumping on this 5k version but... I think even my new build with a 5080 will sweat and breakdown crying begging to stop. I'll wait untill this one become sub 1000,- Ok edit: couldn't sleep. PreOrdered the 5k2k version with a nice little discount directly from LG website. Just returned my 1440 version now waiting 10 days for it to release in europe!

Yeah I just bought the 3440x1440 variant. Was kinda considering maybe swapping it for this one but even with my 5080 it's gonna hurt.. meh. I think I'll give it a year or two Ok edit: couldn't sleep. Pre Ordered the 5k2k version and returned my 1440 version today =O

It's hard to say for sure but you might do ok. I looked up a quick comparison and the desktop 4090 is just under 2x the power of the mobile version. I have played Horizon Forbidden West and Ghost of Tsushima so far on mine with both running 5k2k max settings, DLAA, and frame gen and average 100 fps. On my older LG 45GR95QEB I got about 160 to 180 fps in Horizon at 3440x1440 same settings. I would think that even if you got half the fps so 80 to 90 then you could drop the DLAA and some settings from ultra to high and be at 100 fps. Not sure about the games you mentioned but could be similar performance. I would think you should be ok fps wise. My real concern would be playing at 1440 on the 5k2k monitor. I haven't tried it myself but the quality would obviously decrease. In general a 1440p native monitor will look better. While the older LG 45GR95QEB was 1440 and I did like it, the jump to 5k2k is significant. I would think you would be better off with last year's version of the monitor that is 1440 native if you don't plan to use the 5k2k resolution. It's also cheaper and you might be able to get a deal on a used one from someone who upgraded.

I'd recommend the LG 45" it's a beast for gaming. I have the LG 45GR95QEB (older GR not the newer GS) and the LG 32GS95UE. After trying both the 45 remains as my gaming monitor and the 32 is in my room next to my bed as a TV lol. Nothing compared to the immersion you get from the size and curve of the 45. Now, as for your budget, hear me out. If you can hold off just a bit longer, the new LG 5k2k ultrawide is supposed to be released next month. While it is supposed to be $1999 and out of your budget, it will likely push the cost of the prior models down a fair bit. At that time you will likely be able to pickup the older 45 for sub $1000 or close to it. Another thing I will mention is that many many many people will complain about the low PPI of the 45. Yes on paper it is quite low compared to smaller monitors or higher resolution options. However in use for gaming, it's not nearly as noticeable. In desktop use, yes you will notice it but it's not horrible. My bet is that most of those complaining have never actually used the monitor themselves and are just thinking it will be bad. You also have to consider the rest of your PC and how much power you have to drive the monitor. You will get far better performance at 1440p than 4k so that's another consideration. And if you do have the horsepower you can always use DLDSR to push 5k2k like I do and get image improvement though I wouldn't consider that on newer games unless you have serious power. My 4090 struggles to pull good fps at 5k2k on max settings in newer games. Cyberpunk maxed with DLSS quality and frame gen on got about 60 fps at 5k2k. Turning off DLSS and frame gen drops me to 17, oof. Either way it's some options. Whatever you choose I wish you many hours of delightful gaming.

I completely agree. I had the older LG 45GR95QEB and while it was nice I was always waiting for the 5k2k. Now gaming on the 5k2k is such a significant jump and it's made every game I play an absolutely fantastic experience. Horizon Forbidden West was the first game I played on it as I was already in the middle of it. I then moved to Ghost of Tsushima and then Hellblade 2. All were phenomenal. Currently playing Balder's Gate 3 with some friends which isn't quite the visual feast but it's still great. I recently picked up the DLCs for Alan Wake 2 so I'm stoked to see how they look. Anyone considering the 5k2k should stop thinking and just get it. You won't be let down.

I have the 45" 5k2k and it's beautiful. Upgraded from the older LG 45GR95QEB which was nice as well but the 5k2k is definitely next level. I was at Best Buy recently and it seems crazy they are still selling the older LG 45 for $1700 when the 5k2k is only $300 more. In fact I didn't even see anything about the 5k2k in store.

Yes and I can't wait. I have both the LG 45GR95QEB and LG 32GS95UE. Love the size and curve of the 45 but also love the clarity of the 32. I would also really like the new 45 to include the pixel sound off the 32. It's a really nice feature and makes me need less on my desktop. Also keep the remote from the old 45 as the joystick on the 32 is crap.

In my opinion LG has the immersion factor locked in. 45" 800r is awesome for immersion and just can't be beat in that aspect. As for 3440x1440 vs 5k2k, that's debatable to some. If you desire high fps over absolute image quality then the lower resolution would be better. If you're ok sacrificing fps for the best image then the 5k2k is better. Of course there is also the price difference but more pixels is more money. With my 4090 I do just fine on the 5k2k and it's a blast. If you get a 5090 you're going to be doing even better.

I had 45'' 1440p variant (45GS95QE) and it had VRR flickering. This is the biggest turn off me if that is present in newer monitors. This included. Hopefully the 100% white brightness is also increased. Mine was pretty dim in desktop. Even with dark bluish wallpaper.

I have the 45 inch ultra wide OLED and will never game on a smaller monitor. Yes if you doing work the ppi is a problem, but for gaming it is absolutely the perfect monitor

as an owner of the 45GR95, this is the true endgame, but i feel like it requires a 5080/90 to push all of those pixels.

Agree with this. It really does depend what you call "Productivity" as this can be used for anything. Photo Editing - you want good colour accuracy. OLED is that Video Editing - Again you want good colour space - OLED is that Spreadsheets and word processing - For text clarity you probably want an IPS although again, todays OLED's are "good enough" for legibility. I did a review of my 45" last night on here as I had some concerns re text reading Coding - See above re text clarity My review if you fancy a read [https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/1j96s8h/life\_with\_the\_45gs95qeb\_after\_2\_weeks/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/1j96s8h/life_with_the_45gs95qeb_after_2_weeks/) If you are set for ultrawide I think you need to narrow down how much you're prepared to spend first which should then determine maybe what aspect ratio and panel tech you can go for.

I don't think it's worth it. The problem is LG downgraded the refresh rate for the 4K 21:9 model to 165 Hz from the 1440p 21:9 model's 240 Hz. Before anyone says 165 Hz compared to 240 Hz is fine, sure, in some ways it's fine, heck, even 120 is fine, but... If you actually want to experience the fast pixel response times of OLED - and you payed for it if you bought the monitor - then you need to be at least somewhere in the 180-200 Hz range. Anything under that, and the motion blur introduced by the monitor using the sample-and-hold method of refreshing the screen (AKA "persistence blur") is too much of a "motion clarity bottleneck" and therefore "hides" or "covers up" the insanely fast pixel response times. I did side-by-side comparison tests of my 2023 LG 240 Hz 45" OLED (45GR95QE) with a very fast (for LCD) Asus TN, a fast LG IPS, and a very fast (for VA LCD) Samsung and, at anything under 180-ish Hz, there was no visual different in motion clarity between the insanely fast OLED and all 3 different types of LCDs. Why? Because the sample-and-hold method of refreshing the screen is just too much of a motion clarity bottleneck (regardless of how fast pixel response times are, even if they're 0.0000000001 ms). It was only at around 180-ish Hz that I started seeing very small differences (small, had to do back-and-forth A-B tests). At 200 Hz, the difference was not huge but, at the same time, easily visible and not tiny. At 240 Hz, the sample-and-hold induced blur "bottleneck" becomes lifted out of the way enough where the difference between the OLED and others is huge. At 240 Hz, the OLED has the same motion clarity of LCD somewhere in the 360-480 Hz range. This is why I shake my head when people talk about insane motion clarity of OLED yet are using monitors/TVs less than 200-ish Hz. The exception, of course, is if you're using BFI (black frame insertion), the OLED equivalent to LCD/LED backlight strobing - it's insane. It does not suffer from any sample-and-hold induced blur (AKA persistence blur) because it doesn't use the sample-and-hold method to refresh the screen (instead, the entire screen, every pixel, basically blinks on and off at the same time), but that's a whooollle-nother story.

I don't think it's worth it. The problem is LG downgraded the refresh rate for the 4K 21:9 model to 165 Hz from the 1440p 21:9 model's 240 Hz. Before anyone says 165 Hz compared to 240 Hz is fine, sure, in some ways it's fine, heck, even 120 is fine, but... If you actually want to experience the fast pixel response times of OLED - and you payed for it if you bought the monitor - then you need to be at least somewhere in the 180-200 Hz range. Anything under that, and the motion blur introduced by the monitor using the sample-and-hold method of refreshing the screen (AKA "persistence blur") is too much of a "motion clarity bottleneck" and therefore "hides" or "covers up" the insanely fast pixel response times. I did side-by-side comparison tests of my 2023 LG 240 Hz 45" OLED (45GR95QE) with a very fast (for LCD) Asus TN, a fast LG IPS, and a very fast (for VA LCD) Samsung and, at anything under 180-ish Hz, there was no visual different in motion clarity between the insanely fast OLED and all 3 different types of LCDs. Why? Because the sample-and-hold method of refreshing the screen is just too much of a motion clarity bottleneck (regardless of how fast pixel response times are, even if they're 0.0000000001 ms). It was only at around 180-ish Hz that I started seeing very small differences (small, had to do back-and-forth A-B tests). At 200 Hz, the difference was not huge but, at the same time, easily visible and not tiny. At 240 Hz, the sample-and-hold induced blur "bottleneck" becomes lifted out of the way enough where the difference between the OLED and others is huge. At 240 Hz, the OLED has the same motion clarity of LCD somewhere in the 360-480 Hz range. This is why I shake my head when people talk about insane motion clarity of OLED yet are using monitors/TVs less than 200-ish Hz. The exception, of course, is if you're using BFI (black frame insertion), the OLED equivalent to LCD/LED backlight strobing - it's insane. It does not suffer from any sample-and-hold induced blur (AKA persistence blur) because it doesn't use the sample-and-hold method to refresh the screen (instead, the entire screen, every pixel, basically blinks on and off at the same time), but that's a whooollle-nother story.

Came from a flat 42. The 45 at 800r is perfect. Its not aggressive as you think in person and you get used to it almost instantly. At first it has a bit of a wow factor. Its amazing that more bigger screens don't have this, its needed because without the curve the edges of the screen are further away. Try it before discounting it you'll be amazed how much better it is.

I had doubts, bought the 45GR95QE on his release and you get used to it but I would like to have a lesser curve to be honest. I have a 38GN950B (1800R) above the 45 and I want something like 1000-1400R.

I have 2 45" LG Ultrawides- the new 5K2K and last years 1440p. Both are outstanding. The additional height is a much more functional use of space vs. additional width.

Yeah, it's pretty noticeable if you have them side by side. The 1440p is an awesome monitor, but the PPI is pretty low. If it was a TV that you were sitting a bit further back from, I don't think it would be as noticeable, but up close, the extra pixels in the 5k2k make a noticeable difference.

Yes, but 4K @ 165hz is good enough for me. I can’t tell the difference between 165 & 330hz.

I own the UW1440p and it's an excellent monitor for gaming. I also play FPS shooters and have essentially the same computer (5070Ti instead of 9070XT), and it's a perfect monitor for that. Having said that, since you can find both for similar prices, I'd probably go with the 5k2k. You guys can always pop in a 5090 or whatever is king down the road, and AM5 will be supported for years.

I'm not OP, but I use mine exclusively for gaming. Perfect balance of performance and quality for the games I play. And yeah, I would not use it for work or text heavy stuff. My Dell 5k2k sits next to it for that stuff 😅

I'll say this: I have the 1440p version and also use it strictly for gaming (mainly Warzone). It's awesome paired with my 5090 and I don't think about the pixels for a second. *However*, you're building a brand new PC, so I'd get the latest and greatest and go for the 5k2k.

The 3440x1440p is excellent for gaming. It's not a work monitor. Don't listen to keyboard warriors who don't own one.

I'm gonna go test Warzone now and see. I can max out my UWQHD LG 240hz on ultra settings with my 5090. I'm guessing it could get close or over 200 with more average settings. Having said that, 165hz is more than fine.

5k2k without a doubt. I bought the LG 45 1440 and returned it a few weeks later for the 5k2k and it’s bliss. Go with the monitor.

I had the G9 57” in the box at the house. I ultimately returned it to get the LG 45” 5k2k. I loved the size of the 57”, but the questionable quality of Samsung panels and so little content coming in 32:9 made the decision easy. I already had the 2024 LG 45” OLED 1440p, so I was already familiar with the form factor. That said, if the 57” ever becomes available in an OLED version at a decent price, I may consider it.

I have the 45” LG OLED. It’s amazing. Best Buy has it for $1,100 but 12 months no interest with the BBCC.

Look at them both in the store to see what you prefer. I have an older LG Ultragear45+ 3440x1440 OLED and I absolutely love it. It's the perfect physical size for a monitor in my opinion. If I catch a good sale, I'll probably upgrade to the 4k. I compared it to the Samsung 49 inch and the Alienware 3440x1440 in person and for me, it wasn't even close. Full disclosure, I'm 50 years old, so the more narrow monitors were not as easy to see/read even with my glasses on, so the 45" easily won out in terms of usability and the added vertical height is perfect.

Hi Spinelli! 😉 Whilst what you say is true….i still prefer using 5k2k DLDSR on my LG 45” 1440p which limits it to 144hz instead of the normal 240hz with native 1440p for picture quality improvement. Of course I would prefer not needing to sacrifice refresh rate for your stated reasons but the PPI is bad enough at this size to be worth dropping from 240hz to 144hz just so I can play in 2.25x DLDSR. I can only imagine native 5k2k would have me over the moon, even if it were only 120hz.

My shitter version the 2k 240 hz 45 inch came with a remote. Surely this one did too if it has web os

I have a 45 inch lg 2k 240 hz and the ppi is horrid on this thing I thought I was just being picky but seems others are facing it with other oled monitors. I didn’t expect it coming from a Samsung qd oled cuz it looked amazing with infinite contrast but mix in a matte panel and horrid ppi the texts are horrible and even textures in games if you moves to fast look bad. I still use it tho for space flight games.

I’ll trade you a 45 inch 240 hz lg ultra wide

Lg ultra wide oled 240hz brand new in box but it’s 2k but it’s a tall ultrawide

I've had three OLED ultrawide monitors, granted, they've all been 45" or larger. The Samsung G9 49" OLED is beautiful for gaming, but boo boo for productivity given the fringing. It also broke within two years, glad I had the Best Buy protection plan. Then, I figured I'd give the LG 45" 1440p OLED a shot and it had worse text fringing than the Samsung. Returned that one and ended up getting what had been out of stock for too long, the LG 45" 5K2K OLED. That one uses a new subpixel layout for better text clarity, but the resolution obviously helps as well. It's everything I could've asked for and fits all my needs for gaming and productivity. I recognize it's much larger than you're looking for, but probably some helpful data points.

The hype is that the LG 45", 1440p ultrawide (21:9), 240 Hz, 800R, OLED monitors - released in 2023 and 2024 -were/are generally regarded as trading blows with the Samsung 57", 4K super ultrawide (32:9), 240 Hz, IPS monitor for best overall gaming monitor for size, immersion, etc. The only thing missing for a lot of people with those LGs are the resolution. They wished for a 4K version (ie. 5K2K) instead of a 1440p version and now they finally have it (although at the expense of downgrading the native refresh to 165 Hz from 240 Hz which, I'm assuming, will be back up to 240 Hz for next years 2026 version).

I had the LG oled 45 3440x1440 I had to return it the games looked so blurry I got the 5k2k one its amazing I have a 5090 so it pairs well

You’re fine, I’ve had the 1440 LG 45 Ultragear and Alienware 1440 34. They both looked phenomenal, I really had no issue even w the 45, granted the text could have been better it didn’t bother me. Now on the LG 45 4K, it’s beautiful.

Had the DWF, the picture was truly amazing, but the size of the 5K2k and upgrade to 4K made me sell the DWF, too be fair I was on the Ultragear 45 1440 over the DWF already, really love the 45 for immersion

A month ago I went to an LG 45 inch Oled, 800R curve 1440p. It is absolutely amazing for racing, waaay better than I had imagined !

Recently went from a 4K Sony 65 inch Mini LED to an LG Ultragear 45" Oled 240hz 800R curve. Wow, just amazing for my sim racing (& gaming). I could never go back and Oled is so much better than led imho.

I bought the UltraGear 45GS95QE OLED WQHD (800R) 240 Hz like 6 months ago and I was asking the same thing . I wanted to buy it a year ago but I kept holding off due to all the talk of Ppi and whatnot. But honestly I've come to the realize that us computer people are like old audio people back in the day when they were talking about this bass and this EQ with these speakers is a must cause in movies you can hear the bass tremble in a mouse farting miles away with this setup...(You get the drift..) In other words we tend to go away over the top. I bit the bullet and never been happier 0 problems with PPI I just don't see it. The new upgraded monitor would be nice but depending on the games you play.to be able to run games at max settings with that resolution is gonna require a monster PC to go with it. My advice get the 1440p one and be super happy for your new awesome upgrade. I would be shocked if you actually notice anything in regards to PPI. Probably not a popular opinion. But that's my input 👍

Unpopular opinion warning! The 49 G95c and 57 inch VA superultrawide 240 hz monitors (I tried both) from Samsung don’t look that much better in terms of color and clarity from my 2K LG 45 “ Oled Ultrawide even in competitive games. I think it’s a mix between the VA panel brightness and the W-Oled not having as good of color as Qd-Oled. So I would recommend one of these 2 panels for both work and for gaming since the aggressive 1000r curve is really immersive. I heard coders like the 57 inches extra vertical space and 8K for work but I use a crappy 60 hz 1080p monitor at work so I don’t know if it’s worth like double the price on sale, haha.

i have a 4080s and bought the LG 45 UG 3440x1440, it's perfect in games, I get great framerates. The text is fine, doesn't bother me at all, I just use it for social media and email anyway.

LG 39" or 45" 3440x1440

Nope, nothing other than a few hundred price when on sale. I got my 45" on sale for $1200, the 39" was on sale for $999.

Good luck getting 240 fps on this resolution. I have the 45GX9 and on this resolution even a 5090 won’t get near 165 fps with some titles.

5k… in my opinion the 1440p looks really bad. If you use it at all for browsing or for work it’s not good. But that’s just my opinion others have no problem with it.

I primarily use mine for gaming but I assume it’s your computer so it’s not purely gaming. If your on your web browser, watching a show/youtube or reading/ word processing it’s really bad. For gaming it’s fine but if you plan on doing anything else it looks pixelated. Best Buy usually has it on display at most stores so you can see what your tolerance is. If your are getting both of them the same price then I would definitely get the 5k. The 1440p monitor I would only use as a backup monitor for a couple weeks if my main monitor was broken. I liked the 45 inch form factor when it first came out but the second I used it with how low the ppi was it was just so bad. Again this is my opinion… others may feel strongly a different way. If you do dlss ultra performance or The far equivalent it would still look better then that monitor at its baseline low resolution. That’s if your concern between the two ishaving a mid tier gpu.

For me the Sweet Spoot would be the 45gx9 currently rocking a 49' 32:9 the horizontal space is great but i would definitely much prefer the vertical real estate that the 45gx9 has , also the new subpixel layout makes it finally capable to use an oled for coding

I have the 1440 one and I have no issues, I also only paid $600 for it, I could never justify the cost of the 5k2k, maybe when the tech gets lower in price... but for now... naw. If the cost wouldn't kill me I'd go 5k2k in a heart beat.

I've been waiting for an ultra wide in this resolution for so long. I'm currently using the 1440p 45in ultra gear and this is a very enticing upgrade.

Had two 32” forever. Graphic designer. Upgraded to lg 45” 3440, and then the 5k2k. Would never consider going back.

I have gone back and forth with this same question. I currently have a 32" 4k oled but tried the updated aw3425dw. To me, a 34" 1440p display makes everything feel super small. You get extended peripheral, but the view in front of you is reduced. I noticed myself looking up and down way more on the 34" to be able to see everything, which I found annoying. (Destiny, Oblivion, diablo 4, warzone). I have the older 1440p lg 45" and the larger screen and sharp curve are great. (Personal preference). I would be running the new 45" 5k2k if my rig could get more than 60frames. (4080 laptop)

If you have a 5090, run dldsr and set the resolution to 5120x2160 on your 1440p monitor. I have the older LG 45" and am running it at 5120x2160 and it looks great with my 7800x3d and 5090

I have the LG 45" 1440p, the 5k2k is great but the price wasn't worth it for just a resolution bump + 3440p is already taxing 5k2k was too much, even for my 5080. It CAN work, but I'd rather have 120 fps on lower res than 60 on 5k2k. Playing cyberpunk it was pretty obvious at first but after setting up the graphics settling right the resolution is not an issue anymore it looks amazing with the size and all, i play with Path tracing, frame gen x4 DLSS Quality and It looks great, I get 160-200 fps depending on the scene, never lower, the input lag is also great I don't really feel the frame gen latency because the base frame rate is already great, and I don't mind the slight ghosting of DLSS and MFG, the path Tracing makes it so much prettier that it outweighs the cons. Also the VRAM usage is abnormally high, idk why, it starts at 12Gb but goes up to 15-16Gb after some time, maybe a memory leak idk. But the game is fluid and never have any issues due to VRAM so idk. As for other games I played Witcher 3 it looked great, and GTA5 was amazing looking aswell, even better with DLDSR 1.75x but sometimes some games don't support it well so I keep it off. (Cyberpunk turns off VRR with DLDSR for some reason). I'm not sure this display would fit everyone but I personally love it, the size and aspect ratio is just the best out there for gaming in my opinion, I wish it was even bigger tbh, like 55" 21:9. But yeah good screen overall if you accept that text will look bad on desktop, for gaming it's amazing.

No it's worse. A 24" 1080p monitor has a ppi of 92. A 27" 1080p monitor is like 82. The lg 45" 21:9 1440p is 84. So it's roughly equivalent to a 1080p 27" monitor. So not that good. Usable yes. But not good

Been rocking a G9, but I think I would like the monitor too be more vertical and a bit less wide. The GX9 would be perfect!

240hz 3440x1440p WOLED 3800R :)

Using lg 3440×1440 240hz right now, the 5k2k needs to be closer to 240hz to replace the 34inch （not fhd).

I am already blown away by the lg ultragear 3440x1440 that I got last year because of the immersion . Since then I don't use anymore my 4k 65 lg oled for gaming. So I really think 5k 45 inches is the sweet spot for gaming. I can't wait too see the 5k2k 45 inches and share this great moment with others. De plus je serai en mesure de faire le test non seulement en englais mais aussi en français! 👍

I use a cheaper end LG 3440x1440 monitor connected to a 2019 MBP as my daily driver. Zero issues at all, no blurry text

this is my thought…. I have a 3440x1440 LG that works great with my 4070ti but I can unfortunately tell the difference between 1440p and my old 4K. I’d be fine taking the performance hit until I can upgrade my GPU hopefully the 6070 or 6070ti will be able to run 4k

If the use case is for gaming, this monitor is a game changer. I have the 57 inch Odyssey as well as this monitor, and for gaming, the aspect ratio and picture is so much better on the LG. I don't have a problem with the text for daily use or productivity, but some will disagree. I paid full price when this first came out, and wouldn't change a thing. Love this monitor.

If I had to choose between the 2 I would take the LG 45 inch OLED. There are so many games that don't support the 32/9 aspect ratio of the super ultrawides. I hate having black boxes and playing with half of my screen real estate wasted. I like the 21/9 ratio better unless the game I'm playing supports the other.

I initially got interested in ultra wide screens from promos on 49 inchers, but felt they were not tall enough for their width. Now I have an LG 21:9 45 inch and it seems just right.

I am planning on making the switch from the 57" Samsung to the 45" LG. I have had the 57" since launch a couple of years ago in the US, and it was amazing to have such resolution and space. The HDR brightness is quite blinding at times when in a dark room, and finally being able to at least support 240Hz with the latest 50 series GPUs is nice. But blooming even with as many dimming zones as this screen has is still not great compared to OLED, since I play quite a few dark games, it can be quite noticeable. The smaller screen size might not be great, as I tried this once when I went from a 49" G9 Mini-LED to the 34" Alienware OLED, and I did not like the size downgrade. But seeing the LG in person at a Best Buy made it seem a bit better, and it would be as bad, so I will have to see. I am looking forward to trying it and maybe trying the dual mode functionality to see if 330Hz is worth it in games, but overall, I am looking forward to using OLED for my monitor. Also, getting a decent deal at almost $700 off made it at least worth a try for me.

Yup, the 45” 800r is top notch for gaming.

I had the original Samsung g9, but after it died, I replaced it with an LG 45" OLED 21:9. There have been a few times when multitasking between different design apps and references that the wider format could have been beneficial, but I'm not sure it would have actually saved any time or effort. On the gaming side, the additional immersion of the wider viewing angle on the g9 was cool, but I had been missing the vertical size. In general I find the 21:9 more comfortable to use for gaming. Not to mention that 21:9 is a bit better supported in games.

I just got the 57 inch. I finally kick ass in Call of Duty®. Besides that though it is a beast for productivity. All of the screen real estate is amazing. I doubt burn in is as bad as people say with OLED but since it is not a OLED panel, you don’t have to worry about possible burn in risk if you’re going to use it for productivity. It’s overall an amazing monitor for both gaming and productivity. I’m like you in the sense that when I get something, I’m always thinking about if I made the right decision and whether I should take it back and get something better, but the 57 inch will be staying with me. By the way, the box wouldn’t fit in my car so I left it at Best Buy. I’m so confident with the 57 inch that I’m not even going to go back and get the box because I won’t be sending it back. If I were in your shoes and had the funds to get the 57 inch now I would likely go with the 45 inch LG though. The 5K 2K sounds like a beast. Plus it’s OLED. That will probably be my first choice, but I got the 57 inch for a much better price.

I have the 49" and am going to switch to the 45" OLED. The vertical space on the 45" makes a world of difference.

Hey LG! I’ve had the 38” LG IPS and now have the original 45” OLED! I’d say my sweet spot is probably the 45”. It has the perfect vertical resolution and the curve is super immersive. While I currently only use it for gaming I think it’d be cool to do a review of the 3440x1440 and the 5k2k side by side in productivity apps to help clear the muddy waters in the PPI conversation. Thanks!

It's crazy to be that the 45"lg oled is so high up. I have one and i absolutely love it, BUUUT i got it for$550 brand new at auction. I'd never recommend someone pay 1800+ for it. At that size the pixel density becomes noticeable, and at that price you should probably be looking at 4k monitors. 

I have a 45” LG UW OLED and I would have thought your triples setup is absolute PEAK performance

What are you using it for? Edit: NVM, I just read the body text. 49 would be much better for productivity. The 45 inch LG's biggest (only?) drawback is the slightly blurry text. I'm assuming it's the OLED one, right? That thing is 100% designed for game immersion.

Nah. The 45" with the 800r curve is so much more immersive. It takes up your vertical FOV as well as horizontal.

While that's true, I no longer feel the urge to purchase a VR headset after using my 45" LG.

I actually just got a 45" OLED LG monitor off eBay for $760. Near new condition. It was a display model. Checked all pixels and burn in and it's flawless. Hell of a deal.

This has confirmed/validated me now blowing the money for 3 of these. I have Triple 32s, and have the LG 45" UW on my desktop PC but measured the 45s would be too big. I think the 3440x1440 39"s are the perfect setup, also have 5090. My concern is my NLR Triple Monitor Stand wont fit all three. It looks like you have extra columns there. https://preview.redd.it/csvrexp46qwf1.jpeg?width=2252&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c9d8e6310c93a94ca38ea85ea4a3957215408f82

Ive had every option, 45 LG Oled UW, Triple 32s & single 65" LG C5. Triple 32s are the best by far. Only other option would be to have both Ultrawide + VR. If you like VR then triples are a waste, just get the UW + VR. Triples and VR doesnt work great, as you are using all 3 DP for the triples and may have to unplug, or you can use Meta wirelessly. But getting something like Pimax (even though i hated it) is better than Meta or using PSVR2 on PC. I tried and have all 3 of those as well. https://preview.redd.it/e6xnbqusgjxf1.jpeg?width=2252&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e78aa6a75a9b0342a6779ed9bac4e216982fe8c2

As someone who has a 7800X3D & 7900XTX, I raise you a counter offer. Neither a 34” ultrawide or a 32” 4K. But a 39” or 45” ultrawide instead. I went with the LG 45”. This is coming from a G9 Odyssey 49”. And I started with a 34” ultrawide before that. The one thing that was missing from my G9 was just the vertical screen real estate. It makes it extremely immersive more so than the G9 could ever hit. Plus it runs easier than 4K so you can still hit all of the high fps in a lot of games.

I have a 45 UW LG OLED R800. The OLED technology is sublime, colors, blacks, refresh, however the size is not really enough to stay close to the dash and also have the whole side mirror in the screen. Maybe 57 is enough to get the side mirrors and be on the ideal position inside the cockpit but the curvature of the G9 is way less than the LGs’ and the LCD will never match OLED in terms of blacks or colors.

I’ve tried all of them and I would say 57 G9 > 45 LG OLED > 49 G9 OLED The LG in my opinion is the perfect desktop gaming monitor. It’s good for sim racing, but the 57 is better due to super ultrawide. The 49, I wouldn’t consider. Too narrow of a screen.

I use an LG Ulteagear 45 Oled. I was looking at the Odysey 49 but didn't really like the letterbox effect and preferred something with more of a taller screen like a tv. 240hz and runs smooth.

I mean it's never gonna beat triples or vr but I find the curved screen good enough, definitely more immersion than my old 50inch flat Oled tv. Also running triples and vr require a beast of a PC to run anything on decent graphics and framerates. As always it comes down to preference and how deep your pockets are mate.

Hi man, I have lg 45 oled on my sim rig and I use lg 42 c3 as main monitor for other games, browsing and videos. When you see them side by side you will se that the 4k makes clearer and better image, for me too low ppi on that 45 oled to use it for everything, when gaming I dont see it that much. If you go for 32” 4k image will be even better. My 42“ C3 has ppi close to same as 1440p 27“ but gives a lot more working space

Not true, it's another way of immersion. But when you go to 45" 21:9 you never want back. I mounted both a 49" OLED at the LG 45" OLED above each other and I loved the 49" before I got the 45". But in comparison the 49" vs. the 45" the image on the 49" only is stretched no more. And when you look around the 49" screen while playing, the image moves faster at the sides than in the center due to the strong distortion.

Comming from OLED (LG C2) i switched to G9 57". I think its an amazing screen, and am very happy i switched. With OLED i was always worrying about burn-in. especially because i was using it 8 hours for work and 4 hours orso for gaming. The text fringing on QD-OLED was a no go for me. So the new 45"W-oleds from LG are a good choice too. On the g9 57"i was wondering about the blooming, while working i dont use HDR, saves energy and why would i need to have my eyes burned out when looking at coding docs. and for entertainment is rarely notice it, and when i do, its because hud elements and stars in space games. but even then its so rarely. The contrast enhancer realy does it job well, and i dont notice it.

I have a 21:9 LG 45 Oled and a 32:9 Samsung 49 Neo G9 and the experience is amazing ! BUT. To be fair, 2025 is still not the UW year. There is more game with some compatibility, but most have bad vertical fov, 16:9 cutscenes… You would be more happy with a big 4K Oled monitor ! Édit : I play and stream a lot of indie game, there is no UW support on this side of gaming. Don’t even try. I had to put my monitor in 16:9 to play most of them

If you’re gonna put a vertical monitor off to the side, get something that matches the vertical height of the main monitor. Generally it doesn’t work well (to me) for ultrawide tho, I always found myself turning my head way too much when I had my 38” 21:9 and my 27” 16:9 vertically. I ended up going with the 45” LG OLED and getting rid of the vertical monitor. That’s just me tho, really depends on how useable your current setup is to you.

Love my 800r 45” ultragear. To each their own

Nah, return it immediately. Was going to get one before I saw the LG 45" UW 21:9. I hadn't seen Samsungs in store but already knew I wanted the extra verticality. Got the LG and a couple months later saw the Samsung in store. It looked fucky and I'm so damn glad I didn't waste my time with it. Also the failure rate of Samsungs was really off-putting. Heard nightmares of people dealing with their support as well. Don't regret buying the LG one bit.

I have the 45" LG OLED that I use for productivity and I really like it. I traded in a Samsung for the height which has been a good call.

I've had hit or miss luck using my 45" OLED LG Ultrawide with my M3 Macbook Air and M4 Mac Mini. Despite saying "it is compatible," it's not without adding additional 3rd party software like Better Display. I wish it was easier.

I bought the g9 49 in oled cause cheep and hated it. it’s smaller vertically than my 32 16:9 aspect monitor so it feels like I’m looking through a visor also most games only work on 16:9 aspect ratio so massive black bars fucking suck Switched to a lg 45 in oled and it’s a massive improvement I feel like I’m gaming on a movie theater screen and when forced into 16:9 ration it’s still larger than my 32 in monitor so the black bars are more forgivable

45 oled has been a godsend.

The only challenge with the LG 45” could be achieving acceptable curve distortion correction. The trick is that the closer you sit, the less noticeable the distortions are. [45″ 800R vs 49″ 1800R](https://simrigbuild.com/comparisons/45uw-800r-60-vs-49uw-1800r-60/)

I was debating for a long time between the 49" 32x9 Samsung or the 45" 21x9 lg, I went with the 45" since it's actually bigger. Also most game recognizes the 21x9 ratio. The aspect ratio of the 49" is not as common. Also the 49" runs hot. I went to the local best buy and I can really feel the heat even in a normal functioning distance, something to be aware of.

Check eBay, got my 45” curved LG for $368

I think for gaming the 45" and I have that and love it for gaming. Tried to use it for productivity and it was just kinda weird. The 49" would be great for productivity and you can probably snap it to have 3-4 web browsers/applications open and it would be good. It is not as high as the 45" but I think that helps a lot for productivity. I have a 34" for work and it's great I'd imagine the 49" just adds another 2 workable windows.

45". The added height makes a huge difference.

I have the 45 and it's quite nice. I couldn't imagine having a monitor that's like 4 inches high lol.

the lg 45 is a good option i think 57 too much head turning

Compromise is a 40” 21:9 aspect ratio screen. Its the height of a 16:9 32” but wider. Or if you want to spend $1600 LG makes a 45” 21:9 model that is beautiful.

These are on sale at best buy right now if you were interested. I waffled between the g9 and lg ultragear 45 for a while. I’m currently about to leave to pick up the LG.

So far I'm really liking it. The size feels pretty perfect for a single monitor. I was worried the super ultrawide would feel too narrow and less immersive. The OLED panel is great, I'm enjoying the curve and input lag is non existent.

I got tthe LG 45 ultragear instead.

Amazon is having sales on both, even the 57 inch Samsung, the LG 45 is on sale as well. Both have heavy duty height adjustable stands. The Samsung and LG are both capable of taking up to 4 inputs using PBP (so you can have up to 4 different screens) super easy to set up but both of these monitors will exceed your expectations I promise you that

I just warrantied out my 2yr old LG 45” and paid $200 difference for the new 5k2k. BestBuy has em down to $1599

45" LG. Better aspect ratio and PPI should be sufficiently high for productivity. The Samsung one will have compatibility issues with MacOS. You will likely have to drive it in PbP mode. Good reviews by Pete Matheson and Rtings Feel free to ignore this part, but if you're really primarily only looking at productivity, I would say the Dell U4025QW is the best out of the three and the one I own. I am primarily a gaming laptop user, so I pair my Dell 5K2K with a smaller gaming monitor underneath which has been the best combo for me when it comes to having flexibility for productivity

Bro go for the ultragear 45" its so so much better than my g9 was.

That was exactly my thought. I just got the 45" UltraGear too

Lg 45 inch with mnice curve plenty height and very good quality. Hell if money is not problem get 3 of them :D

I've had both, the LG 45" is way better in gaming. The Samsung 57" is too wide and too short height wise, very littler immersion.

I don't understand how people are still buying these goofy looking ultra wides that are super wide but super short, they just look off putting with a lot of unnecessary neck craning. I'll stick with my 45in LG Ultra Gear for the vertical real estate, thank you very much.

The LG 45". I got two its awesome:)

I have the 45” UW LG and it’s awesome, especially for PVE games. I play ancient dota and 20K cs2. Takes getting used to but if you give up on going pro you’ll be happy with it. If you’re trying to extract every last mmr over casual enjoyment, I’d get a smaller screen.

They're goat. No doubt. Dual monitors isn't a replacement for an ultrawide. I still run an extra monitor off to the side of my LG 45 for discord and shit. I'm not about to split that immersion ass screen while gaming. 

I am running an LG UltraWide 45 inch (2023 momdel) hooked up to an asus scar 17 (2023) that has 64 GB of RAM and a 4080 laptop gpu along with AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX. It works, but until i can afford to upgrade my desktop, its what Ive got. Desktop is a 2070 Super, 32 GB of RAM and Ryzen 7 3800x (OLD ass CPU lol). Currently use this more as a streaming host (OBS Teleport plugin from laptop to desktop), when I rarely stream.

I have the LG 45 and hesitated aswell. If you want a screen exclusively for racing, you'll get a better FOV out of the G9. If you use your screen for racing AND anything else the LG 45 is just far superior. To me the 32:9 is the perfect ratio. The only downside on the LG 45 is pixel density (at least on my 2024 model).

This is potentially the form factor and resolution we have been waiting for. Enough screen real estate with the 5k2k resolution to replace a plethora of multi-monitor setups while the curve allows the eye to still maintain a view of the peripheral areas on the screen such that it is still viable as a FPS and other gaming monitor where a view of every corner of the screen is important to be competitive. Having tested the previous generation 45" and found it nearly perfect but for the resolution, I would be excited to get my hands on this to determine if it is indeed the grail monitor that has been eluding me for years after my 34" LG was damaged a decade ago and I never settled on another ultrawide that could tick all the boxes once higher refresh rates were necessary.

I went with the lg 45 only because the Samsung has had issues with reliability.

I love my 45 considered switching up but my local microcenter has a 49 with a racing sim and I wasn't feeling it. Better pixel density for a lower price most the time anyhow

I had a 38in Alienware and fell in love with the extra height that my Neo G9 just did not have. This 45 I got yesterday finally has that height. Not sure I could go with a 55, just seems like overkill unless mounted to the wall for video games on console.

A 45-inch 8K display sounds amazing. This setup should easily last 3 to 5 years, especially with GPUs still needing time to catch up to run this effectively.

I like my ultragear 45 for productivity except the resolution is a bit low. I think this'll be a great upgrade.

Have you considered the 45 LG Ultrawide? It’s a decent bit taller than the 49 inch ones, which is super nice for immersion and it’s OLED and 240hz.

45 without a doubt

I'd like the 45" with vertical height. Try using arc browser on it and have fun 😊

Look for a 39’ or 45’ LG monitor, the vertical height helps so much. Those 34 and 49 monitors feel like peeking out of a tank visor

i have the 49 inch samsung and id go with the 45 lg in a heart beat. ive had problems with the samsung since ive gotten it

Yup, I've been using this with the LG 45. It works just as well as a real KVM.

Check ur rez settings bro… i have an LG 45 and it’s not stretched on the edges for me… game supports 3440 x 1440 and it looks perfect.

45" all the way, 49" is too small in height for the width The 45" actually has a larger screen estate in general, except that it's exactly as wide.

I'm using a 49" G9 and it's not "tall" enough (in pixels), plus it's not OLED. I think the LG 45" fixes both of those things for me! I really like the 1000R on the G9 so I'm excited about 800R, but haven't seen it in person yet.

Why not use both. I own the ultra gear 45 curved i plan on stacking a g9 on top of that. Thought it would look cool but after reading all this seems I'll have that be my dedicated pc monitor instead

I have the 49 samsung and i wish i had more vertical . Should have went with the 45 lg

Got the 45” LG and love it for side-by-by spreadsheets

That is a damn good price for it. My only complaint is that the vertical height can feel lacking especially in content that doesn’t support widescreen. I switched to the newer lg 45 this year.

I have both and I prefer the 45. The 49 feels narrow and anything that doesn’t use the whole screen is essentially in a 27 inch screen which is too small.

Big disagree, I just switched to the 45in lg and I'm never turning back.

I have g9 oled and the lg 45 when i am switching betwen them from flat or little curve to 800r it makes me sick sometimes but if you will use just the lg you will get use to it eventualy.

45" 49 is TOO long/wide The extra height is nice

Have a G9 49" OLED stacked on top of a 57". Contemplated going with the 45" LG as a replacement, but to be honest, the 57" is pretty amazing. I'm actually going to switch out the 49" OLED for the new Samsung 5k2k 40" since I mainly use it as a secondary info monitor. My issues for the 45": the curve for productivity is too much.... and for a 1300 to 1900 dollar monitor, it should have had KVM and a better DP built in (only supports UHBR13.5). TL;DR: I would go 57" for productivity >= gaming. 45" if gaming >> productivity.

Especially with a Mac just get the 45 and be done. I went from the Samsung G9 OLED to the 45 and the experience on a Mac is just immediately better. 5120x1440 is not properly supported on the Mac without using hacks like BetterDisplay, and anytime you reboot or update the computer the display just goes wacky until it gets to the OS and the modifications load. Also from my experience (on a Studio M2 Max) trying to set 240hz was supported in macOS, but it would crash the whole system randomly with colored lines. Only 120hz works properly on the G9 OLED with Mac. The 45 works perfectly with no 3rd party tools, and both the curve and matte coating were a massive improvement, as well as the legibility of text.

Using a 39" lg oled, and having used an 1800r g9 oled before, 800r is goated. It's a bit in your face at first, but after a couple hours it's great. If anything, I would like it even more agressive. If it was adjustable like their last 45 incher, I would basically never even do that. I actually used to get a bit motion sick on 1800r, and I don't on 800. The matte... yeah... Well, it's matte. Hopefully LG start dropping glossy's one day. QD doesn't work for my environment.

i would also never get a WOLED again, QD-OLED is just superior in basically every aspect. switched from an LG WOLED to the samsung G9 and the picture quality of QD-OLED is just so much clearer and better. (i am really picky when it comes to displays, so im definitely not the average user and ive been selling TVs for the last 18 years, so ive seen basically every tech stage from ctv to oled with all their ups and downs over the years)

800r vs 1800r you can get used to both eventually. If you’re used to vibrant and saturated colors of oled, dont go with woled. I have a LG woled 800r.

I miss mine, to an extent. The second they release this monitor with a 1000r curve screen I'm ditching my LG ultragear 21:9 for it.

Been an avid 21:9 user for like 4yrs and can't go back, only drawback is that I'm still in the OG 3440x1440 group and want a bit more crispiness to the text (OLED) and a smidge more screen real-estate. So far I've had the LG UltraGear, the Alienware one, then the Samsung G8 (current). Been eyeing a 5k 2k for a long time and curious to hear other reviews (if I get sent one LG, I will deep dive so hard into the things that I look for in a panel so be warned lol). OLED brightness, HDR, VRR, color banding are things that are very important to nail so praying ya'll nailed it. I used a Dell 32:9 (forget the model) and returned it within a week. Tried to make it work, but didn't like that it's a huge performance hit for the added peripheral you technically never use and for normal day to day, hurts my neck moving windows around. And thats before I get into getting games to do 32:9 was a nightmare vs 21:9. So sweet spot if you're a gamer imho is 21:9 -- perfect FOV to performance for modern mid-high end+ GPU's.

Msi is cheaper compared to LG alwell. It is 140hz while lg is 160hz.

Get the MSI one. I had to get the LG ultragear because MSI wasn't available at my location.

You wont notice the difference between 144hz and 165hz I found LG decent enough as well.