On prior 21:9 monitors I always felt they had a niche where they worked well, but they weren't a product for everyone. Perhaps it is just using too many 27' monitors at this point, but only having 1080 vertical pixels with such a wide screen feels very limiting. With menu bars and everything else that occupies program windows, you are left with very little vertical space and a plethora of horizontal space. For gaming and movies it works very well, but for a regular monitor it leaves me wanting.

With 1440 vertical pixels, the LG 34UM95 frees me of that problem. Using the 34UM95 as my only monitor for two weeks I never feel cramped or that I am lacking the space for work. On the contrary, it does a very good job of providing space for two programs side-by-side and allows me to actually be productive in both of them. While editing this article I almost have the space to run three programs at once since they need very little horizontal space but the vertical space is far more important.

When I started using dual monitors ages ago, like most I started with a pair of 17" or 19" CRTs. Having those two screens opened up productivity but dominated space on the desk. The LG 34UM95 is a very similar design to having two of those old 4:3 or 5:4 CRTs on your desk again. The resolution is higher, and the depth is much slimmer, but the overall experience is similar. Make no mistake: 34 inches is a lot of display for a desk, but if you're used to dual monitors already that shouldn't be a problem.

The little gaming that I do on the LG 34UM95 is also very enjoyable. I have covered this more in my prior 21:9 reviews, but the extra field of view makes for a more immersive environment than 16:9. The larger screen size of the 34UM95 compared to prior 21:9 monitors only increases that. It also has a very low input lag, making it a useful choice for those that are competitive at FPS and other games.

A direct competitor here is the Apple Thunderbolt Display. It is the only other Thunderbolt display on the market but it's a few years old now. It is lower resolution and lacks the HDMI and DisplayPort inputs, USB 3.0 support, and cannot use a VESA mount without an adapter. The Apple display includes a (now outdated) MagSafe adapter, webcam, Firewire 800, and Gigabit Ethernet Ports. Given the choice of the two, I would pick the extra resolution of the LG. The contrast ratio of the LG, and the uncalibrated numbers, are superior as well.

At $1,000 you have a number of display choices. The 24" Dell UP2414Q is a 4K panel available for the same price right now that offers even higher resolution. It has the 4K limitations involving DisplayPort 1.2 and MST that I mentioned in my other 4K reviews, so it won't work quite as easily. You will also need DPI scaling on it which can lead to some OS or Application appearance issues, but those should work out over time. The main thing is you're still in the 16:9 aspect ratio, so running two apps side-by-side isn't as easy as it is with the 21:9 ratio. Dual 27" monitors will provide more space for even less money than the LG 34UM95, but they also take up far more of your desk.

If I sound like I've come away liking the LG 34UM95 a lot, I really have. It has surprised me at what a difference the extra vertical resolution makes with 21:9. It does a wonderful job as a single monitor while not impacting my ability to multitask at all. Even though I don't play many games that would utilize the extra field-of-view I would still strongly consider the LG 34UM95 as my only monitor. It performs very well on the bench, it looks very good in use, and most importantly it helps me get things done. If you've previously discarded 21:9 as a niche, obscure format, you should try out the 34UM95. It has managed to convince me that 21:9 isn't so much of a niche anymore.

Input Lag, Gaming and Gamut
Comments Locked

110 Comments

View All Comments

  • bigboxes - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link

    Why doesn't this have any of the input ports on the side? Whenever I want to slip in a flash drive I want an easily accessible port.
  • ggathagan - Wednesday, June 18, 2014 - link

    Given the width of this monitor, I suspect most users would actually find it easier to reach the ports in back.
    The ports aren't too densely packed, so once you acclimated yourself to the location, the back ports are probably pretty easy to access by feel.
  • twistedgamez - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    5120x2160 would be amazing - once you get that you'd probably wont need to buy another display again
  • sseemaku - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    Everything is fine except the price. When will the price of monitors greater than 24'' come down!
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    Based on this model I would like to:
    Remove Thunderbolt, USB und audio to make it cheaper.
    Make it a bit smaller (27 - 29") but keep the resolution.
    Add variable refresh rate for stutter-free movies and games.

    At this point I'd be willing to spend 500€ on it even though I'm pretty pleased with my current model.
  • Conficio - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    Wow those pictures are grainy.
  • Footman36 - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    I really like this monitor. I currently have a Dell U2711 at 1440 x 2560 and would love a little more horizontal real estate to play with. 4K is just too much screen and does not scale well currently.
    It is a niche product but IMO way overpriced at the moment. I would consider an upgrade to this monitor if it was priced at a more reasonable $800 or less... Part of the cost is most likely due to the non standard IPS panel size. Still having an IPS panel with these dimensions is a great idea, certainly for the way I use my PC...
  • Larzy - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    Some really misinformed replies in the comments section..

    "It's niche but it's not for enthusiasts" ?
    - Enthusiasts are a niche market as they are a minority.

    "The Human eye is actually 4:3"
    - lol

    "4K is the future but 21:9 is not" ?
    - Err so what about a 21:9 4k display ? Not so much ? Fine I'll take one.

    "more people want 4:3 than widescreen"
    - WTF ?

    Ever since the 21:9 ratio was released in displays people whom have gone out of thier way to find ways of shunning it. Perhaps because they are trying to justify everything where they have spent thier moneies and is the only way the can react to not being able to buy the latest and greatest??

    21:9 is finally here,thankgod, and its here to stay, so get used to it.

    My thoughts on the physical aspects of the display...
    It seems like they have got a lot right here, but I cant stand plastic silver finish. I really don't like materials that are cheaper knock offs made to look like something they're not.

    Also these un even sized bezels, they should be equally thin on all four sides. NEC was the only company to do this right imo.

    Also...

    Make it black or make it with high quality materials like Apple do, or even better do both.

    Bet the panel itself is very impressive though.
  • Footman36 - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    I like 21:9 but not the initial panels that had a horizontal resolution of 1080. This panel has a more usable 1440.....
  • TegiriNenashi - Thursday, June 19, 2014 - link

    "21:9 is finally here,thankgod, and its here to stay, so get used to it."

    Fine. Turn this monitor to portrait mode and be happy. Excuse me if some of us wan't IMAX experience, not embrasure world view.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now