hmm dont need those garbage, my plasma tv have an native refrehrate of 120Hz and the panel it self can refresh them in 22,8 nanoseconds, faster llike an OLED :toast:

ValantarWell, people have different preferences. I sit about an arm's length away from my 27" display (with the 24" secondary a bit further away to the side of the main one) on a 160x80cm desk (that's ... 63x31.5" for those operating in Freedom Units), but the main is also mounted on an arm for easy positioning (I've bought a dual arm for more flexibility, but haven't gotten around to mounting it yet). At this distance, I can easily see the entirety of the 27" display without moving my head, though the extreme corners strain my eyes a tiny bit if I don't shift my head. This is comfortable for me for both work and gaming, though I tend to move around and sit differently for both. The entirety of the 24" (mounted vertically) is visible in my peripheral vision when I'm looking dead centre at the 27". Seeing how a 32" is ~10cm wider than a 27" that would definitely make a difference, and I'd likely need to shove it back a bit (plenty of room for that thanks to the arm), but I would probably enjoy it more for gaming.

I would love a 3:2 monitor for work, but not for gaming. Sadly I need the same thing to do both, so ... meh. At 27" or above 16:9 is sufficiently tall for it to not matter, but going smaller than that for work would be unacceptable. It fits nearly three full-sized A4 pages side by side, so that's plenty really - the secondary is for managing all the damn windows I need for work, keeping reference material up for glancing at, plus screen capture and that kind of stuff. Having two separate monitors is a benefit in that regard, as stuffing all of that onto a single one would be a mess.

Freedom units lol More like Old school units. 160cmx80cm desk, nice, about the same here 86cm x 212cm and all cluttered up, need a bigger desk :) Ya to each their own. Would have to give a 24" or 27" 3:2 a chance on gaming first, maybe it would be ok depending on the game, no way to find out though with the dominance of 16x9.

mechtechFreedom units lol More like Old school units. 160cmx80cm desk, nice, about the same here 86cm x 212cm and all cluttered up, need a bigger desk :) Ya to each their own. Would have to give a 24" or 27" 3:2 a chance on gaming first, maybe it would be ok depending on the game, no way to find out though with the dominance of 16x9.

I used to game on a 16:10 Dell U2412M (which was advertised as a professional monitor), and it was awesome! :rolleyes: I think it's such a shame that games never really scaled well on 16:10 and it never got to be the leading standard. The increased height makes the screen feel much more comfortable to look at than the narrow strip of 16:9.

AusWolfI used to game on a 16:10 Dell U2412M (which was advertised as a professional monitor), and it was awesome! :rolleyes: I think it's such a shame that games never really scaled well on 16:10 and it never got to be the leading standard. The increased height makes the screen feel much more comfortable to look at than the narrow strip of 16:9.

Huh? Most games support 16:10 displays no problem.

TheLostSwedeHuh? Most games support 16:10 displays no problem.

They do, but they look better in 16:9. I remember The Witcher 3 came up with black bars on the top and bottom of the screen when I was looking at the map or playing Gwent.

mechtechFreedom units lol More like Old school units. 160cmx80cm desk, nice, about the same here 86cm x 212cm and all cluttered up, need a bigger desk :) Ya to each their own. Would have to give a 24" or 27" 3:2 a chance on gaming first, maybe it would be ok depending on the game, no way to find out though with the dominance of 16x9.

Lol, my desk is consistently far too small - a consequence of using a single desk for work and play (and my work often involving half a dozen books and a dozen articles spread out around me). The worst part is having to choose whether I tidy it up at the end of a day (only to have to recreate the mess the next day), or to live with my keyboard and mouse being cramped together because of all the stuff on the desk :P

IMO, taller aspect ratios will likely never be as immersive in games (or other audiovisual media) simply due to how the human field of view is also much wider than it is tall. A wider display is as such a better fit in terms of mimicing or gesturing towards a likeness of how we perceive our physical surroundings, including peripheral vision. While this is obviously oversimplified, there is something to the logic of 'the more of your field of vision is taken up by the experience, the more immersive it is'. Work, on the other hand, takes place mostly within the ~5° circle of our FOV that is properly sharp, and at most within the ~20° circle that is reasonably sharp - peripheral vision is of very little consequence for this, and taller aspect ratios bring more usable screen space closer to the middle, minimizing eye and head movement.

If I had a PC for work only, my dream display for it would be the 28.2" 3:2 Huawei Mateview, which seems fantastic in many ways, even if it has a lot of quirks (only mDP or USB-C for DP input; no VESA mount). But the lack of a VESA mount and the tall aspect ratio makes it a no-go for a multi-purpose monitor IMO (especially as I also want my next main monitor to go above 60Hz for gaming). And that's part of where the desire for a 32" panel comes from too - it's the same height as a 28.2" 3:2, but ~11cm wider. The width (and refresh rate) would be mostly wasted for work, but would be greatly appreciated outside of it.

GarrusAnd yet Samsung never released a flat 240hz VA panel. Absolutely mind boggling! I'd relish a comparison of the new Apple Studio Display versus the Dell high refresh 4k monitor. I think Dell makes great monitors, especially if you want adjustable stands and a built in hub. You can buy an amazing $650 4k/60hz with a hub from Dell. Oxide panel, bezels half the size of Apple, and IPS black double contrast. For $650 regularly on sale. Dell is trusted with monitors for a reason. I also think the $1000 MSI Xbox edition monitor looks good.

I have a suspicion this is due to the relatively poor viewing angles on those panels. A flat 24" VA would probably be fine, but even at 27" you'd likely start to see color shift towards the edges. 32" would likely be quite bad, and 34" UW would be borderline unusable (not to mention the inherent issues of flat ultrawides due to the focal distance difference between the middle and edges of the display potentially causing eye strain).

AusWolfThey do, but they look better in 16:9. I remember The Witcher 3 came up with black bars on the top and bottom of the screen when I was looking at the map or playing Gwent.

Never played it. I guess that might apply to console ports, I try to avoid those.

DELL has the bad habit to delete five years old products, from their website and of their memory too.
Never the less, DELL products so far they shown a good life cycle (10 years +) , my U2311H was a best-seller product worldwide.

MentalAcetylideMaybe I'm an outlier with my opinion, but I don't understand gaming with such a big monitor; especially if you do so competitively where you want to be turning & bending your head as little as possible. I'm currently using a 27" @ 1440p and glad that I didn't go even bigger than that with the 72" x 30" desk that it sits on. It seems to be the sweet spot at that resolution & size so that you don't have to change your seating distance from it when switching from gaming to 3D content work or other productivity tasks. Granted, the higher the resolution you go, the bigger the screen you'll want to have, but regardless, its still going to be a huge screen to have sitting on a desk(not to mention you'll probably need a depth of 30+ inches on it so you'll be able to set the monitor back far enough).

That's a very personal preference and depends on the bubble you live in. Personally, I don't play "competitive" games and I don't know many people that do, so I wouldn't want to go back to screens below 34-40" - right now I'm using a 43" 2160p screen. My desk is 3m wide so I'm not constrained by space and I'm sitting close to the screen - no more than 40cm - so it covers my peripheral vision nicely when playing games. The benefit of this size is no need for scaling in the OS and a lot of working area.

TheUn4seenThat's a very personal preference and depends on the bubble you live in. Personally, I don't play "competitive" games and I don't know many people that do, so I wouldn't want to go back to screens below 34-40" - right now I'm using a 43" 2160p screen. My desk is 3m wide so I'm not constrained by space and I'm sitting close to the screen - no more than 40cm - so it covers my peripheral vision nicely when playing games. The benefit of this size is no need for scaling in the OS and a lot of working area.

I don't know how you're able to sit so close to such a big monitor and not have eye strain. Even though your fonts & everything are big enough, your eyes are going to be strained focusing on such a close screen. Its a recipe for developing nearsightedness. 40cm * (1"/2.54cm) = 15.7" which is less than 1.5 feet. I don't think I even sit that close to my 1080p 17" laptop. I sit at least 26" or 66cm away from my 27" monitor.

MentalAcetylideI don't know how you're able to sit so close to such a big monitor and not have eye strain. Even though your fonts & everything are big enough, your eyes are going to be strained focusing on such a close screen. Its a recipe for developing nearsightedness. 40cm * (1"/2.54cm) = 15.7" which is less than 1.5 feet. I don't think I even sit that close to my 1080p 17" laptop. I sit at least 26" or 66cm away from my 27" monitor.

Yeah, 40cm is ... well, likely just not true. Exceptionally few people would be comfortable sitting that close to any monitor, and especially not one that large. It would also render the vast majority of that 43" panel essentially useless, as it's relegated to peripheral vision alone (including most UI elements in most games), requiring significant head and eye movement to even see them clearly (which is again a significant source of eye and neck/back strain). That might work in some games, but in others it would render them near unplayable, at least to me, and it is certainly not a setup that's safe to recommend to anyone else, as the chances of it actually causing them physical harm with any significant use are very real.

ValantarYeah, these prices are unacceptable. And why skip the USB-C port on th 4k model? Seems like a lot of weird compromises here.

Yep, as usual for Dell, nice looking, overall fair specs, but ALWAYS have to choose which compromises you can live with and whether or not you are willing to pay moar for them as compared to the competition....

For me, Sammy's are perfectly fine (for both monitors & TV's), and while not cheap by any means, they perform very well and last a long time..... I currently have 5x of their recent 32" monitors and 3x of their (50-55-75") TV's at home, plus 138x 32" monitors at work, neveranottaproblemo for over 5 years now.

"DUDE, I'm N.o.T. gettin a dell" hehehehe :D

Integrated power supply is really lame at this price point, not only its heat output sometimes warps the backlight layers (really common during hot summer), but also for troubleshooting its so much pain in the butt. Like for example you got a power surge - the monitor doesnt turn on - if the power supply is integrated you gotta disassemble the whole frame (crack the lcd if you arent careful enough)... so much hassle. also with external power brick the monitor gets much slimmer.

Nike_486DX

Integrated power supply is really lame at this price point, not only its heat output sometimes warps the backlight layers (really common during hot summer), but also for troubleshooting its so much pain in the butt. Like for example you got a power surge - the monitor doesnt turn on - if the power supply is integrated you gotta disassemble the whole frame (crack the lcd if you arent careful enough)... so much hassle. also with external power brick the monitor gets much slimmer.

Oh, I so disagree with this. External power bricks are not only a hassle to deal with, but are notorious for terrible quality. Having an integrated PSU, at least from Dell, makes me much more secure that it's a good quality unit, as they actually have to consider its cooling and quality and not just buy some cheap garbage off the rack from the lowest bidder OEM. (Not that anecdotal evidence counts for much, but the one in my U2711 has been going strong for 11 years of consistent, frequent use now. And the wide-gamut CCFL backlight means that thing runs hot - especially when I hit 30-degree room temperatures in summer. I've also seen way too many external monitor PSUs fail throughout the years.) Prioritizing a marginally slimmer monitor over not having to deal with the hassle of managing a power brick (or just having it dangling unsupported from your desk as the cable is never long enough for it to rest on the floor) doesn't make sense for me either - it's not like the thickness of the monitor is noticeable while in use.

Nike_486DX

Integrated power supply is really lame at this price point, not only its heat output sometimes warps the backlight layers (really common during hot summer), but also for troubleshooting its so much pain in the butt. Like for example you got a power surge - the monitor doesnt turn on - if the power supply is integrated you gotta disassemble the whole frame (crack the lcd if you arent careful enough)... so much hassle. also with external power brick the monitor gets much slimmer.

That pic makes me really appreciate my LG27GL850 which has its inputs facing out the back not under like in the pic, when I replaced a cable on my 2209WA a few days back which is facing down it took me nearly two hours, in the end I had to completely unplug it and drag it out to access the ports. Really annoying that nearly all monitors have the ports in a blind spot like that and difficult to reach as well.

chrcolukThat pic makes me really appreciate my LG27GL850 which has its inputs facing out the back not under like in the pic, when I replaced a cable on my 2209WA a few days back which is facing down it took me nearly two hours, in the end I had to completely unplug it and drag it out to access the ports. Really annoying that nearly all monitors have the ports in a blind spot like that and difficult to reach as well.

Inputs facing out might be sometimes easier to connect but are more difficult to manage if you want to mount your monitor to a wall or very close to one.

The G3223D is absolutely nonsensical even against Dell's other current offerings.

I'm using a Dell S3220DGM with the same panel, and the newer version, the S3222DGM is available in the US before discounts at $329.99

It's actually a very decent screen that suffers from marginal backlight bleed like all non-OLED curved panels do, but is otherwise very fast for a VA panel with minimal black smearing even in artificial testing that exaggerates black smearing.

At $719.99 the G3223D appears to get you a USB-C port, for "just" $390 more ;)

Nike_486DXIntegrated power supply is really lame at this price point, not only its heat output sometimes warps the backlight layers (really common during hot summer), but also for troubleshooting its so much pain in the butt. Like for example you got a power surge - the monitor doesnt turn on - if the power supply is integrated you gotta disassemble the whole frame (crack the lcd if you arent careful enough)... so much hassle. also with external power brick the monitor gets much slimmer.

I disagree; External power supplies are really lame - they're harder to cable-manage, generally have a higher failure rate, and ugly as well.

I've been buying ~500 Dell Ultrasharps and ~100 other brand monitors per year for about 20 years now. I go with integrated PSU wherever possible and I've yet to see one single instance of heat warping the backlight. Failures do happen but I haven't seen an integrated PSU die that wasn't covered by warranty for at least a decade. If they're built well enough to survive infant mortality, they're built well enough to outlast the LEDs and other electronics in the monitor.

If you want the screen to be slim, then (at least with LCD panels) you're choosing external aesthetics over picture quality, and there are "pretty" monitors specifically for this market. Most gamers will be putting their monitor with the back to a wall and couldn't care less about what's on the other side.

Any theories on which panel these monitors use

Dr_b_Any theories on which panel these monitors use

I think it's Innolux for the WQHD 165Hz model.
www.panelook.com/modeldetail.php?id=48336

I had the advanced search narrow it down to three options, but the two AUO panels were HDR600 certified, only the Innolux was HDR400.